DescentBB

Now this idea has all sort of possibilities. I'm thinking of good uses first, like organic computer infused cells, organic nanites I guess you could call them, that can enter the body and selectively kill cancer cells or fix genetic disorders or even root out viruses like HIV that like to hide inside other cells.

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2 ... tml?ref=hp

HIV is a retrovirus, it's a lot more complicated than just hiding inside cells . All viruses hide inside cells, technically.
I think destroying the entire genomes of that many cells in someone's body would, unfortunately, do more harm than just letting HIV take its course. And I could see it causing cancer if you tried to do it without destroying the entire genomes of those cells.

I can go further into retroviruses if this is just confusing.

Maybe everyone at birth could have their genetic code scanned and stored for future reference and repair. Then people could have a clean base code to start off of to fix things. But, I guess that doesn't work if a person starts out with a genetic defect, unless we already know what code causes that defect. However, I can imagine all sort of nefarious uses this information could be put to as well. There's always a dark side to any idea, isn't there?

As for HIV, or even the common cold, don't you think it could be targeted somehow, even imbedded inside a cell? I guess I'm not a genetic expert here. The cell computer is a cool idea however.

Yes, it is interesting. But. Living cell incomparably more perfectly than any computer created by the person. So deep intervention of the person in the live mechanism of an organism can do much harm more, than bring advantage. On mine, it will be better to learn people to use effectively own internal forces of an organism, for example, by means of psychology.

tunnelcat wrote:As for HIV, or even the common cold, don't you think it could be targeted somehow, even imbedded inside a cell? I guess I'm not a genetic expert here. The cell computer is a cool idea however.

The common cold, sure. But in the case of HIV the actual virus doesn't need to be physically present inside a cell for the cell to be infected. And in fact it usually isn't. A retrovirus actually integrates its DNA into the host cell's DNA and unlike other types of viruses it doesn't lyse the cell to release viruses into the bloodstream.
When the actual infection has literally become a part of your genome that makes this a lot more complicated. This is one reason anti-retroviral drugs are so ineffective.

@sigma, that would be a really nice idea if it worked. But it doesn't. Unconscious and automatic processes are just that, and there's only a tiny number of them that you can ever actually teach yourself to control -- and most of those would be classified as behaviour.
Think of it this way. If a cell does something automatically (like, for example, transcribing viral proteins) it doesn't need a neural signal to do that. Because it doesn't need a neural signal to transcribe proteins, there is no neural signal that says "stop doing that". And you can't send a signal to stop that process because there is no signal to say "stop this process" that the cell would understand.

"HIV" is a catch phrase that incorporates something like 28 specific and different virus....viri? viruses? whatever...

Mutations, strains...
Everything makes it harder. In the end they are all still retroviruses though. Just like a cold sore.

And we're talking about something morbid like HIV when we should be talking about cellular computers.

Thread title had me thinking this was a sarcastic term for a smartphone

Sorry. I couldn't think of a better line to describe putting a computer inside a cell. Maybe "Fantastic Computer" in honor of the movie "Fantastic Voyage"????