Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[extremis]

This thread is for the skeptics (one of whom is particularly egregious) on this board who believe that traditional distraction osteogenesis using an Ilizarov frame or magnetic nails is the only procedure we're likely to see for effective limb lengthening in our lifetime or within the next 20 (or whatever ridiculous, inflated number) years.

Those of you who have seen me post on this board before have most likely seen me say time and again that we're no further than 10 years away from a safer, more effective procedure that could allow for even more growth than distraction osteogenesis with much greater (if not total) retention of physical abilities, particularly athletic ability. The last time I discussed this on this board was a few months ago now (I haven't posted in a while), and I had one back-and-forth with what is possibly the most fervent skeptic on this board that terminated with that individual essentially dismissing my claims regarding the imminent creation of such a technique as a fantasy or product of hopeful delusions.

I responded to this by informing that poster that they were a scientific illiterate and do not understand the way scientific progress works, or the magnitude of the increase in the rate of scientific discovery and advancement in the information age. Well, being an enthusiast and hobbyist of several biomedical fields, I constantly keep myself up-to-date with recent scientific advancements and discoveries in those same fields. And, earlier this week while I was browsing my sources, I happened upon these very interesting morsels:

https://physicsworld.com/a/handheld-biopen-prints-human-cartilage/

Handheld biopen prints human cartilage
04 Oct 2018

A handheld “biopen” capable of 3D printing cartilage tissue could for the first time be used during surgery to treat cartilage injuries and osteoarthritus. The extrusion-based device, which prints live stem cells embedded in a hydrogel material, produces constructs that look and behave just like natural articular tissue (Biofabrication 10 045006).

“This is in stark contrast to conventional reparative cartilage made of fibrocartilage, which is very different in structure to physiological cartilage, inferior in quality and not durable,” say the researchers, a multidisciplinary team that includes surgeons, biologists, physicists and engineers. “Our technique and the scaffolds we are able to produce provide much hope for treating patients suffering from cartilage injuries and osteoarthritis.”

While some success has been reported for surgical treatments that exploit engineered cartilage tissue, existing procedures require two separate operations: one to remove the damaged tissue, and another to replace the tissue once it is repaired. What’s more, surgeons report a high failure rate – partly because pre-fabricated scaffolds might not perfectly match the defect, and partly because the implanted tissue is not similar enough to natural cartilage to survive for long inside the body. 

Note that this is WITHOUT major attention being paid to the field of cartilage tissue engineering. Furthermore, this article actually serves as a follow-up to this other article:

https://physicsworld.com/a/biopen-speeds-up-stem-cell-repair/

Biopen speeds up stem-cell repair
20 Mar 2018

As 3D printing technology evolves and advances, we are getting ever closer to the goal of being able to implant 3D printed tissues inside the body. At present, 3D printed cells must first be cultivated and then allowed to grow into viable tissue – which normally takes a few days. But a new instrument, dubbed the biopen, could help to speed up this process. The biopen, developed by researchers in Australia, could allow surgeons to repair damaged bone and cartilage by “drawing” new cells directly onto bone during surgery and then filling in any damaged areas.

I've taken the liberty of bolding and underlining something particularly interesting about these two articles. Notice what it is? The second article, which is about the original release of the Biopen, was published on March 20th of this year, while the first one, which details successful forays into cartilage printing using the Biopen (and even upcoming attempts to surgically implant the tissue) was published this month, roughly 7 months later.

Then there's this:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/10/181010105531.htm

With today's technology, we can 3-D-print sculptures, mechanical parts, prosthetics, even guns and food. But a team of University of Utah biomedical engineers have developed a method to 3-D-print cells to produce human tissue such as ligaments and tendons, a process that will greatly improve a patient's recovery. A person with a badly damaged ligament, tendon, or ruptured disc could simply have new replacement tissue printed and ultimately implanted in the damaged area, according to a new paper published in the Journal of Tissue Engineering, Part C: Methods.

The paper, for the scientifically-inclined:

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ten.tec.2018.0184

So it's now possible to 3D print connective tissue such as ligaments and tendons, which are among the soft tissue that is distended and damaged by distraction osteogenesis (ultimately resulting in loss of physical ability). The paper was published on September 14th of this year. This again follows up on the Biopen article from months before, as well as several other research papers involving printed biological tissue that have been published throughout this year.

And again I repeat that all this progress comes without any special attention paid to the field of tissue engineering. This is a natural progression. So, as I've always said, there's nothing absurd about asserting that a non-crippling, safer, better alternative to distraction osteogenesis could be as close as 10 years away, probably more like 7 or 8 if height increase had as much impetus from the (overwhelmingly male) community of short statured people who want to be taller as androgenic alopecia gets from men/women who are balding or weight loss procedures get from overweight people.

Stuff like this is the reason why bullsh*t copes like "therapy" and "acceptance" (i.e. resignation) should NEVER be suggested as "solutions" to height dysphoria or any problems involving a person's height. The community ought to be encouraging short people who have experienced heightism and/or are otherwise unhappy with their height to make as much money as they possibly can so we can all come together and help FUND research like this, so that we can ALL have a solution that doesn't involve excruciating pain and risk of being permanently crippled a la unicorn from this board.

[myloginacc]

Thank you for sharing.

And again I repeat that all this progress comes without any special attention paid to the field of tissue engineering. This is a natural progression. So, as I've always said, there's nothing absurd about asserting that a non-crippling, safer, better alternative to distraction osteogenesis could be as close as 10 years away, probably more like 7 or 8 if height increase had as much impetus from the (overwhelmingly male) community of short statured people who want to be taller as androgenic alopecia gets from men/women who are balding or weight loss procedures get from overweight people.

In my opinion, the main problem is that most of the "short community" does not have the necessary scientific acumen and knowledge to keep up with developments (myself included), and also connect the dots between them. Ideally, I think we'd need a centralized place, be it a twitter account or a community of some sort, where it could be demonstrated, in laymen terms, that such a possibility is not a fantasy destined to only materialize itself in the far distant future - that it could be done once science gets to point A and B, so we can do C. It'd befall on whoever is in charge of such an account or community to demonstrate how close we are to points A and B, and to keep the whole community updated. That is an ideal scenario.

[Mzacr]

I think that as the surgery gets more popular there will be a lot more research around it. So to supply the growing demand.

[IwannaBeTaller]

Awesome news...I continue to be optimistic and very excited about the future. Gotta love the fact that we have modern science.

[ZUCC420]

Thank you for sharing.

In my opinion, the main problem is that most of the "short community" does not have the necessary scientific acumen and knowledge to keep up with developments (myself included), and also connect the dots between them. Ideally, I think we'd need a centralized place, be it a twitter account or a community of some sort, where it could be demonstrated, in laymen terms, that such a possibility is not a fantasy destined to only materialize itself in the far distant future - that it could be done once science gets to point A and B, so we can do C. It'd befall on whoever is in charge of such an account or community to demonstrate how close we are to points A and B, and to keep the whole community updated. That is an ideal scenario.

Even if such an enlightening source were created, how would it gain a following that is substantial? If only men didn't have this propensity towards stoicism regarding particularly pejorative implications that pertains to masculinity.

[myloginacc]

Even if such an enlightening source were created, how would it gain a following that is substantial? If only men didn't have this propensity towards stoicism regarding particularly pejorative implications that pertains to masculinity.

I don't know. Promotion around these parts, maybe?

Either way, short people with a lot of money to spare also tend to be... short on time. The vast majority are entrepreneurs rather than scientists, too. If the community is going to come together to fund such endeavors, they'll want to understand where their money is going to, what is it helping with, and how it furthers the path towards the goal of safer alternatives to distraction osteogenesis LL.

[myloginacc]

Anyway, there's a medical trial, happening in about two years, that I'm looking forward to. It'll happen in Europe. I think it'll give us the panorama of what can be reliably expected (or not) in regards to alternatives to current CLL practices.

[..]

Bump

[LuciusFox]

This thread is for the skeptics (one of whom is particularly egregious) on this board who believe that traditional distraction osteogenesis using an Ilizarov frame or magnetic nails is the only procedure we're likely to see for effective limb lengthening in our lifetime or within the next 20 (or whatever ridiculous, inflated number) years.

Those of you who have seen me post on this board before have most likely seen me say time and again that we're no further than 10 years away from a safer, more effective procedure that could allow for even more growth than distraction osteogenesis with much greater (if not total) retention of physical abilities, particularly athletic ability. The last time I discussed this on this board was a few months ago now (I haven't posted in a while), and I had one back-and-forth with what is possibly the most fervent skeptic on this board that terminated with that individual essentially dismissing my claims regarding the imminent creation of such a technique as a fantasy or product of hopeful delusions.

I responded to this by informing that poster that they were a scientific illiterate and do not understand the way scientific progress works, or the magnitude of the increase in the rate of scientific discovery and advancement in the information age. Well, being an enthusiast and hobbyist of several biomedical fields, I constantly keep myself up-to-date with recent scientific advancements and discoveries in those same fields. And, earlier this week while I was browsing my sources, I happened upon these very interesting morsels:

https://physicsworld.com/a/handheld-biopen-prints-human-cartilage/

Note that this is WITHOUT major attention being paid to the field of cartilage tissue engineering. Furthermore, this article actually serves as a follow-up to this other article:

https://physicsworld.com/a/biopen-speeds-up-stem-cell-repair/

I've taken the liberty of bolding and underlining something particularly interesting about these two articles. Notice what it is? The second article, which is about the original release of the Biopen, was published on March 20th of this year, while the first one, which details successful forays into cartilage printing using the Biopen (and even upcoming attempts to surgically implant the tissue) was published this month, roughly 7 months later.

Then there's this:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/10/181010105531.htm

The paper, for the scientifically-inclined:

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ten.tec.2018.0184

So it's now possible to 3D print connective tissue such as ligaments and tendons, which are among the soft tissue that is distended and damaged by distraction osteogenesis (ultimately resulting in loss of physical ability). The paper was published on September 14th of this year. This again follows up on the Biopen article from months before, as well as several other research papers involving printed biological tissue that have been published throughout this year.

And again I repeat that all this progress comes without any special attention paid to the field of tissue engineering. This is a natural progression. So, as I've always said, there's nothing absurd about asserting that a non-crippling, safer, better alternative to distraction osteogenesis could be as close as 10 years away, probably more like 7 or 8 if height increase had as much impetus from the (overwhelmingly male) community of short statured people who want to be taller as androgenic alopecia gets from men/women who are balding or weight loss procedures get from overweight people.

Stuff like this is the reason why bullsh*t copes like "therapy" and "acceptance" (i.e. resignation) should NEVER be suggested as "solutions" to height dysphoria or any problems involving a person's height. The community ought to be encouraging short people who have experienced heightism and/or are otherwise unhappy with their height to make as much money as they possibly can so we can all come together and help FUND research like this, so that we can ALL have a solution that doesn't involve excruciating pain and risk of being permanently crippled a la unicorn from this board.

Here we are  in 2021...

[LuciusFox]

[-]

And again I repeat that all this progress comes without any special attention paid to the field of tissue engineering. This is a natural progression. So, as I've always said, there's nothing absurd about asserting that a non-crippling, safer, better alternative to distraction osteogenesis could be as close as 10 years away, probably more like 7 or 8 if height increase had as much impetus from the (overwhelmingly male) community of short statured people who want to be taller as androgenic alopecia gets from men/women who are balding or weight loss procedures get from overweight people.

So now we already have a community of short statured people who want to be taller. Where are you now?

[LuciusFox]