DARPA calls for antibiotic replacement

[Tank]

DARPA calls for antibiotic replacement

(Medical Xpress) -- Most everyone that has been keeping abreast of world events knows that the clock is ticking on antibiotics; bacteria have been slowly developing a resistance and development of new antibiotics has slowed to a crawl, thus the day will soon come that all of the tools were are currently using to fight bacterial infections will be lost, leaving everyone at their mercy. This problem has not gone unnoticed by those at the upper reaches of the military establishment in the United States, thus it should not come as a surprise to anyone that DARPA, via the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program, has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to completely replace antibiotics with something new and better.

...Instead of working to develop new antibiotics, DARPA proposes the development and use of so-called nanoparticles to deliver gene altering chemicals directly to the cells of bacteria to kill them. In addition, they are hoping that someone will be able to come up with a way to make it so that the nanoparticles and chemicals they carry can be reprogrammed on-the-fly so as to combat newly evolved or created bacteria as soon as they appear. The idea is that the nanoparticles would carry something called small interfering RNA (siRNA) which are groups of molecules that would actually do the work of shutting down the genes inside the cells of the bacteria...

An interesting concept, slightly amusing that the military solution is a 'smart bomb'  

[Squid]

I know that RNAi is thought to have popped up as a mutation that counteracted viral insertions and since it's discovery have been examined as useful against viruses and other disease-causing biological agents.  The research is still fairly new in that RNAi wasn't really "discovered" until the late 90s.

[xSilverPhinx]

Didn't the Russians use bacteriophage viruses to do that? It does look like the smart solution, the plus side to nanobots being that if bacterial evolve to hide from them, the bots can be tweaked in some way to compensate.

[Squid]

Hmm, I'm not sure, haven't read anything on it.  I do know that HIV is being utilized to combat forms of cancer and has shown much promise.  It wouldn't be a wild leap to think that the same can be done to phages to target particular bacteria.

[xSilverPhinx]

Hmm, I'm not sure, haven't read anything on it.  I do know that HIV is being utilized to combat forms of cancer and has shown much promise.  It wouldn't be a wild leap to think that the same can be done to phages to target particular bacteria.

Found the Wiki article on the subject. Weird thing that they're not being as researched in other places other than the ex-Soviet Union. Especially if they're cheaper than nanobots and could be used to target more common drug-resistant bacteria which could be infected...

Is the risk that they could mutate and a resulting type start infecting human cells high?

[Pharaoh Cat]

As usual, I'm thankful the military is out there to conceive and fund science no one else will.

Another paragraph from the same article:

On its face, the project seems rather simple, after all, this is not science fiction, DARPA points out that just last year a research group used siRNA delivered by nanoparticles to kill the Ebola virus in four primates. Unfortunately, the problem is, it's not as easy as it looks, all of this science is still in its infancy and if a way can be found to do what is being asked, it likely will take years, if not decades to fully develop. The success against the Ebola virus was one agent against just one virus in a structured environment. To do what DARPA wants would mean using one technique to kill any and all bad bacteria and/or viruses. Also, if it can be done, no one really knows if the procedure would be reprogrammable, much less whether it could be done on-the-fly, so it's not really clear if anyone will be able to achieve what DARPA is asking for; though it seems for the sake of all of us, we better hope so. Turning back the clock to a time when we were helpless against the onslaught of bacterial infections would be difficult to swallow, to say the least.

[xSilverPhinx]

Nothing like war to give these leaps in technology I don't glorify war, but without it, we wouldn't have the internet, at least not now perhaps.

One thing that worries me about nanobots is that if they can be programmed, could they be reprogrammed while in a person's body? What if maliciously?

[Crow]

Here are a few articles that are related to the DARPA proposed concept that are already under research and some cases development, though none are as advanced in terms of adaptability but show some of the existing groundwork that has been done to possibly allow the idea to be realized.

Future bio-nanotechnology will use computer chips inside living cells
DNA wrappers for carbon nanotubes
Cell surface engineering with DNA nanotechnology
New DNA test uses nanotechnology to find early signs of cancer
Nanoparticulate Drug Delivery Systems

[Ecurb Noselrub]

One thing that worries me about nanobots is that if they can be programmed, could they be reprogrammed while in a person's body? What if maliciously?

This, and your previous question about whether they could start to mutate and attack human cells. Given the rapid developments in the field of artificial intelligence, one wonders if we aren't creating things that will intentionally wipe us out one day. But, all progress carries risk. It's important to stay one step ahead of evil, whether it be natural evil or intentional evil.

[Crow]

One thing that worries me about nanobots is that if they can be programmed, could they be reprogrammed while in a person's body? What if maliciously?

This, and your previous question about whether they could start to mutate and attack human cells. Given the rapid developments in the field of artificial intelligence, one wonders if we aren't creating things that will intentionally wipe us out one day. But, all progress carries risk. It's important to stay one step ahead of evil, whether it be natural evil or intentional evil.

Well unless nanobots are programmed to be harmful then there is not much of a problem unless programed incorrectly, nor is there a problem with intelligence as they are created to do a specific job. Though there is the potential for people to create them to be harmful and was calculated (I cant remember who but may find the reference later) that a suitcase filled with harmful nanobots in theory could wipe out all life on earth i.e grey goo scenario. However the positives of nanotechnology by far out ways the negatives especially if the technology can progress to large scale molecular manufacturing.

[Recusant]

You can do some serious thread necromancy on this site. 

Actual nanobots, interacting with bacteria. They redirect light to move and steer. Scientists use lasers to manipulate them. The paper is from this past March, but the pop-science article just popped up.

"Tiny robots powered by light can hunt down and collect bacteria" | ScienceDaily

Robots small enough to operate in the microbial world could give scientists a new way to directly handle objects that are impossible to manipulate by hand. These tiny machines are around 50 times smaller than the diameter of a human hair, bringing researchers closer to the long-pursued goal of interacting directly with the microscopic world.

That capability could be especially useful for biological materials in water, including individual cells and bacteria. Precisely controlling and moving objects at this scale has been a persistent challenge. The newly developed nanorobots show that it is already possible to collect bacteria, transport them, and release them at selected locations.

One of the biggest obstacles in developing machines this small is finding an effective way to propel and control them. At Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg (JMU), a research team led by Professor Bert Hecht has been developing a solution that uses the recoil produced by individual photons to move microscopic devices known as microdrones.

The devices contain as many as four plasmonic nanoantennas. These antennas absorb light with a particular color and helicity, then emit that light in a specific direction. Redirecting each photon creates a tiny recoil force, similar in principle to the recoil produced when a bullet is fired. Because the microdrones have so little mass, those extremely small forces can generate substantial acceleration and speed.

[Continues . . .]

The paper is open access:

"A nanoscale robotic cleaner" | Nature Communications

Abstract:

Photon-recoil–based actuation enables maneuvering of micro- and nanoscale objects without beam steering or tight focusing, mitigating system complexity and photodamage. Recent light-driven microdrones achieved full control in two dimensions using multiple laser fields; however, for many applications, sacrificing degrees of freedom allows substantial miniaturization and improved propulsion efficiency.

Here, we demonstrate sub-micrometer nanorobots actuated by a plasmonic directional antenna that simultaneously provides propulsion force and orientation control. The nanorobots reach propulsion speeds up to 50 μm/s [50 thousandths of a millimeter per second], with their motion direction intrinsically locked perpendicular to the linear polarization axis.

Circularly polarized light pulses lift the resulting twofold orientational degeneracy through spin–momentum transfer. Using opto-thermophoretic forces, nanorobots efficiently capture, transport, reversibly assemble, and release bacteria. By sequencing linear and circular polarization states, they execute complex, high-precision trajectories to systematically sweep defined regions, functioning as light-driven robotic cleaners. This work expands the capabilities of nanorobots for biological manipulation and high-speed, localized sensing.