Man made virus

>>8498448
Yes, but viral gene therapy has been held back due to a series of cancer deaths caused by the virus.

I'm a big fan of this approach though, we just have to work out the kinks.

File: nano bot.jpg (40KB, 634x286px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 634x286px

>>8498454
interesting, maybe if they added some kind of expiration date to the virus it could be injected, do the cleaning up and then eventually die off leaving the host repaired and functioning normally again.

This type of research is fascinating. People make arguments for Nano robotics being used in medicine but a virus is basically the same thing and would probably be a lot easier to develop.

>>8498466
I think people talking about nano-robotics don't know enough about cell biology, because if they did they'd realize that the cell and the virus are already a more advanced nano-robots than anything we could create in a thousand years. Maybe there's a place for nano-particles that can be implanted into cells to enhance function, but full-fledged nano-robots will never surpass cells within this century.

>>8498478
A nano bot would just be an artificial cell.

Anyways, isn't the risk for mutation for a virus too big to even bother?

>>8498448
>is it possible to create a virus that could repair human cells and work with the host to keep it alive?

Yes in theory, however there are obstacles in creating viral vectors, namely stability (viruses tend to reorganize their genomes rapidly) and immunity (people develope immunity against viruses if percieved as foreign). There are also many other technical challenges.