[HN Gopher] First Transient Electronic Bandage Speeds Healing by...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       First Transient Electronic Bandage Speeds Healing by 30 Percent
        
       Author : lxm
       Score  : 51 points
       Date   : 2023-03-13 00:14 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.mccormick.northwestern.edu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.mccormick.northwestern.edu)
        
       | bilekas wrote:
       | > When the wound is healed, the flower-shaped electrode simply
       | dissolves into the body, bypassing the need to retrieve it.
       | 
       | This is probably the most incredible tech discovery of all this
       | to me. Insane how it can just be absorbed by the body with no
       | side-effects.
        
         | reducesuffering wrote:
         | > with no side-effects
         | 
         | Citation and years needed...
        
         | knodi123 wrote:
         | I had a steel splinter in my thumb once. It turned gray, and
         | then just faded, over a span of 6 months or so. I was
         | disappointed, because I could use it to feel magnetic fields,
         | which was really neat.
        
         | bioemerl wrote:
         | > The team made the electrodes from a metal called molybdenum,
         | which is widely used in electronic and semiconductor
         | applications. They discovered that when molybdenum is thin
         | enough, it can biodegrade. Furthermore, it does not interfere
         | with the healing process.
         | 
         | Fda limits the metal to 2 mg a day.
        
           | DoreenMichele wrote:
           | Most likely, it's not an issue:
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35074916
           | 
           | I mean unless they stick a _bunch_ of these mini electrodes
           | all over you.
        
       | tomxor wrote:
       | I cant help but think when reading another paper with a "think of
       | the diabetic masses" spin on it, how much pain an suffering could
       | be avoided if as much focus was put on improving peoples
       | nutrition at market scales.
       | 
       | We know now that highly refined carb and sugar based food that
       | makes up 95% of what is sold in the west is pretty much
       | singularly responsible for diabetes, and the more we learn about
       | the effects of the clever substitutes we come up with like
       | sweeteners the more we realise that these are as bad if not worse
       | at increasing insulin resistance. We've created our own diabetes
       | epidemic through technology, using the cost function of yield and
       | profit for food processing, and it feels like we are reaching for
       | technology to also treat the myriad symptoms instead of challenge
       | that cost function to include human health.
       | 
       | I'm sure this technology has broad utility beyond diabetes, but
       | people keep including it in every medical paper, maybe it's not
       | really the authors focus.
       | 
       | [edit]
       | 
       | Judging by votes I seem to have offended people, to be clear I
       | don't blame people for poor diets, and I don't blame diabetics
       | for becoming diabetic, I blame industry. Of course if it's food
       | industry people that I've offended then fuck you :) if other
       | reasons, do explain.
        
         | RHSeeger wrote:
         | > pretty much singularly responsible for diabetes
         | 
         | 1. You should say Type 2 Diabetes when you're talking about it.
         | Type 1 and Type 2 are vastly different things. Diet and
         | exercise help with making Type 1 easier to manage, but they
         | don't "fix" it in any way.
         | 
         | 2. There exist people for whom reducing the effects of Type 2
         | diabetes is harder than just a simple diet change. Things to
         | help Type 2 can help these people make their lives better.
        
         | DoreenMichele wrote:
         | I agree with the thrust of your point and said something
         | similar in the previous discussion.
         | 
         | But there's a lot we don't understand about diabetes. It's more
         | complicated than just sugar and there's a lot of room to
         | improve our understanding.
        
         | devmor wrote:
         | If you look at the food production industry as a whole in the
         | US, the picture of why funding and effort is not put into
         | fixing nutrition becomes very clear.
         | 
         | It's extremely profitable AND nearly risk-proof to run monocrop
         | farms to produce varieties of corn, which can be grown as
         | necessary to sell based on what has higher demand in the
         | current season: sweetener, meal, whole ears, biofuel, cattle
         | feed, etc. It's much less profitable to run a farm full of
         | different types of crops that must be grown, harvested, watered
         | and cared for in different ways - and have 1 or 2 markets at
         | most.
         | 
         | If you were to create a venn diagram of the share holding firms
         | in major farming operations compared to the shareholders in
         | major food production companies, it would be very close to a
         | circle. Thus, it's in the best interest (as far as turning
         | short-term profits) of those shareholders to ensure high corn
         | production and high corn use, filling our shelves with high-
         | calorie, low-nutrition products.
         | 
         | There are many more tangents to go on that end in a similar
         | "hooray, short-term profits" conclusion. To name a few:
         | 
         | Heavily-preserved food that can stay on shelves longer, and
         | thus contains too much sodium.
         | 
         | Long commutes and work hours that benefit corporations,
         | resulting in high demand for pre-packaged food that has lost
         | many essential nutrients in its preparation method.
         | 
         | High rents and housing costs from real estate speculation
         | leading to people having small, inadequate kitchens and
         | ordering food more.
        
           | devbent wrote:
           | Corn syrup has rapidly been vanishing from foods based on
           | consumer demand. A decade ago buying bread without corn syrup
           | in it was a challenge, now days all but the cheapest bread in
           | stores proudly had "no corn syrup!" printed on the label.
           | 
           | > leading to people having small, inadequate kitchens and
           | ordering food more.
           | 
           | Friend of mine has been undergoing a kitchen remodel and
           | cooking for a family of 4 using a plug in induction burner
           | for the last 5 or 6 months. Historically kitchens were small
           | and families were big. Outside of kitchens that only have a
           | microwave, even a small 2 burner range will suffice, although
           | it will strongly limit what dishes can be prepared in
           | reasonable time.
           | 
           | > thus contains too much sodium
           | 
           | Sodium is an often blamed boogie man, but undeservedly so.
           | Outside of people with chronic health conditions, it is
           | _really_ hard to intake so much sodium such that it has a
           | negative impact on health.
           | 
           | The problems in the US food supply are likely a lot more
           | subtle and nuanced than too much fat or salt. People have
           | been eating salted fatty cuts of meat for thousands of years
           | w/o the health problems we see now days.
        
           | tomxor wrote:
           | Yes, these are all fair points, in a nut shell you could
           | blame market forces and say industry behaviour is inevitable,
           | which is what I was alluding to as the cost function.
           | 
           | In other areas where this becomes a problem government
           | intervene to change intensives, e.g the total cost of
           | continuous alcohol consumption is not included in the sticker
           | price, so some governments add a tax, same with tobacco...
           | ideally such taxes would be directed to public spending on
           | the medical costs, but that depends on the country.
           | 
           | The same could be done far more broadly with food, not just a
           | mere sugar tax, but taxing foods that are known to be product
           | placements as poor substitutes for a full meal, that are too
           | nutritionally devoid and contain too many substitutes. Just
           | like alcohol, an occasional ready meal or highly refined cake
           | isn't going to kill you or give you chronic disease, in which
           | case it can be expensive to dissuade you from making it a
           | regular thing and disincentivise industry from focusing on
           | producing that type of food..
        
             | devbent wrote:
             | > Just like alcohol,
             | 
             | Alcohol fucks with DNA. It is neurotoxic.
             | 
             | Let's not lie to ourselves, the safe amount of booze is 0
             | booze.
             | 
             | I'm not saying don't drink, just that we should be 100%
             | honest with ourselves.
        
               | tomxor wrote:
               | Yes, however it's the consistent consumption of high
               | quantities of alcohol that cause chronic illness, and
               | it's the same behaviour that is problematic in food, this
               | is what diabetes is, sugar ends up being toxic
               | (glucotoxicity). Even short term high sugar intake causes
               | cell stress, it's not as toxic as alcohol, but long term
               | consumption of either is problematic.
        
               | devbent wrote:
               | You should clarify, refined sugars.
               | 
               | There is also the ongoing debate of why the hell
               | consuming white rice, which is instantly broken down into
               | large amounts of glucose, doesn't have the same negative
               | health impact. Lots of investigations around fructose vs
               | glucose and biological pathways of how straight fructose
               | is processed and so on and so forth, but feel free to
               | visit any SE Asian country where rice is well over 50% of
               | meals by volume and obesity levels are low.
               | 
               | I read a good series of investigative articles that
               | posited it is contamination of our food supply from one
               | or more unknown sources that explains why a diet
               | consisting of highly processed food causes more chronic
               | health conditions than a diet consisting of fresh foods
               | even if the macro nutrient content is the same. (Wish I
               | had bookmarked it...)
        
         | devbent wrote:
         | > Judging by votes
         | 
         | You are mostly off topic. :)
         | 
         | Likely no one will disagree with you that the standard American
         | diet is a ultra processed chemical trash heap, just, that is
         | not related to super cool wound healing tech.
         | 
         | Diabetes isn't the topic of the article, diabetic ulcers were
         | used in the clinical trial, but otherwise the story is about
         | using electricity to heal open wounds.
        
           | tomxor wrote:
           | The paper targets diabetic ulcers... it's literally a band
           | aid on diabetes.
           | 
           | This is the trend in medical papers currently, target
           | diabetics, which there are so many of. It's really not much
           | of a tangent.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | tenuousemphasis wrote:
         | What you're referring to is a political and economic problem,
         | not a medical or technical problem.
        
           | tomxor wrote:
           | This is true, but it is a problem enabled by technology at
           | the industrial level. Science could at least help reframe
           | what has come to be accepted as "food".
        
         | pengaru wrote:
         | There's far more money to be made running dialysis centers in
         | every strip mall than selling more carrots and broccoli.
         | 
         | And don't you dare obstruct the fast path to dialysis because
         | FREEDUM!!!
        
           | dsfyu404ed wrote:
           | I'll be even more cynical and say that the "upper middle
           | class on up" who's whims drive political policy actively DGAF
           | because exercise and eating healthy are a lifestyle thing
           | that separate them from the people below them.
        
             | pengaru wrote:
             | Except there are plenty "upper middle class on up" who
             | don't take care of themselves either...
        
         | xnx wrote:
         | Widespread use of semaglutide might cure metabolic syndrome.
        
           | tomxor wrote:
           | Nutrition is not that simple, you cannot trick the body with
           | a miracle cure chemical. If you cheat the body of nutrients
           | there will be long term consequences.
        
       | pimlottc wrote:
       | Previous discussion based on an different article:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35060657
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-03-14 23:02 UTC)