The cell programming revolution - with Mark Kotter
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 มิ.ย. 2024
- Neurosurgeon and stem cell biologist Mark Kotter reveals how he and his colleagues made some of the first major breakthroughs in cell therapy. Watch the Q&A here: • Q&A: The cell programm...
Subscribe for regular science videos: bit.ly/RiSubscRibe
Listen to our monthly podcast here: anchor.fm/ri-science-podcast
Scientists are embarking on a biological version of the digital revolution. Until recently, controlling the mechanisms within cells-how they develop and change-was out of reach. But now biologists are finding ways to reprogramme cells at the genetic level, giving them access to the entire operating system of life.
Success is going to require collaboration across biology, computer science, physics and mathematics. The huge rewards will include extending our lifespans, curing a range of debilitating ailments and giving birth to a whole new generation of technology.
This talk took place in in collaboration with the London Institute for Mathematical Sciences and bit.bio.
Dr Mark Kotter is a doctor, scientist, and serial entrepreneur. As a neurosurgeon, he treats patients with spinal cord injury. Mark is best known for discovering the importance of macrophages for brain regeneration, which led to the first regenerative medicine trial for degenerative cervical myelopathy, and for developing opti-ox, a gene targeting approach that enables faithful execution of genetic information in cells. Applied to cellular reprogramming, opti-ox demonstrated that robust activation of a new cell type program (encoded in transcription factors) is necessary and sufficient to deterministically induce a new cellular identity. These findings challenge the theory that cell reprogramming depends on stochastically determined permissive states and enable the production of any human cell within days at purities approaching 100%.
He is the founder of bit.bio, co-founder of cultured meat startup Meatable, and co-founder and trustee of Myelopathy.org, the first charity dedicated to a common yet often overseen condition causing a 'slow motion spinal cord injury'.
This talk was recorded at the Royal Institution on 10 March 2022.
----
A very special thank you to our Patreon supporters who help make these videos happen, especially:
Andy Carpenter, William Hudson, Richard Hawkins, Thomas Gønge, Don McLaughlin, Jonathan Sturm, Microslav Jarábek, Michael Rops, Supalak Foong, efkinel lo, Martin Paull, Ben Wynne-Simmons, Ivo Danihelka, Paulina Barren, Kevin Winoto, Jonathan Killin, Taylor Hornby, Rasiel Suarez, Stephan Giersche, William Billy Robillard, Scott Edwardsen, Jeffrey Schweitzer, Frances Dunne, jonas.app, Tim Karr, Adam Leos, Alan Latteri, Matt Townsend, John C. Vesey, Andrew McGhee, Robert Reinecke, Paul Brown, Lasse T Stendan, David Schick, Joe Godenzi, Dave Ostler, Osian Gwyn Williams, David Lindo, Roger Baker, Greg Nagel, Rebecca Pan.
---
The Ri is on Patreon: / theroyalinstitution
and Twitter: / ri_science
and Facebook: / royalinstitution
and TikTok: / ri_science
Listen to our monthly podcast here: anchor.fm/ri-science-podcast
Our editorial policy: www.rigb.org/editing-ri-talks...
Subscribe for the latest science videos: bit.ly/RiNewsletter
Product links on this page may be affiliate links which means it won't cost you any extra but we may earn a small commission if you decide to purchase through the link. - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![🎮เกมยิงปืนใหม่ ภาพสวย และ สมจริงที่สุดในโลก [ BODYCAM ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/My3l1owRY9I/mqdefault.jpg)
Here I am, a 70 year old retired blacksmith who has the curiosity of a ten year old. I am overwhelmed by this incredible field of study and the possibilities that may become available in the future. I’m an outsider looking in. I’ve always had this thought that cells, like say cancer cells are cells that don’t like their job description, I know, bizarrely wide of the mark, but cell programming and the possible future therapies may bring solutions to humanity and I just love the very thought of it, I wish you all well in your studies.
you are 70 years young
Curiosity has no age
Thank you, sir, for sharing. I’m 40, and reading your words feels just right. I’d be glad to hear more if you something to share.
Iv yet met a blacksmith of any age who isn't an intelligent, thoughtful person, after all you have a skillfull creative artistic mind, or you wouldn't be moulding metal and creating tools/art 👍
It is mind boggling how the human race can think and develop using the resources of the natural world. This has to be the most informative channel on TH-cam. Thank you for the upload.
What a careful, clear speaker. So enjoyable
he literally put me to sleep at my desk...
@@michaelfried3123 another effect of his talent!
What a time we r living. Full of chaos but also hope and lot of fun! Seating confortably at home hearing a genius talk about freaking potent science. Beautiful!
How wonderfully clear! Your patient delivery and desire to be understood shone through. It enabled me to understand the concepts and their potential even though I have no background in biology. Kudos and all the very best to you and your wonderful work!
Nobody asked and nobody cares. ("uHhhHh 10 pEoPle sEem to DisAgrEe")
It’s lovely how careful and guarded his first words are. Because it’s true the global corporate governance has abused certain scientific advances
True Science died years ago unfortunately we now live in an age where politics and nwo dictate what is fact and what is/are "alternative facts"
@@onemansjunk01 TRUE. MANY YEARS AGO.
Very clearly communicated. Pleasure to listen to
A truly beautiful and profound talk. I would also add that just reading through the appreciative and thoughtful comments left by grateful viewers helps to lift one's hope that not all of our social media spaces are overrun by disagreeable bots and trolls.
I feel lucky to be a student when this type of technology is emerging and I may be able to use it in my professional career
Do it! Please! I can't wait to work again, and be able to support the research. Yes, I am selfish, and this could mean a cure for a long list of my own... difficulties :-)
Systems and synthetic biology and microbiology sure are fields to watch. IGem competition will go next level..
Great talk. Clear and important and interesting
Wonderfully described. What a wonderful world awaits us......if we use it wisely
excellent explanation sir...i love the way you describe..Great respect for you..after listening your speech i totally understand that the all the branches of science are together will extremely impacting on humans sustainability in present and far future...please except my respect 🙏 and heartily wishes...thank you sir..Great God bless you all.
What a wonderful approach . The new technology is really going to make wonders! Great and all the best wishes for you and your team
Very important information
THANK YOU...!!!
Thank you for a very informative summary of where we have come to in our understanding of the great mystery of life . Clearly we have recently come a long way , but equally clearly we still have a long long way to go .
Myself , I am running out of years to be around for the endgame , and so I am looking over heads of our boffins to try and see where we are going , and what the final revelation will be .
Will Stephen Meyer be proved correct ? Just as we use our intellects to understand and manipulate this complexity , should we not give some thought to whatever force or forces gave rise to it in the first place ? That is still the big question . Get on with it guys , I haven't got long .
Awesome. Thanks.
I live for this
amazing talk ❤️🙏🖖
This is skirting the real problem...what we need to know is the electromagnetics that builds up in a living cell and tells that cell to replicate. I have a model in my head which says that two, invisible, electromagnetic forces, come together and pass through each other, invisibly, whilst the atoms that are carried by them are chemically crushed together in the core of this activity then left behind after the invisible electromagnetic forces leave and enter neighbouring cells to dismantle then replicate them. The Higgs field is a related imploding force...but with a subtle difference because atomic particles can't escape the Higgs field unless they are kicked out.
I had the same feeling watching this: the DNA graph looked like a quantum wave field and the warped space plane a bit later like a Higgs field.
26:06 warmed my heart!
super talk
Thank you for your research. The miracles possible using stem cells are truly inspiring.
Please be careful with the creation of biological computers in regards to the possibility of creating enslaved consciousness.
They can fly flight simulators with cultures of rat brain tissue....bout ten years ago?
This is revolutionary
My name is Ozymandias, king of kings. Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!' The passage quoted is from the 19th century poem “Ozymandias” by Percy Bysshe Shelley. it's quoted in the film “Alien: Covenant” and serves as an allegory for the film's central theme.
He should talk to Michael Levin - he is well along the regeneration road. Bioelectricity and stimuli.
Wow! Just wow!
My father suffered 2 strokes 4 years ago and as gained weakness down one side due to nueron damage. Is it possible to get the neurons back or create new neurons to regain proper movements. And can muscle memory help. I am a great believer that providing no more damage is done time and muscle memory can help re program and even help gain new neurons I would like to know if this is feasible in theory and does it happen in practice.
Track the progress of " T.N.T. " ( Tissue Nanotransfection Technology ) out of Indiana University . It is a cell reprogramming regenerative medical technology . It's potentials are very interesting.
Thanks
Interesting channel
My spinal cord injury was almost 40 years ago. I'm fed up with "how to live" with it approaches. If only for a few years, I'd like my body back.
Looking good Mr. Kotter
nice work 👍
I was wondering what was of this field
He made a cliffhanger at the end of video like a Lost episode.
It opens a new field, this field is called Ethical Field
I hear you, but if we can fix somebody that permanently cannot fend for themselves using this technology, it may be more ethical than the alternative. Presently, the most ethical way we treat these are with a care system (at the expense of society in some way e.g. the taxpayer in the UK), where somebody in full-time care only has a life because there is another life sustaining it, we think that's ethical but societies only do that if they can afford it, e.g. the first mission to colonise Mars won't be taking any passengers.
Of course, there are other potential consequences such as over-population, or if the technology becomes weaponised. Exciting times ahead.
Stonks!
Very cool!
interesting indeed
I dont understand what he said about the meat. Does this mean they were able to grow meat without fetal bovine serum? Because I find the harvesting of this extremely problematic and it would be a huge deal- atleast to me.
Correct. No animal products needed.
this picture of a cell looks like a living breathing hyper advanced city full of factories
i think we need to zoom all the way in
i wanna see if there is any sort of intelligent life doing some of the work, or its all automated
moreover i wanna know exactly how they are doing what they do
i hope someone is working on zooming way more in
This is incredible science finally moving forward. This research could be used to benefit human lives in so many ways, and in bad ways. Having DARPA behind this research now concerns me!
I fully agree.
Just to clarify - discovering LifeOS requires bold funding- such as DARPA can provide. However, this research is not funded by DARPA.
@@markrkotter Thanks for the clarification! Hope you make good progress in updating LifeOS to a more reliable version. I'll be waiting to download it when ready :)
@@markrkotter Well that is good because then they can’t have the last say on wether any new progress is continued or shared with the public, or shut down for there own secret takeover.
cell regenerative therapies already seem to work in humans. For example, Vertex's islet cell replacement 'functional cure' cases and Lineage's OpRegen retinal regeneration cases in AMD
The brain cells playing pong is pretty scary (what do you do to it when sentience emerges in the network?) But fixing a spinal injury or curing cancer is great.
What we need is the mechsnism how apples grow, and NOT why they fall.
Darpa bought IBM's project Synapse playing pong.. Amazing the wet tissue can do the same. Wondering if the underlying setup is really the same now..
Also: iGem competition and all synthetic and systems biology and omics fields still face enough systemic complexity, kill switches on signaling pathways are important..
Innovation needs smart and healthy public with unedited knowledge of science and history.
Is it possible to use the patients brain to manipulate these cells in a similar outcome to this external method? Is this what happens during psychoneuroimmunology?
That sounds kinda cool. I don't have a lot of knowledge about this but considering what our brains can do is send specific signals to some cell systems I am not sure it is able to achieve something that complex at that level. My computer is a pretty impressive machine, but when I opened my command prompt and asked it to turn itself into an airplace it just said that command was not recognized ... :/
Out of mind we should be able to create and program and this is just as true today as it was in the day of the late great Isaac Newton.
Materialist have taken is as far they can with physicalism. This 3 Rd enloghtment will be lead by idealism .
Awesome
What if software could control hardware? Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) and Programmable Logic Devices (PLDs) let you do that, and they've been around since the mid 1980s.
Speaker should update his, seemingly 'comprehensive' pbs documentary at start of talk, lacked some imagination or tech knowledge there, no offense to the guy
my my, wikipedia tier galaxy brains nitpicking on wording. go program pga to be adc, or a voltage regulator, or to grow more gates. hardware limits what is possible in software, and software 'controls' hardware by definition
Software cannot change hardware, cannot update it's physical nature. But biology can.
@@dinf8940 What speaker means to say is he wants to put algorithm / function / idea over what is physically possible, is that right? That's odd considering Speaker also says we should stay pragmatic and try stuff (using methods that exist now, here) instead of figuring out how stuff works. Is this contradictive conclusion understood correctly from my side? 'Software is limited by hardware' is like saying 'ideas are limited by reality'.
Where is the difference between this and eugenics?
Right to repair!
Biological engineering is underrated
Someone really smart sent me this 🤯
Thanks for an important and timely talk. Okay, perhaps a bit of an infomercial, but the fact remains that whoever owns and controls these technologies will rule the coming world.
I am not so sure. Historically, there have been many revolutionary technologies, and the world doesn't seem to be ruled, in the sense that you meant, by those who were involved in their inception. I understand this is highly debatable though, who rules the world, so I am a bit wary of poking that beast here...
@@edumazieri What technology is comparable to the invasiveness of this kind?
No one will rule the world.
@@Junior-yz8tf My comment had nothing to do with the "invasiveness" of this and other technologies. I said revolutionary technologies, as in technologies who once applied were able to affect and completely change a lot of things.
@@Junior-yz8tf the inventor of the transistor, capacitor, LCD, RAM, and everything else that underlies all electronics in the world. there's only one true monopoly in the US regarding technology that i know of and that's Qualcomm with their patents on wireless networking, but they most certainly don't rule the world.
Software determining hardware or is it more like software and hardware merging together becoming inseparable and fluid.
I call it Natural Intelligent Design
What could possibly go wrong..
(error - which I keep making myself)
1. You cannot promote new science without mentioning possible universal dangers of using it!
(promotion of emergence)
2. 11:00 - "creating stem cell from specialized cells"
Original theory did not support backwards changes.
Just want to encourage applying the view of "emergence theory". to my eyes the basic notion is "anything is emerging under certain conditions".
Consider each specialized cell (which we identify by differentiation of cells) as a group of emerging differences
from a cell, within a cell.
So, you are prompt to find the conditions for emergence.
So you did. It should not surprise, that finding the conditions for emergence is the same as finding the conditions for the dissolution of what can emerge.
Good morning
Thanks to Mr Mark Kotter on this interesting lecture.
As we see how the structure of the cell and the genetic code of the DNA, how is complex and advanced programming we are in the beginning in this new science.
We know scientist Darwin at that time they don't know anything on the cell structure and the DNA.
And recently after the human geneum sequence we understand that DNA encoded, but :
" DNA like a software program but more more advanced than any our software program " Bill Gates.
And I think you agree on that because you show us in your lecture.
Mr Kotte as you know the scientists they don't know from where came the genetic code of the DNA,
So if we said :
- Windows program software was programmed by expert software.
- obviously the genetic code of the DNA who is more more advanced than the code of Windows:
Impossible came by natural selection (evolution) but only by Higher Intelligent Creator :
Allah Almighty ..!!
Thank you again Mr Kotte and I don't think you have problem to accept the Higher Intelligent Programmer.
Have a nice day
The way he speaks he makes these 29 minutes feel like eternity.
Totally, there should have been many more explosions and super heroes flying about.
Take my money
All I write is free. *shudders*.
🕊
Wow nice! Lets cook a giant brain to rule us!
Safe and effective
Sorry, had no time to read through the comments but I hope there are also critical ones that go beyond just simplistic admiration for this technology. When the speaker said the only problem [with the technology] he would see in it’s inefficiency that’s where my (always “on”) alarm went to a siren! A serious scientist [if the speaker considers himself as such) HAS to mention the dangers that “their” technology can (and will bring in the hands of less naive-minded people). “Curing diseases” is such a touching and noble goal put in your face by lobbyists and other promoters of fancy technology serve to make them automatically stand on the morally “good” side and silence any critical thought from the audience. I am not saying the guy is trying to manipulate us but he definitely sells us a pinky view of the product. I am not against this technology, I love it and I hope/wish he is right. But I think he makes it too easy for himself to speak about it in bright colors only..
It seems that all progress in any STEM field requires catalytic capitalistic goals disguised with altruistic justifications.
eloquently put sir, may the cynicism stay strong in you sir
Yeah, and so what. Try and make taxpayers pay for a new technology that may as well go to nowhere, let's see how far progress goes
@@coscinaippogrifo Your counter argument is your right, however the predatory greed of the pharmaceutical industrial complex is not vindicated by it. It cost almost nothing to make allopurinol, colchicine and insulin but they charge exorbitant prices for profit over societal well being, and of all governments, ours enables this practice.
Nobel of Medicine is on the way.
We need to merge the last part of research in this article with Neuralink!
"Here you see a living computer chip, made of braincells that are learning to play Pong."
You said what now? O___O
03:20 he lost 99% of scientists when he said we need to move on from questions like 'how does it work'. How does anyone ever say that in any public talk presenting science... wtf...
Yeah, when you have an entirely programmable thing then you are a programmer, not a biologist, well a computational biologist at least. We have gotten used to the constrained variables of evolution for long enough! It's time to get creative on our own! But yeah we need to study evolution as well and all the usual biology too...
@@Neptoid there's really no argument being made about being able to modify and repair anything better, the better you understand how it works. I mean... try, I'm all ears...
How I interpreted it is he's saying it's good to take an engineering approach to biology (where it's more, design, build, test, optimise, etc). I think both scientific and engineering approaches are valuable, and engineering approaches to biology (e.g. see synthetic biology) have substantially contributed to answering these how/why research questions anyway. So it's not a zero sum game, both can complement the other
@@magnuskarlsson8655 Aubrey de Grey has been in the mainstream for around 12 years now - were any of his interesting theories proven to have any traction?
@@magnuskarlsson8655 I will break this down. Let's try to give a broken gameboy to a toddler for repair. Let's not tell the toddler how it works and only use its tools: Its hands and eyesight/senses. You're telling me you think it's best we don't tell the toddler how the thing works, because it's too complicated, let's just have it try best it can on its own? Will it get better if we change to story to a 8, 12 or 16y old kid, considering age appropriate tools? Adults?!? Engineers?!??
All this great stuff It Is useless of did not translate in human treatment for deseases
String theory's 4D is a "hypersphere" or "space-time".
This is a contradiction.
There is no 4D "hypersphere" or "space-time" (temporal length/breadth of spatial 3D). That would be 5D.
2D circle ✅
2D sphere 🚫 contra.
3D circle 🚫 contra.
3D sphere ✅
4D circle ✅ (see quaternion)
4D sphere 🚫 contra.
5D circle 🚫 contra.
5D sphere ✅ (see hypersphere)
Here's my 1D-9D:
3 sets of 3 dimensions;
1D, 2D, 3D are spatial
4D, 5D, 6D are temporal
7D, 8D, 9D are spectral
1D, 4D, 7D line/length/continuous
2D, 5D, 8D width/breadth/emission
3D, 6D, 9D height/depth/absorption
So 4D = temporal length of spatial 3D (current reality)
And 5D = temporal length/breadth of spatial 3D (space-time)
READ:
Fascinating. Coincides with some of my own thinking and research these past decades, until the realization occurred.
It’s an endless pursuit, of human-centered technological activities and applications.
As we work to improve and extend human capability, develop AI, computer-brain interfaces, direct cell actions, we are simultaneously destroying our Earth-home, which we callously “share” with nonhuman animals and plants, which we misuse, exploit, waste, and abuse.
One million new humans are added every five days, 9500 new humans /hr!
We’re destroying oceans, rain forests, depleting fresh water, non-renewable resources, killing off species, and becoming fixated on ourselves.
Man is truly alien, to this Earth.
So it’s nice to help paraplegics, quadriplegics, improve movement, vision, hearing, IQ’s, run faster, jump higher, live more comfortably, build $5 billion dollar sports complexes, quantum computers, insanely plan Mars vacations, but the present ego-centric civilization WILL collapse.
Technology will be unable to save the world,, from humans.
Before using those cells in therapy, are you really close enough to understanding what your reprogramming is really doing and if your cells stay stable adult cells in their natural environment?
Re-programing leaves your cells probably close to an incomplete reprogramming and prone to develope into an cancer cell. I assume you left the natural cellular mechanisms to taggle with this intact? to my knowledge as Biochemist our characterizations of cells is stilllimited,though much has improved during the last years.
good luck but please stay careful!
Developmental biology and Genetics are not easily played around with and quickly messed up. Nature made it so wonderfully complex
Safety is the most important aspect of a medicine. In all the studies that have been conducted by labs across the globe transplanting reprogrammed cells into animals there has been not one description of a teratoma = the tumour that can occur when one transplants traditionally differentiated stem cells. The conversion seems to be more complete when you operate on the transcription factor level.
They said it was safe and effective
@@brianmcglade8164 they might say it but they just can't have enough date and deep knowledge to really state or prove it
You can just use AI with all the possible combinations. It will probably take many orders of magnitude less.
well...now what???
So what ? Has he basically cured Alzheimer's now ?
The answer is NO. We only created models that can be used to do large scale research on human cells and allow scientists to move away from animal models and cancer cell lines.
Funny how comments that point out the flaws in this understanding and practice are deleted. No science here
These insane fools need to be stopped.
Oooh! Manmade horrors beyond our comprehension. Nice!
" Trust the science " it's safe and effective
lot of armchair experts in audience I see. A whole lot of folks caught up in how smart they are to be able to listen with an unprejudiced mind to anyone else. Sad.
"TRUST THE SCIENCE " It's safe and effective
How can value be in Currency !only by greed.
If cells are programmable, I imagine the "language" of cells is a really poorly thought-out one, worse than Visual Basic.
AND YOU CALL IT INNOVATION WTF
Did he really say that the pandemic was caused by a pathogen jumping from animals to human??!!?
Not all - but many. Search for ‘zoonosis’ and ‘pandemic’. I’m aware of the controversy around COVID-19, the origin of which I simply don’t know.
It may have been a Zoonotic jump from a Pink Unicorn to Humans.
Pink Unicorns are present in Wuhan.
Because it was.
@@neshirst-ashuach1881 No, it wasn't. This is not an opinion but a proven fact. Not even him believes that and you can actually see his embarrassment while he says it.
" trust the science " it's safe and effective
I woke up at 40 minutes in....realized this guy flat out put me to sleep!
I cant listen to this guy, the way he presses the SSS sound every sssentencccsss is so annoying
Meh, we cured cancer, no biggie. 😳
no
We can program any matter because this universe is actually a robot
Lol our pandemic was not caused by a transfer from an animal to human. If you really believe that then I for sure would not want you involved in any cell therapies of mine... a little research would of told you that...lol
You can't say either way without evidence. No one was ever going to be allowed to investigate that lab.
No worries. " trust the science " it's safe and effective