Fwd: An intriguing example of working, medical DIYBio

[Bryan Bishop]

From: Michael Yamashita <michael...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:51 PM
Subject: [biocurious] An intriguing example of working, medical DIYBio
To: biocu...@googlegroups.com


Hi all,

An intriguing example of DIYBio, as a necessity to stay alive without bankrupting oneself. Here a man built his own kidney dialysis machine at a fraction of the cost of what was available commercially, using common kitchen tools. 

Although this is an early example, it shows the potential for low-cost innovation, as medical consumers evolve into creators and makers, mastering their own fates, rather than rely helplessly on the mainstream experts. 

Interestingly, it will be in the less-developed parts of the world where DIYBio may find many of its early adopters and creators, both out of need, and also because of lack of existing infrastructure (like healthcare, environmental standards, good governance). Just as Mobile Banking was pioneered by africans because of a lack of financial infrastructure, and poor/non-existant rules makes setting up traditional banking difficult. Now as a result, Africa now is several generations ahead of us in terms of mobile technologies, and has developed itself to export its systems and know-how to the world. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/9817855/Chinese-man-kept-alive-by-self-built-dialysis-machine.html

Cheers,

Michael

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "BioCurious" group.
To post to this group, send email to biocu...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
biocurious+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/biocurious?hl=en
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BioCurious" group.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to biocurious+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
- Bryan
http://heybryan.org/
1 512 203 0507

[Michael Turner]

> An intriguing example of DIYBio,

Given that he's only taken over a med-tech/nurse job for himself, and
isn't doing any actual biology, the distinction "DIYmed" makes more
sense here.

> ... as a necessity to stay alive without

> bankrupting oneself. Here a man built his own kidney dialysis machine at a
> fraction of the cost of what was available commercially, using common
> kitchen tools.

Not quite that simple. Nor, at about $25 per treatment, so cheap, at
least by Chinese standards.

> Although this is an early example, it shows the potential for low-cost
> innovation, as medical consumers evolve into creators and makers, mastering
> their own fates, rather than rely helplessly on the mainstream experts.

Medical economics is strange, and can dramatically distort the markets
of services like dialysis, which costs about $77K per patient year in
the U.S., with about 1 patient in 10 dying anyway, annually. Who knows
how much of that $77K goes to malpractice insurance premiums?

So I can almost see it: between cutting a few corners, not relying on
some supposedly risk-reducing (and expensive) injections, not having
to pay malpractice insurance on his own work, while benefiting (except
in purchasing power terms) from generally lower costs in China, it's
possible this guy has given the world a huge breakthrough.

Possible. But likely? Applying Occam's Razor, I get another couple of
possibilities:

(1) He'd was MISdiagnosed with total renal failure, and has failed to
kill himself with amateur treatment for a condition he actually
doesn't have.

(2) He's a plucky (but not very ethical) entrepreneur, hoping to sell
millions of DIYalysis kits before the authorities take much notice, on
the strength of "See? I'm drinking my own Koolade!" pitch plus a lot
of free publicity from overcredulous Chinese journalists.

> Interestingly, it will be in the less-developed parts of the world where
> DIYBio may find many of its early adopters and creators, both out of need,
> and also because of lack of existing infrastructure (like healthcare,
> environmental standards, good governance). Just as Mobile Banking was
> pioneered by africans because of a lack of financial infrastructure,

Mobile payments through banks is not something invented in Africa.
It's wildly popular there because cellphone penetration in Africa has
(as Bryan points out) leapfrogged almost all of the many
infrastructural and institutional obstacles to more conventional
banking and payment systems. But leapfrogging from a backward position
can still leave you a little backward.

Somalia has you-can-hear-a-pin-drop cellphone service, perhaps the
highest quality in all of Africa. But it's found in cities of hundreds
of thousands of people where, somehow, they all need to share a single
x-ray machine at a single clinic. So I wouldn't pin my hopes on DIYmed
taking off in a big way in Africa just because a particular class of
telecom has. Not all technology is created alike.

> ... Africa now is several generations ahead of us in terms of
> mobile technologies,

SEVERAL generations? They have VR projectors in their cellphones?

> and has developed itself to export its systems and
> know-how to the world.

Examples, please? There's a lot of breathless hype on this subject. For example:

"According to California-based mobile-banking innovator Carol Realini,
executive chairman of Obopay: "Africa is the Silicon Valley of
banking. The future of banking is being defined here… It's going to
change the world.""

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/jul/24/mobile-phones-africa-microfinance-farming

If that's true, Ms. Realini, what the hell are you still doing in
California? Your MARKET may be in Africa. But where are your
developers?

I know that the cellphones, the base stations and the switching
equipment are not developed (or even manufactured) in Africa. The
mobile banking software, however? Software development is growing in
Africa. I keep track of this through a mailing list and a couple of
Google news alerts. And that's a very good thing. But it wouldn't
surprise me at all to learn that the Silicon Valley of African mobile
banking software is actually ... Silicon Valley.

Regards,
Michael Turner
Project Persephone
1-25-33 Takadanobaba
Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 169-0075
(+81) 90-5203-8682
tur...@projectpersephone.org
http://www.projectpersephone.org/

"Love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward
together in the same direction." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

[Bryan Bishop]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Michael Turner <michael.eu...@gmail.com> wrote:

(as Bryan points out) leapfrogged almost all of the many

what? I did no such thing.

[Michael Turner]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Bryan Bishop <kan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Michael Turner
> <michael.eu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> (as Bryan points out) leapfrogged almost all of the many
>
>
> what? I did no such thing.

You're right. Michael Yamashita, whose e-mail you were forwarding,
wrote that. I'm sorry, Bryan -- I regret attributing to you the one
thing in his e-mail that seemed reasonably accurate. ;-)

[Bryan Bishop]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Michael Turner wrote:
> > An intriguing example of DIYBio,
>
> Given that he's only taken over a med-tech/nurse job for himself, and
> isn't doing any actual biology, the distinction "DIYmed" makes more
> sense here.

I don't see your point. Are you saying you are not interested in it
because it can be given a more specific label?

> Medical economics is strange, and can dramatically distort the markets
> of services like dialysis, which costs about $77K per patient year in
> the U.S., with about 1 patient in 10 dying anyway, annually.

There seems to be a gap between those who make minimum wage working
full time (and therefore do not qualify for medical assistance from
the government, something about being above a minimum income), and
those who have a higher salary or possibly insurance that can cover
the procedure. I would be interested in hearing from anyone who knows
anything about what people "in the gap" do. Do they just choose to
drop dead ?? or does the government pay for anyone that asks for
dialysis?

> in purchasing power terms) from generally lower costs in China, it's
> possible this guy has given the world a huge breakthrough.

Nope, actually the first dialysis machine was a washing machine and
some cans from a kitchen-- this guy is certainly not the first.

"Dr. Willem Kolff, a Dutch physician, constructed the first working
dialyzer in 1943 during the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands.[5] Due
to the scarcity of available resources, Kolff had to improvise and
build the initial machine using sausage casings, beverage cans, a
washing machine, and various other items that were available at the
time."

> (1) He'd was MISdiagnosed with total renal failure, and has failed to
> kill himself with amateur treatment for a condition he actually
> doesn't have.

I don't see how misdiagnosis is relevant in this case. The article
wasn't about "... and he's not dead yet, therefore the treatment must
be working." Instead, it was about the fact that he even bothered, I
think.

> (2) He's a plucky (but not very ethical) entrepreneur, hoping to sell
> millions of DIYalysis kits before the authorities take much notice, on
> the strength of "See? I'm drinking my own Koolade!" pitch plus a lot
> of free publicity from overcredulous Chinese journalists.

Eh, maybe. But apparently people have been purchasing less and less
home dialysis machines for years now. I don't see how this would
trigger a reversion in this trend.

> SEVERAL generations? They have VR projectors in their cellphones?

what is a "VR projector"

[Michael Turner]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Bryan Bishop <kan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Michael Turner wrote:
>> > An intriguing example of DIYBio,
>>
>> Given that he's only taken over a med-tech/nurse job for himself, and
>> isn't doing any actual biology, the distinction "DIYmed" makes more
>> sense here.
>
> I don't see your point. Are you saying you are not interested in it
> because it can be given a more specific label?

I didn't say I wasn't interested. As for "more specific label", no, I
mean more appropriate label.

- Biology is a science.
- Biotech is an engineering discipline.
- The practice of medicine is neither, though uses results from both.

Psychiatry, for example, is a medical specialty. Would you say that
someone who is doing amateur psychoanalysis on his friends was doing
"DIYbio"?

>> Medical economics is strange, and can dramatically distort the markets
>> of services like dialysis, which costs about $77K per patient year in
>> the U.S., with about 1 patient in 10 dying anyway, annually.
>
> There seems to be a gap between those who make minimum wage working
> full time (and therefore do not qualify for medical assistance from
> the government, something about being above a minimum income), and
> those who have a higher salary or possibly insurance that can cover
> the procedure. I would be interested in hearing from anyone who knows
> anything about what people "in the gap" do. Do they just choose to
> drop dead ?? or does the government pay for anyone that asks for
> dialysis?

I think dialysis is rationed in the U.S. and has been for a long time.
I don't know how the patient's payments are calculated; I was only
referring to costs, which aren't the same thing. Since this guy is
supposedly doing his own dialysis, his "price" = his cost.

>> in purchasing power terms) from generally lower costs in China, it's
>> possible this guy has given the world a huge breakthrough.
>
> Nope, actually the first dialysis machine was a washing machine and
> some cans from a kitchen-- this guy is certainly not the first.
>
> "Dr. Willem Kolff, a Dutch physician, constructed the first working
> dialyzer in 1943 during the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands.[5] Due
> to the scarcity of available resources, Kolff had to improvise and
> build the initial machine using sausage casings, beverage cans, a
> washing machine, and various other items that were available at the
> time."

If I understand the NYT obit's use of the term "50 yards of sausage
casing", the resulting contraption hardly looks like something you
could put together out of a few kitchen appliances and bits of scrap.
It's frickin' enormous, for one thing.

http://postmanpatel.blogspot.jp/2009/02/inventor-of-kidney-dialysis-machine-in.html

Just because they improvised on some parts doesn't mean it wasn't a
significant engineering effort, well beyond the scope of what's
claimed in the South China Post article: "anybody with a high school
education."

>> (1) He'd was MISdiagnosed with total renal failure, and has failed to
>> kill himself with amateur treatment for a condition he actually
>> doesn't have.
>
> I don't see how misdiagnosis is relevant in this case. The article
> wasn't about "... and he's not dead yet, therefore the treatment must
> be working." Instead, it was about the fact that he even bothered, I
> think.

No, it claims more than that: that he was sick, that he "bothered,"
AND he succeeded.

Absent independent verification of the claim, this might only be more
of the kind of story that passes for hard news in the developing
world.

>> (2) He's a plucky (but not very ethical) entrepreneur, hoping to sell
>> millions of DIYalysis kits before the authorities take much notice, on
>> the strength of "See? I'm drinking my own Koolade!" pitch plus a lot
>> of free publicity from overcredulous Chinese journalists.
>
> Eh, maybe. But apparently people have been purchasing less and less
> home dialysis machines for years now. I don't see how this would
> trigger a reversion in this trend.

What trend? Not much of one.

"annual per-patient costs for home dialysis are about $20,000 lower
than for standard dialysis"

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/09/28/us-home-dialysis-idUSTRE68R5TV20100928

$77,000 - $20,000 = a lot more money than most people have after
ordinary living expenses.

In my searches, the first article that turned up talking about how
home dialysis might be a bit cheaper dates from 1972, which might have
been around they started doing it. This isn't exactly Moore's
Law-level technology progress.

>> SEVERAL generations? They have VR projectors in their cellphones?
>
> what is a "VR projector"

VR=virtual reality.

Clearly, African mobile telephony is not "SEVERAL generations" ahead
of what's to be had in developed countries, as Yamashita claims. Most
of these online banking payments in African are probably done on
something capable of little more than texting and e-mail.

As I said: breathless hype.

[Bryan Bishop]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:40 AM, Michael Turner
<michael.eu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Bryan Bishop <kan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> in purchasing power terms) from generally lower costs in China, it's
>>> possible this guy has given the world a huge breakthrough.
>>
>> Nope, actually the first dialysis machine was a washing machine and
>> some cans from a kitchen-- this guy is certainly not the first.
>>
>> "Dr. Willem Kolff, a Dutch physician, constructed the first working
>> dialyzer in 1943 during the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands.[5] Due
>> to the scarcity of available resources, Kolff had to improvise and
>> build the initial machine using sausage casings, beverage cans, a
>> washing machine, and various other items that were available at the
>> time."
>
> If I understand the NYT obit's use of the term "50 yards of sausage
> casing", the resulting contraption hardly looks like something you
> could put together out of a few kitchen appliances and bits of scrap.
> It's frickin' enormous, for one thing.
>
> http://postmanpatel.blogspot.jp/2009/02/inventor-of-kidney-dialysis-machine-in.html

That's a picture of multiple units of the rotating drum device, seen here:

http://homedialysis.org/types/museum
http://homedialysis.org/images/hdc_content/equipment/th_kolff1.jpg

"""
The first practical artificial kidney was developed during World War
II by the Dutch physician Willem Kolff. The Kolff kidney used a
20-meter long tube of cellophane sausage casing as a dialyzing
membrane. The tube was wrapped around a slatted wooden drum. Powered
by an electric motor, the drum revolved in a tank filled with
dialyzing solution. The patient’s blood was drawn through the
cellophane tubing by gravity as the drum revolved. Toxic molecules in
the blood diffused through the tubing into the dialyzing solution.
Complete dialysis took about six hours. The Kolff kidney effectively
removed toxins from the blood, but because it operated at low
pressure, it was unable to remove excess fluid from the patient’s
blood. Modern dialysis machines are designed to filter out excess
fluid while cleansing the blood of wastes.

Blood was drained from the patient into a sterile container.
Anticlotting drugs were added, and the filled container was hung on a
post above the artificial kidney and connected to the cellulose
acetate tubing that was wound around the wooden drum. A motor turned
the drum, pulling the blood through the tubing by gravity.

The tank underneath the drum was filled with dialyzing fluid. As the
blood-filled tubing passed through this fluid, waste products from the
blood diffused through the tubing into the dialyzing fluid. The
cleansed blood collected in a second sterile container at the other
end of the machine. When all of the blood had passed through the
machine, this second container was raised to drain the blood back into
the patient.

"""

> Just because they improvised on some parts doesn't mean it wasn't a
> significant engineering effort, well beyond the scope of what's
> claimed in the South China Post article: "anybody with a high school
> education."
>
>>> (1) He'd was MISdiagnosed with total renal failure, and has failed to
>>> kill himself with amateur treatment for a condition he actually
>>> doesn't have.
>>
>> I don't see how misdiagnosis is relevant in this case. The article
>> wasn't about "... and he's not dead yet, therefore the treatment must
>> be working." Instead, it was about the fact that he even bothered, I
>> think.
>
> No, it claims more than that: that he was sick, that he "bothered,"
> AND he succeeded.

I know what they claim, but I wouldn't trust their ability to report
on two of those three anyway, so you can just throw out the rest.

>>> (2) He's a plucky (but not very ethical) entrepreneur, hoping to sell
>>> millions of DIYalysis kits before the authorities take much notice, on
>>> the strength of "See? I'm drinking my own Koolade!" pitch plus a lot
>>> of free publicity from overcredulous Chinese journalists.
>>
>> Eh, maybe. But apparently people have been purchasing less and less
>> home dialysis machines for years now. I don't see how this would
>> trigger a reversion in this trend.
>
> What trend? Not much of one.

Wikipedia seems to disagrees with you, there are references of a
declining trend of home dialysis.

> "annual per-patient costs for home dialysis are about $20,000 lower
> than for standard dialysis"

Yes, home dialysis is cheaper but I was talking about the trend of
people not choosing it.

> In my searches, the first article that turned up talking about how
> home dialysis might be a bit cheaper dates from 1972, which might have

again, i wasn't talking about it being cheaper. I am not a difficult
person to understand.

"""
In the USA there has been a large decline in home hemodialysis over
the past 30 years. In the early 1970s, approximately 40% of patients
used it. Today, it is used by approximately 0.4%.[20] In other
countries HNHD use is much higher. In Australia approximately 11% of
ESRD patients use HNHD.[20]

The large decline in HHD seen in the 1970s and early 1980s is due to
several factors. It coincides with the introduction and arise of
continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in the late 1970s, an
increase in the age and the number of comorbidities (degree of
"sickness") in the ESRD population, and, in some countries such USA,
changes in how dialysis care is funded (which lead to more
hospital-based hemodialysis).

Home night-time (nocturnal) hemodialysis was first introduced by
Baillod et al.[25] in the UK and grew popular in some centers, such as
the Northwest Kidney Centers, but then declined in the 1970s
(coinciding with the decline in HHD). Since the early 1990s, NHHD has
become more popular again. Uldall[26] and Pierratos [27][28] started a
program in Toronto, which advocated long night-time treatments, (and
coined the term 'nocturnal home hemodialysis') and Agar[9] in Geelong
converted his HHD patients to NHHD.
"""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_dialysis

>
>>> SEVERAL generations? They have VR projectors in their cellphones?
>>
>> what is a "VR projector"
>
> VR=virtual reality.

what is a "VR projector"

[Josiah Zayner]

I mean the article is scant on information but think about this.

He has no way to test things like bicarbonate in his blood, sodium, potassium, water concentrations and the like. If somehow he managed to find the exact flowrate needed with the exact dialysis membranes used for the exactly perfect amount of time that's great. Testing something like this on yourself is hardly worth the risk.

I don't think this is inspirational. I think it is dangerous. And it seems like the article is more of a half-truth. And kind of scary and I hope it doesn't inspire people to try and build medical equipment on their own and trust their lives to it.

How is this guy obtaining anti-coagulants in quantities needed?

How does he keep it sterile?

I agree that this really seems like the guy didn't really have renal failure or it is just some exaggerated media article.

[Nathan McCorkle]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Michael Turner
<michael.eu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Bryan Bishop <kan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Michael Turner wrote:
>>> > An intriguing example of DIYBio,
>>>
>>> Given that he's only taken over a med-tech/nurse job for himself, and
>>> isn't doing any actual biology, the distinction "DIYmed" makes more
>>> sense here.
>>
>> I don't see your point. Are you saying you are not interested in it
>> because it can be given a more specific label?
>
> I didn't say I wasn't interested. As for "more specific label", no, I
> mean more appropriate label.
>
> - Biology is a science.
> - Biotech is an engineering discipline.
> - The practice of medicine is neither, though uses results from both.
>
> Psychiatry, for example, is a medical specialty. Would you say that
> someone who is doing amateur psychoanalysis on his friends was doing
> "DIYbio"?

Yes. The goal is specific to a biological organism.

Simply using google on the keywords DIY dialysis brings up a few more
slightly interesting stories:

'DIY' kidney machine saves girl

A baby dying from kidney failure was saved when her doctor designed
and built her a dialysis machine from scratch in his garage.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7542404.stm



Chinese farmers set up DIY dialysis clinic in battle to reform
crumbling healthcare system

Ten poor Chinese farmers who set up a do-it-yourself kidney dialysis
clinic because they were too poor to afford hospital care have become
a cause celebre in the battle to reform China's crumbling public
health system.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/5165350/Chinese-farmers-set-up-DIY-dialysis-clinic-in-battle-to-reform-crumbling-healthcare-system.html

--
-Nathan

[Nathan McCorkle]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Josiah Zayner <josiah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I mean the article is scant on information but think about this.
>
> He has no way to test things like bicarbonate in his blood, sodium,
> potassium, water concentrations and the like.

Unless he included in the quoted 60 yuan cost ($9.64 USD) the price of
test strips like one of these :
http://www.ctlscientific.com/pages/potassium.html

or he just didn't care because low levels of those items probably
stabilize pretty fast, considering the guy's supposed reason (avoiding
death), this seems like a perfectly fine risk to take

> If somehow he managed to find
> the exact flowrate needed with the exact dialysis membranes used for the
> exactly perfect amount of time that's great. Testing something like this on
> yourself is hardly worth the risk.

I'd rather risk killing myself than simply accepting death.

>
> I don't think this is inspirational. I think it is dangerous.

But you don't /need/ a contraption like this to live, you likely have
medical insurance (as I seem to recall you're a grad student in the
U.S.)... of course it's /more/ dangerous than going to the hospital,
but it's /less/ dangerous than simply doing nothing.

> And it seems
> like the article is more of a half-truth.

Yeah it would be great to find the original video he supposedly
posted, but that may be behind the 'Great Firewall of China' if it
exists. But other's have done this before and succeeded, so I don't
doubt it's possibility/plausibility.

> And kind of scary and I hope it
> doesn't inspire people to try and build medical equipment on their own and
> trust their lives to it.

This line of reasoning is what keeps 23andMe illegal in some states
(without being ordered by a doctor), it's pretty sad to me.

>
> How is this guy obtaining anti-coagulants in quantities needed?

Maybe he doesn't need a prescription, or the black/grey market is nice
enough over there that you can get most medicine if you want it.

> How does he keep it sterile?

Looked like he was using disposable sharps, at least. That seems to be
doable within the $9,64 cost that the article mentioned.


--
-Nathan

[Josiah Zayner]

Not disposable sharps. You need to run your blood through tubing and a device...

You call it accepting death. I call it a fake article.

If you look at the other articles you posted they bought up old dialysis machines so I don't think there is much precedence for this. Dr. Coulthard I doubt "built it from scratch" and rather used a base system to work from and I am sure had access to $$$$.

I still think the original is fake or exaggerated.

Yes, I have insurance but I don't know what that has to do with building my own dialysis machine? As others have done I would more likely try and buy an old one a refurbish it. And I can tell you I would most assuredly test it on animals first.

23andme illegal? I don't know where you obtained that info? And sending your saliva for genetic arrays is hardly similar to testing a dialysis machine on yourself....

So many DIYBio people think it is bad that they can't do anything they want. The problem is DIYBio people might not know what they are getting into. Many don't have the knowledge to make that judgement call.

Some guy just posted about cyanide antidotes on the list when there are shit tons of stuff out there already. Is this really what people want DIYBio to be associated with? People hurting themselves? Risking their lives for stuff that is already out there?

The reason scientists and medical doctors won't just let anybody in their labs/work environment is not because they think the person can't learn it is because it can be dangerous, people can do stupid stuff and hurt themselves.

I am sorry I don't think it is correct to encourage people to do harmful things to themselves when there are so many non-risky/non-harmful science they can take part in.

If you or anyone you know is dying of renal failure and are very destitute please post to the list and I am sure we can start a fund or something to help you out. Without you having to risk your life.

--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups DIYbio group. To post to this group, send email to diy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/diybio?hl=en
Learn more at www.diybio.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to diy...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en.

[Nathan McCorkle]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Josiah Zayner <josiah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not disposable sharps. You need to run your blood through tubing and a
> device...
>
> You call it accepting death. I call it a fake article.

Fake or not, I stand by the principle that I like to call as many
shots as I can when it comes to my health.

> If you look at the other articles you posted they bought up old dialysis
> machines so I don't think there is much precedence for this. Dr. Coulthard I
> doubt "built it from scratch" and rather used a base system to work from and
> I am sure had access to $$$$.
>
> I still think the original is fake or exaggerated.
>
> Yes, I have insurance but I don't know what that has to do with building my
> own dialysis machine? As others have done I would more likely try and buy an
> old one a refurbish it. And I can tell you I would most assuredly test it on
> animals first.
>
> 23andme illegal? I don't know where you obtained that info?

From 23andMe when I ordered my tests a few years back and had to make
all the physical transactions happen in a state other than where I had
been residing (New York).

> And sending your
> saliva for genetic arrays is hardly similar to testing a dialysis machine on
> yourself....
>

It's similar in that I can't easily order any/many of the
prescription-required diagnostics for myself, why do I have to pay
some doctor for common knowledge? It's my own damn life, if I'm wrong
and kill myself, well, that just means I wasn't fit enough to survive.

> So many DIYBio people think it is bad that they can't do anything they want.
> The problem is DIYBio people might not know what they are getting into.

So what about the people who do know what they're getting into? Why
are they denied?

> Many
> don't have the knowledge to make that judgement call.
>
> Some guy just posted about cyanide antidotes on the list when there are shit
> tons of stuff out there already.

So he fails at using google... that's a different story.

> Is this really what people want DIYBio to
> be associated with?

Yes, DIYbio is here to exterminate ignorance relating to DIYbio.

> People hurting themselves?

No one mentioned hurting themselves but you, the article was about the
opposite, saving oneself from being hurt by a malfunctioning body
part.

> Risking their lives for stuff
> that is already out there?

Sure, we all recommend buying second-hand when appropriate, that
hasn't changed. The point is regarding what happens when you /must/
DIY.

>
> The reason scientists and medical doctors won't just let anybody in their
> labs/work environment is not because they think the person can't learn it is
> because it can be dangerous, people can do stupid stuff and hurt themselves.

Who mentioned going into random labs? I was talking simply about
ordering a test, walking into a clinic and saying 'here's $100, give
me a biopsy of this lump on my cheek with the cytologist option'.

> I am sorry I don't think it is correct to encourage people to do harmful
> things to themselves when there are so many non-risky/non-harmful science
> they can take part in.

No one is encouraging anyone else to do harmful things to themselves or others.


--
-Nathan

[Bryan Bishop]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Michael Turner wrote:
>>> In my searches, the first article that turned up talking about how
>>> home dialysis might be a bit cheaper dates from 1972, which might have
>>
>> again, i wasn't talking about it being cheaper. I am not a difficult
>> person to understand.
>

> That's for people who are trying to understand you to decide, isn't
> it? As I read your contribution, you were initially trying to say that
> home dialysis cost breakthroughs had been made possible by a Chinese

Hardly.. I linked to the original home dialysis machines to show that
it was not made possible by this individual from the original article.

> inventor who was self-treating. Sorry for not noticing a 180-degree
> turn toward skepticism somewhere in there.

The specific point you were replying to was my point about the
declining use of home dialysis. You replied with your thoughts about
price/cost. Then I cited Wikipedia. Not sure how this is a 180-degree
turn into skepticism?

[Michael Turner]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 2:32 AM, Nathan McCorkle <nmz...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> [I wrote] Psychiatry, for example, is a medical specialty. Would you say that

>> someone who is doing amateur psychoanalysis on his friends was doing
>> "DIYbio"?
>
> Yes. The goal is specific to a biological organism.

OK. Um ... so ... there's this science where they try to understand
how homo sapiens manages resources using this symbolic intermediary
resource that homo sapiens calls "money" (in one of its myriad
auditory signaling systems, at least). The science is called
"economics". There's a subdiscipline of economics called "experimental
economics", where they'll gather members of this species into a room
and put them through various simulation games using this money stuff,
to better understand economic behavior in this biological organism.

If I were to conduct my own economics experiment, would I be doing DIYbio?

Finally, if your answer to that question is "yes" (sounds like it
would be, extrapolating from your answer about psychiatry), what would
predict as the outcome of a discussion among editors on Wikipedia if I
tried to put the category of "economics" under "biology"?

Or are you just having a little fun with us?