Which dream of modern person can be put into reality with the help of biomedical engineering?
I. Khlusov: the dream of modern person to live longer and to be happy in the consumer society. This is international trend. All the medicine is aimed at solving this problem, forming rigid requirements to the other branches of science and technology. Physicists in Germany were warned: “If you don’t work for German medicine, we will close you!”.
What is biomedical engineering?
Y.Dekhtyar: In the definition of different combinations of “bio”, “medicine” and “engineering” one should be very careful. Bioengineering is technological processes, connected with biology. Biomedicine is biological processes connected with medicine. And biomedical engineering is engineering knowledge and technologies for medicine. This is the answer for question how to use engineering or physic for medicine.
I. Khlusov: that’s why the integration into biomedical engineering means application of physical and technical knowledge and achievements in the medicine.
On which level does biomedical engineering operate?
Y. Dekhtyar: Biomedical engineering covers all the levels beginning with atomic, ending with level of organisms. Biological structure has the hierarchy on all the levels of organization. It is impossible to “pull out” and consider one level from the chain of other ones. And physic has very strong cognitive tools which make it possible to work beginning with atomic level and ending with macrolevel.
Why has the combination of “biology”, “medicine” and “physic” become possible?
Y. Dekhtyar: There is no other way out today. I think that the main prerequisite is technical one. In 1986 the Nobel Prize was won for the discovery of atomic force microscope, scientists saw atoms for the first time and started moving them. It was boom. Nowadays atomic force microscope, tunnel microscopes are microscopes which should be in every laboratory. Scientists have understood that they can manipulate separate atoms. That has given new impetus to the technique and electronics microelectronics has appeared, then nanoelectronics which has performed expansion into almost all the brunches of science and technology and made bionanotechnologies possible. That’s why medicine today is making step forward.
Nobel Prize unfortunately was not given for the second brilliant invention laser forceps for manipulating nanoparticles. It is much cheaper that atomic microscope and allows manipulating particles with the size of dozens of hundreds nanometers “with your own hands”. In this way the possibility of technological construction of nanostructures from single atoms, crystals have appeared.
I.Khlusov: in 1980-s new methods of manipulation appeared, and a little bit earlier, in 1975−76 years, medical material science had appeared.
Y. Dekhtyar: Here we cannot fail to mention the discovery of graphene. The situation the last year’s Nobel prize for grapheme is ridiculous. All researchers who work with atomic microscopy when examining the surface of nanofilm use tape – they take samples of the material, stick it to the tape, then rip it off, cleaning by this the surface. But Game and Novoselov the only ones in the world who looked on the surface of tape but not on the surface of material. This way graphene was discovered.
Now about the future. Physical society is looking for Higgs boson. Which its own Higgs boson the biomedical engineering is looking for, which problem does it face and what can it give to new generations?
Y. Dekhtyar: Biomedical engineering is trying to create living organ with artificial way. Now vessels are created from living cells. But biology is such an area that it impossible to predict the consequences of those that will happen in 100−200 years. That’s why I call for being careful. What will happen with the generations of people who get mother or father with artificially grown organ? If the human being has a defect and we change his organ, then we do not treat the reason, but just illuminate the consequences. What will be with the children of such people, who will have this defect again? That’s why biomedical engineering faces the questions: “Should we?”, “Whether it it for good for future generations?”. These ethical problems restrict its development.
I. Khlusov: Now controversy exists about the ways of biomedical engineering development. Practice is following the direction: firstly to grow up organ beyond the organism, than – to transplant. Tofay there are a lot of problems in the sphere of transplantology of artificial material into organism, not everything goes well. The direction that goes together with biomedical engineering is regenerative medicine. Its gist is the following: with the help of physical knowledge, technologies, artificial materials to make stem cells regenerate their abilities. From the point of view of possibility and accessibility this is more right direction. This is an attempt to reproduce living function beyond the organism. And in the same time with the help of introduction of artificial materials into organism to restore natural function of this or that organ. But for the development of biomedicine new philosophical conception of human being, new ethic are needed
What about the examination of projects?
I. Khlusov: there exist some difficulty with writing the application — we should demonstrate newness and achievements but at the same time not reveal the main know-how.
Y.Dekhtyar: That means that expert should understand that this can be realized, but understand it so deeply that not to make a conclusion like “I cannot understand how it could be realized because authors did not point it”. It frequently happens that you are trying hard but than the expert comes who says “I don’t understand that means that it is written badly and if it written badly it is not worth funding”.
I have experience of taking part into the examination of projects concerning American system. Experts put marks. That everybody gathers around the round table and discusses each project, notwithstanding which mark did this project get. For example, three experts worked, among them the head was chosen, who makes the review and tries to substantiate why the projects got this or that mark. Every expert ask the question: “I still do not understand why this project with this statement of question, which we have appreciated so highly, on other criteria got so low mark?”. And then experts should explain. If they cannot explain then the discussion flares up or the project is sent to repeated examination.
After making conclusion of this examination around the round table the gathering of feedback is carried out. One of the experts emphasized that “we spend a lot of time, money and this is not quite rational, it much easier to put marks, find the average and put the projects into rating”. The discussion has begun – whether the examination basing on this system should be continued or not. The discussion was very important, because the team of leading American scientists took of this direction part in it, and future work will depend on their opinion. I voted for the protection, noticing that this is European examination system being bureaucratized and formalized that offers this banal marking of projects. And we lose behind the figures the very gist of the projects, the authors of the application and the team of the project. Such examination costs more but it is more correct.
Reference:
Yuri Dekhtyar and Igor Khlusov are coauthors of the projects “The development of the conception and introduction the technologies of “tissue bioconstructors” into regenerative medicine” that was verified by international expert board of cluster “Biological and medical technologies” of “Skolkovo” innovative center and got the status “Participant of Skolkovo projects”.
Yuri Dekhtyar is the director of the Institute of biomedical engineering and nanotechnologies of Riga technical university, president of Latvian medical-engineering and physical society, member of New-York academy of science, expert of medical physical and engineering European network, member of European physical society.
Igor Khlusov is the leader of educational and research center “Biocompatible materials and bioengineering” of Siberian state medical university, professor of the department of morphology and general pathology of Siberian state medical university, Doctor of medical science.
Comments