US researchers from Stanford University have developed a bionic eye, which has been successfully tested in rats. According to the research team, the eye implant - a 3-millimetre-wide chip that would fit behind the retina - could be a dramatic step above currently available technology.
Bionic Eye System (Courtesy: Stanford University)
Degenerative retinal diseases (such as age-related macular degeneration) is caused in 700,000 people each year in the USA alone. In such a disease, the rod-shaped photoreceptors at the retina's periphery (responsible for night vision), and cone-shaped cells (color vision) are damaged. However, the retina is still intact, and if it could be directly stimulated, some functionalities could be restored.
The complete setup includes a small chip implanted directly onto the eye, a wearable computer, a video camera, and a pair of infra-red goggles. First, light from (say) a flower enters the video camera. The video camera then sends the image of the flower to the wallet-sized computer for complex processing. The processor then wirelessly sends its image of the flower to an infrared LED-LCD screen mounted on the goggles. The transparent goggles reflect an infrared image into the eye and onto the retinal chip. The chip converts the image to the visual range, and projects it onto the retina.
This design employs a pixel density of up to 2,500 pixels per millimeter, corresponding to a visual acuity of 20/80, which could provide functional vision for reading books and using the computer. This is significantly better than the currently existing technologies, which provide only a few pixels per millimeter. The work is a synergy of diverse fields: biology, electronics, physics, and signal processing.
Bionic Eye System (Courtesy: Stanford University)
Degenerative retinal diseases (such as age-related macular degeneration) is caused in 700,000 people each year in the USA alone. In such a disease, the rod-shaped photoreceptors at the retina's periphery (responsible for night vision), and cone-shaped cells (color vision) are damaged. However, the retina is still intact, and if it could be directly stimulated, some functionalities could be restored.
The complete setup includes a small chip implanted directly onto the eye, a wearable computer, a video camera, and a pair of infra-red goggles. First, light from (say) a flower enters the video camera. The video camera then sends the image of the flower to the wallet-sized computer for complex processing. The processor then wirelessly sends its image of the flower to an infrared LED-LCD screen mounted on the goggles. The transparent goggles reflect an infrared image into the eye and onto the retinal chip. The chip converts the image to the visual range, and projects it onto the retina.
This design employs a pixel density of up to 2,500 pixels per millimeter, corresponding to a visual acuity of 20/80, which could provide functional vision for reading books and using the computer. This is significantly better than the currently existing technologies, which provide only a few pixels per millimeter. The work is a synergy of diverse fields: biology, electronics, physics, and signal processing.
Bionic Eye
(Hide)
(Show)
11 Comments:
I don't understand why human trial can't start earlier - there would surely be no shortage of volunteers. I understand why there would be rules for general release of drugs to the unsuspecting public, but if people volunteer to do the testing then surely there's no issue!
The other thing about the FDA holding back drugs where it feels they aren't proven, is that people who could be alive because of the treatments, may otherwise die. For example if an effective cancer cure was created right now, it would be 5-7 years before it would be allowed to come to the market. If I was dying of cancer with a month to live, I'd say "stuff the regulation, just give me the drug, I'll take that risk".
Sorry, I didn't mean for this to turn into a rant about the nanny state. I used to read Scientific American for my science updates - I'm thinking about cancelling my subscription and just reading your blog instead ;-)
I havent yet understood the technical part, but it would be amazing and so wonderful for the people who would benefit.
yes a valid point re.terminally ill and medicines which are yet to be approved.. if the patient definitely has no chances and is absolutely aware of the risks and if there r rules to prevent it being misused, well why not:) after all every life saved, counts.
Computer models might replace experimentation to a certain extent. Researchers often model drugs on the computer, and some estimations of toxicity etc. can be done on the computer. But they still have to test the drugs on animals after all that.
My biggest problem with animal testing is not that animals are used, but that they are often kept in really poor conditions, in small cages, for day after day. And once their utility is finished, they are thrown away like a piece of shit.
Wise donkey: Even though I hate it, I really dont see a way around animal testing in some cases. I guess we shoukd make laws that restrict animals testings only for life-threatening diseases. But these days, they do such testing for cosmetics and soap and detergents, which is pathetic :-(.
Post a Comment