Comments on: The Integration of Engineering and Cancer Biology http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2007/10/09/the-integration-of-engineering-and-cancer-biology/ Business + Technology in the Exponential Economy Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:30:41 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Willy Lensch http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2007/10/09/the-integration-of-engineering-and-cancer-biology/comment-page-1/#comment-1866 Willy Lensch Fri, 12 Oct 2007 23:08:16 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/2007/10/09/the-integration-of-engineering-and-cancer-biology/#comment-1866 When I think of what has kept us from encountering greater success in the understanding and management of cancers, I come up with a single word: complexity. In two words: staggering complexity. The myriad ways that a single cell does its business, normal or otherwise, are enormously complicated. Protons and electrons going here and there, receptors binding molecules and then being recycled, transcription factors coming on and off the DNA, lots and lots of "this or that" decisions (to divide or not, to move to a different location or not, even to die or not). Nature works via a series of nanomachines (ribosomes for example). It may well take other tiny machines to fix tissues when they fail. What's certain is that as scientists have become better and better at describing these various biological states in isolation, we have also improved upon our ability to describe them in relation to one another. It has taken the invention of bioinformatics to permit the analysis of so many integrated data points at once. Presto, systems biology. If the trend continues, I feel that one day we will be able to describe an instantaneous "biological quantum state" for cells; the sum of all of its molecular components though it will take a hell of a hard drive to store such a heap of information... maybe we could borrow <a href="http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/lloyd/lloyd_index.html" rel="nofollow">Seth Lloyd's ideal laptop</a>. I feel that understanding such molecular relationships will in turn permit a greater ability to direct them; it will be another revolution in biology where if the third as Prof. Sharp indicates is combining engineering and biology, describing biological quantum states may be the sixteenth or so. We've got a long ways to go before then, but I nevertheless get excited when I hear about projects like the Koch Institute because they prove that good things are happening in the development of more rational therapeutics. In my mind, the fields of cell biology and engineering are as distinct as the words "discovery" and "application". A confluence of these two views brings new perspectives to the practice of each and that's exactly how breakthroughs are made. The news about the Koch Institute tells me that we're at a point where enough biology has been learned and key questions and/or hurdles identified to warrant getting some engineers on the phone. Having them in the same building is even better. When I think of what has kept us from encountering greater success in the understanding and management of cancers, I come up with a single word: complexity. In two words: staggering complexity.

The myriad ways that a single cell does its business, normal or otherwise, are enormously complicated. Protons and electrons going here and there, receptors binding molecules and then being recycled, transcription factors coming on and off the DNA, lots and lots of “this or that” decisions (to divide or not, to move to a different location or not, even to die or not). Nature works via a series of nanomachines (ribosomes for example). It may well take other tiny machines to fix tissues when they fail.

What’s certain is that as scientists have become better and better at describing these various biological states in isolation, we have also improved upon our ability to describe them in relation to one another. It has taken the invention of bioinformatics to permit the analysis of so many integrated data points at once. Presto, systems biology. If the trend continues, I feel that one day we will be able to describe an instantaneous “biological quantum state” for cells; the sum of all of its molecular components though it will take a hell of a hard drive to store such a heap of information… maybe we could borrow Seth Lloyd’s ideal laptop. I feel that understanding such molecular relationships will in turn permit a greater ability to direct them; it will be another revolution in biology where if the third as Prof. Sharp indicates is combining engineering and biology, describing biological quantum states may be the sixteenth or so.

We’ve got a long ways to go before then, but I nevertheless get excited when I hear about projects like the Koch Institute because they prove that good things are happening in the development of more rational therapeutics. In my mind, the fields of cell biology and engineering are as distinct as the words “discovery” and “application”. A confluence of these two views brings new perspectives to the practice of each and that’s exactly how breakthroughs are made. The news about the Koch Institute tells me that we’re at a point where enough biology has been learned and key questions and/or hurdles identified to warrant getting some engineers on the phone. Having them in the same building is even better.

]]>