Human Health, Computer Health and Science Fiction

[jmilsom]

Science fiction writers often come quite close to their observations on society and predictions with respect to technological innovation. The two areas where I feel they are consistently off the mark is with respect to medical technology and to a lesser degree computers.<br /><br />In most science fiction books, the future seems to be disease free. Most illnesses have been dealt with. People are healthy and rarely get sick. But look at our society in general. We seem to be losing the war against microbes. We feed our livestock with antibiotic laced growth promoters and as a result we now have vancomycin resistant bacteria killing people is hospitals (that is the last line antibiotic, you catch a multi-drug and vancomycin resistant strain and you’re dead). We seem to be losing the battle on all fronts - tuberculosis, malaria - you name it. Where are these miracle cures in the Sci Fi books?????<br /><br />And computers. Notice how everyone has their own personal AI and can quickly access all the information in the world without trouble. Whoever predicted we’d be victims of popups, viruses, adware. Some subjects are so dominated by quacks, it is hard to find the real information. Which character in SciFi has looked at their wrist AI, and said “Darn popups!” or "Jim looked at wrist AI, half an hour and many muttered curses later, he found the information, but by then it was too late!" No they do a quick search and there it is.<br /><br />Any comments on this?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jmilsom]

Hey thanks for your thoughtful reply. I visited your site and links. Very interesting! The future convergence of biological and information viruses - not really as far-fetched as it sounds and perfectly posible in the future.<br /><br />Check out this biomedical nanoscience update site:<br /><br />http://www.nano.gov/html/research/nanomednews.htm<br /><br />The ideas on your links might not be as far away as one would think. Recent real research headlines include:<br /><br />"RNA could form building blocks for nanomachines" - discusses using RNA as scaffolding for nanotech devices or complex microscopic machines.<br /><br />"UCLA chemists develop new coating for nanoscale probes" discusses a technology that allows inorganic particles (such as the nanomachines above) to be diguised so that they can enter cells without being rejected.<br /><br />"ORNL's nanobiosensor technology gives new access to living cell's molecular processes" discusses being able for the first time to see and study cellular signalling networks.<br /><br />On the intelligent advertising - PKDick wrote some great future fiction on people going crazy for this reason. Perhaps in the future there will be advertising nanomachines that invade your body and give subliminal messages to get you to favour a particular product!!!<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jmilsom]

I am going to introduce DALEKS into the thread, seeing as we have been discussing them so much lately. <br /><br />I have a brother working in biotech, who recently read this thread and send me the following comment:<br /><br />“I like your point on disease free futures as well, I haven't come across a sci fi writer who has taken into account that modern medicine has for most part stopped evolution, and in first world countries we are breeding a weaker species that is far more reliant on medical intervention; hang on I just had a thought having just watched the re run of Dr Who "Genesis of the Daleks" on the TV, perhaps we are all going to evolve into sloppy pieces of goo that need life support machines at all times like the Daleks!”<br /><br />Question: Are we evolving into DALEKS!?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[duress]

I’ve always looked at viruses, diseases, cancers etc as a type of buffer against life. We require these things in order to give direction. The setting up of opposites in motion. No different to an engine that requires back-pressure, wearing to build up skin toughness, or friction that facilitates a force. Just like the analogy of the “Ball of maggots the size of the Earth”, life needs these resistors in order to work properly. Notice I didn’t say effectively. This prevents the ridiculous from happening.<br /><br />I sometimes think that we over-do-it and nature needs to claim back some ground every now and then. Issuing a new virus, or mutating a common one to balance the order. We will never get rid of disease, nor should we expect to.<br /><br />

 

[jmilsom]

We are certainly doing a lot of genetic manipulation of plants, but I'm not sure when we'll start in humans. It is an ethical minefield as well. Many weaker genes that are dominant (weak eyesight for instance) continue to spread among our gene pool. <br /><br />(Maybe Daleks lost their eyesight first, hence their lack of ingenuity when designing their tunnel line eye proturbence - gives them the worst peripheral vision in the known universe!) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jmilsom]

This is a great summary of some nanotech / medical technologies that just popped up on Yahoo. It looks at the use of Quantum Dots, a few atoms across, as a diagnostic tool, nanofibres that may prevent scar tissue formation on neurons, the use of carbon nanotubes to monitor blood sugar levels and gold-coated nanospheres that may be used to destroy tumours. <br /><br />http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1802&e=8&u=/washpost/20050131/ts_washpost/a49758_2005jan30<br /><br />The seemingly magical super-diagnostics and cure-all technologies we read in our Sci Fi books may be on the way!<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>