Articles, Blog

Nina Tandon: Could tissue engineering mean personalized medicine?

March 1, 2020

Translator: Joseph Geni
Reviewer: Morton Bast I’d like to show you a video of some of the models I work with. They’re all the perfect size, and they don’t have an ounce of fat. Did I mention they’re gorgeous? And they’re scientific models? (Laughs) As you might have guessed, I’m a tissue engineer, and this is a video of some of the beating heart that I’ve engineered in the lab. And one day we hope that these tissues can serve as replacement parts for the human body. But what I’m going to tell you about today is how these tissues make awesome models. Well, let’s think about the drug screening process for a moment. You go from drug formulation, lab testing, animal testing, and then clinical trials, which you might call human testing, before the drugs get to market. It costs a lot of money, a lot of time, and sometimes, even when a drug hits the market, it acts in an unpredictable way and actually hurts people. And the later it fails, the worse the consequences. It all boils down to two issues. One, humans are not rats, and two, despite our incredible similarities to one another, actually those tiny differences between you and I have huge impacts with how we metabolize drugs and how those drugs affect us. So what if we had better models in the lab that could not only mimic us better than rats but also reflect our diversity? Let’s see how we can do it with tissue engineering. One of the key technologies that’s really important is what’s called induced pluripotent stem cells. They were developed in Japan pretty recently. Okay, induced pluripotent stem cells. They’re a lot like embryonic stem cells except without the controversy. We induce cells, okay, say, skin cells, by adding a few genes to them, culturing them, and then harvesting them. So they’re skin cells that can be tricked, kind of like cellular amnesia, into an embryonic state. So without the controversy, that’s cool thing number one. Cool thing number two, you can grow any type of tissue out of them: brain, heart, liver, you get the picture, but out of your cells. So we can make a model of your heart, your brain on a chip. Generating tissues of predictable density and behavior is the second piece, and will be really key towards getting these models to be adopted for drug discovery. And this is a schematic of a bioreactor we’re developing in our lab to help engineer tissues in a more modular, scalable way. Going forward, imagine a massively parallel version of this with thousands of pieces of human tissue. It would be like having a clinical trial on a chip. But another thing about these induced pluripotent stem cells is that if we take some skin cells, let’s say, from people with a genetic disease and we engineer tissues out of them, we can actually use tissue-engineering techniques to generate models of those diseases in the lab. Here’s an example from Kevin Eggan’s lab at Harvard. He generated neurons from these induced pluripotent stem cells from patients who have Lou Gehrig’s Disease, and he differentiated them into neurons, and what’s amazing is that these neurons also show symptoms of the disease. So with disease models like these, we can fight back faster than ever before and understand the disease better than ever before, and maybe discover drugs even faster. This is another example of patient-specific stem cells that were engineered from someone with retinitis pigmentosa. This is a degeneration of the retina. It’s a disease that runs in my family, and we really hope that cells like these will help us find a cure. So some people think that these models sound well and good, but ask, “Well, are these really as good as the rat?” The rat is an entire organism, after all, with interacting networks of organs. A drug for the heart can get metabolized in the liver, and some of the byproducts may be stored in the fat. Don’t you miss all that with these tissue-engineered models? Well, this is another trend in the field. By combining tissue engineering techniques with microfluidics, the field is actually evolving towards just that, a model of the entire ecosystem of the body, complete with multiple organ systems to be able to test how a drug you might take for your blood pressure might affect your liver or an antidepressant might affect your heart. These systems are really hard to build, but we’re just starting to be able to get there, and so, watch out. But that’s not even all of it, because once a drug is approved, tissue engineering techniques can actually help us develop more personalized treatments. This is an example that you might care about someday, and I hope you never do, because imagine if you ever get that call that gives you that bad news that you might have cancer. Wouldn’t you rather test to see if those cancer drugs you’re going to take are going to work on your cancer? This is an example from Karen Burg’s lab, where they’re using inkjet technologies to print breast cancer cells and study its progressions and treatments. And some of our colleagues at Tufts are mixing models like these with tissue-engineered bone to see how cancer might spread from one part of the body to the next, and you can imagine those kinds of multi-tissue chips to be the next generation of these kinds of studies. And so thinking about the models that we’ve just discussed, you can see, going forward, that tissue engineering is actually poised to help revolutionize drug screening at every single step of the path: disease models making for better drug formulations, massively parallel human tissue models helping to revolutionize lab testing, reduce animal testing and human testing in clinical trials, and individualized therapies that disrupt what we even consider to be a market at all. Essentially, we’re dramatically speeding up that feedback between developing a molecule and learning about how it acts in the human body. Our process for doing this is essentially transforming biotechnology and pharmacology into an information technology, helping us discover and evaluate drugs faster, more cheaply and more effectively. It gives new meaning to models against animal testing, doesn’t it? Thank you. (Applause)


  • Reply Kemanorel Kin December 7, 2012 at 8:53 pm

    cont 3…

    I'm not bashing nature, but you can't get anti-psychotic drugs form it because the conditions needed to synthesize them literally don't occur naturally.

    It's not like for every drug, there's a better natural counterpart either. I couldn't live without things like aspirin and caffeine, but other people can't live without (4E)-6-(4-Hydroxy-6-methoxy-7-methyl-3-oxo-1,3-dihydro-2-benzofuran-5-yl)-4-methylhex-4-enoic acid.

  • Reply Kemanorel Kin December 7, 2012 at 9:01 pm

    cont 4…

    "Drugs are too expensive."

    Then you take the risk of putting up 100s of millions of dollars and a decade of an entire team's man-power to develop a drug… and then sell it so cheaply you don't make a profit.

    Why is it people only ever get ticked off at the pharmaceutical companies for wanting to make a profit on their investment, especially when their risk is considerably higher than say, Apple's investment in a new iThing?

  • Reply eatchiles December 8, 2012 at 12:45 am

    a life for a life. not the way i choose to live. the pharma companies are the benefactors, not the humans. just the money mongers.

  • Reply J. Jun December 8, 2012 at 1:57 am

    she's a cutie

  • Reply ASHMIT PYAKUREL December 8, 2012 at 2:15 am

    well i really respect your way of thinking, and I promise that I understand what you are trying to say but, if we keep emotions aside.. we have saved a lot of people's life due to these rats.. think about it.. people died of pneumonia.. and something as stupid as cold! I know that it's not right, but it was inevitable..

  • Reply James Downs December 8, 2012 at 9:37 am

    She didn't say they just wanted to make a bunch of neurons. She said that they want to make organ systems like a real person's so that they could see how drugs act upon them just like in a human body. Thats straight up what she said. I don't smoke pot.

  • Reply TeratoRonin December 8, 2012 at 11:31 am

    Sooooooooo cooool !!! Great job!! This things make feel better about human future. A sincere hug to all scientists working in these wonderful projects and the people who support them and………yes…. she's a cutie.

  • Reply DocUnsane December 8, 2012 at 5:13 pm

    an organ system does not mean consciousness

  • Reply Aaron Harden December 8, 2012 at 5:16 pm

    Smart and beautiful one hell of a combination.

  • Reply Hsereal December 8, 2012 at 5:29 pm

    6:02 If this talk weren't so exciting, I'd mad at her for that.

  • Reply Dusty Rhodes December 8, 2012 at 7:28 pm

    If you REALLY feel that way, perhaps you should never use modern medicine.

  • Reply James Downs December 8, 2012 at 9:06 pm

    True but it would be close.

  • Reply princeofexcess December 9, 2012 at 4:21 am

    the only thing that is slowing the process is the law and public healthcare in other countries (soon US) Scientists and pharmacists are going as fast as they can because if they cure cancer they will get so much money and there will always be people getting new cancer so they are guaranteed future income for a while.

  • Reply Wils0n951 December 9, 2012 at 4:40 am

    There is no profit in health. There is only profit in creating new treatments once the patents on the old treatments expire. All they care about is the bottom line. Profit and Power. Research "scientists" are nothing more that bought and paid for patentable drug engineers, OWNED by an industry that preys on desperate people that they make and keep sick

  • Reply john doe December 9, 2012 at 5:22 am

    I can see how other peoples comments have to do with GOD but why are you brining it up other than to spread controversy?

  • Reply john doe December 9, 2012 at 5:25 am

    Please don't say "all religion is bad" even if it is really all made up it does help some people be nice to others and a lot of charity, I don't see why so many athiests are butthurt by people like hindus who have DONE NOTHING wrong to anyone as long as he is leaving you alone why don't you do the same?

  • Reply Palmetto Atheus December 9, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    And who will benefit from this technology? The rich?

  • Reply folechno December 9, 2012 at 3:35 pm

    Cancer is when cells don't act the way they are supposed to, there is no single thing all cancers have in common, so no curing cancer would in fact be a hard thing to do, even if you focus on one specific type as researchers currently do
    oh and if someone did invent a drug that "cured" cancer, it would sell out for sure

  • Reply folechno December 9, 2012 at 3:37 pm

    Avoid the comment section, completely derailed from the video, lots of trolls present.

  • Reply Alfaz Ahmed December 9, 2012 at 3:58 pm

    Damn she's HOT!!

  • Reply folechno December 9, 2012 at 8:10 pm

    since it's a short list I'm sure you can enumerate it in a comment or two, and don't dumb it down at all, I want to learn as much as I can

  • Reply Drake Santiago December 9, 2012 at 8:11 pm

    Great point!

  • Reply Kemanorel Kin December 9, 2012 at 11:34 pm

    Troll 0/10

  • Reply Not Bob December 10, 2012 at 3:52 am

    But what is the biggest rock?

  • Reply Ravi kumar Tulugu December 10, 2012 at 12:32 pm

    boy she is hot , ooooops can i say that ?

  • Reply ilaiqat December 10, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    Thats not pessimism, your examples are of laziness. Jesus, learn the definition. Pessimism is about expecting the worst, doesnt mean you dont do anything.

  • Reply Fossil Music December 10, 2012 at 10:56 pm

    I don't know which teachings of Christ you hold to be good, but whichever those are, they are what Matthew refers to 6:33 in seeking "first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness."
    If you suffer from hunger, then avoid doing committing evil. Do not murder, or steal from those who are suffering more than yourself. I think that even those who hold Ahteistic views believe that it is better to die, than to treat others unjustly.

  • Reply Fossil Music December 10, 2012 at 10:57 pm

    Cont 2..
    What I understand, is that if I hold to that standard of love, towards my fellow man, then I am pursuing the kingdom of God, and will hopefully be more worthy or Heaven when I die, even if I die from that hunger. Death is iminant for all of us, but if I die, avoiding evil through love, then I will live in eternal happiness.

    The more we worry about these things, the more we will be tempted to do evil when we are deprived of material things.

  • Reply Fossil Music December 10, 2012 at 10:57 pm

    Cont 3…
    This verse is about putting things in perspective: What is truly important when times get tough? It is not saying that we need to stop working, or earning a living, or seeking justice when it is due to us. It says, "Do no worry." It doesn't say, "Don't worry, be happy."

    I think this is a difficult for everyone, when push come to shove, but I think there is a natural, situational wisdom to it.

  • Reply Kemanorel Kin December 10, 2012 at 11:16 pm

    Do you not get that the rest of Matthew 6:33 says that if you believe in God he will provide you shelter, food, and water?

    Like I said, good luck with that. There's a reason people cynical of religion from the ancient Greeks to Ben Franklin said something along the lines of "God helps those who help themselves."

    Belief does not guarantee the necessities for living, and in many cases where people give their welfare checks to bullshit televangelists, it guarantees they don't have the necessities

  • Reply Kemanorel Kin December 10, 2012 at 11:18 pm

    "Death is iminant for all of us, but if I die, avoiding evil through love, then I will live in eternal happiness."

    Too bad the same courtesy isn't provided to anyone who doesn't believe in your deity.

    "The more we worry about these things, the more we will be tempted to do evil when we are deprived of material things."

    Yea… Damn that survival instinct…

  • Reply Kemanorel Kin December 10, 2012 at 11:21 pm

    "What is truly important when times get tough?"

    Family, friends, hard work, welfare… Things that actually are shown to help those who have fallen on hard times…

    "It is not saying that we need to stop working, or earning a living, or seeking justice when it is due to us."

    That is actually exactly what it says multiple times where he says to get rid of all of your possessions, hate your family, etc.

    "I think there is a natural, situational wisdom to it."

    There's really not.

  • Reply Adrian Aragon December 11, 2012 at 4:20 am

    Where do they hold all these talks at?

  • Reply ilaiqat December 11, 2012 at 5:07 am

    pes·si·mism (ps-mzm)
    1. A tendency to stress the negative or unfavorable or to take the gloomiest possible view: "We have seen too much defeatism, too much pessimism, too much of a negative approach" (Margo Jones).
    2. The doctrine or belief that this is the worst of all possible worlds and that all things ultimately tend toward evil.
    3. The doctrine or belief that the evil in the world outweighs the good.
    "inaction" is not mentioned. In fact I attend university, I bet you don't.

  • Reply ilaiqat December 11, 2012 at 5:09 am

    You seem to think pessimist leads to inaction, that is a slippery slope. Provide evidence of study or that is a conjecture. Im pretty sure the hardest working people in the world are pessimists, my own opinion.

  • Reply ilaiqat December 11, 2012 at 7:22 am

    Sure thats a negative view. But that one step extra, "Its gona be hard….I'm not gona do it" is called laziness. Pessimism stops at your first statement. End of story.

  • Reply kevin harper December 11, 2012 at 11:22 am

    6:10 She was having a good hair day.

    Wow, now I can put the chances of my dying at 99.99120%. Whatever they are doing I hope they keep it up for my sake!

  • Reply Rabsputin December 11, 2012 at 1:08 pm

    his comment made no mention of catholics whatsoever, scroll up and read it again. also, this:
    "Catholics aren't Zealots, Jews and Muslims are Zealots."
    is plain horse shit.
    there are zealots amongst every religious group, including catholics. just look at that ratzinger prick.
    "Our Ethics come from His teachings."
    so you hate members of your family?

  • Reply Rachelle Danis December 12, 2012 at 8:47 pm


  • Reply midtownman6 December 12, 2012 at 10:34 pm

    23,713 views here and a million for the foot ball game. Priorities, it think it might be a while.

  • Reply Nathan Achatz December 13, 2012 at 2:16 pm

    why dont we learn how to take care of our bodies, rather then coming up for solutions to replace failing body parts because we abuse and neglect our bodies. Obviously the industries that invest into this type of research have no interest in healing the individual, rather they just treat the symptom.

  • Reply euler etwotaui December 14, 2012 at 4:57 am

    Well, this is youtube, just look at the "most subscribed" channels.

  • Reply IWantMyVisionBack December 15, 2012 at 5:01 pm

    I agree wholeheartedly. It doesn't even make sense, if there was a cure to 'cancer', then these medical establishments would all go down the gutter within months.

    The same institutions that tell you that certain foods are okay are the same foods that cause cancer which brings in money for these institutions.

    The body heals itself, and you can do that through eating natural foods such as fruits and vegetables.

  • Reply flooodis December 16, 2012 at 4:53 pm

    Have you ever heard of genetic diseases? Or cancer? Or accidents? You know, stuff that you cannot controll. Have you ever heard of these things?

  • Reply flooodis December 16, 2012 at 4:55 pm

    Now your comment is just stupid. This IS a part of a solution to cure cancer. And why the hell would you want medical establishments to go down the gutter?

  • Reply Gabriela Anghel December 17, 2012 at 4:58 am

    Why can't we do both? Learning to take care of our bodies and treating the symptoms and the problems, too? You can not live under a glass bell in a lab, with no pollution and no stress and no accidents!

  • Reply Gabriela Anghel December 17, 2012 at 5:25 am

    Probably the microchips with the engineered tissues could served for 80% but not 100% drug efficiency, anyway much better than the studies that have been done till now!

  • Reply drditup December 17, 2012 at 7:38 pm

    It was either this or robotics that was gonna be my life story. Sadly, I knew I would envy the other no matter what I chose. So it was ultimately robotics, and I'll just have to go with the fact that development like this will always amaze me. But hey, it makes the world charming.

  • Reply IWantMyVisionBack December 18, 2012 at 4:57 pm

    Why is that huh? Is it because you want to continue eating garbage perceived as food, get cancer, and just implant engineered tissue/organs into your body?

    the solution to cancer is eating foods and doing the things that help your immune system fight off and destroy cancer, tumors, etc… And also eating natural, organic foods and doing things that are not destructive to your mind and body prevents cancer.

  • Reply IWantMyVisionBack December 18, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    If you think the medical establishment functions to help you, then you are a fool. They prescribe medication and perform surgeries that either worsens your condition or temporarily hinders the symptoms.. not the root of the problem which is a destructive lifestyle many chose to live.

  • Reply Lawrence Rizzo December 18, 2012 at 5:40 pm

    She's sexy

  • Reply Muralikrishna Bandi December 19, 2012 at 10:48 am


  • Reply hmmBEEFY December 21, 2012 at 5:27 am

    These are the types of videos that made me subscribe to TED. More science and innovative ideas please.

  • Reply Jordan Johari December 29, 2012 at 2:55 pm

    More hot intelligent women please

  • Reply nexos6 January 9, 2013 at 8:17 pm

    Agree if you like learning with good neurons and the right shape around them
    try Sheila Patek clocks the fastest animals on ted talks – pistol and manta schrimps.

  • Reply crawfordviolin January 11, 2013 at 4:44 am


  • Reply TheVt91 January 16, 2013 at 4:43 pm

    EKG Necklace!

  • Reply J Kindle January 23, 2013 at 2:20 am

    Perhaps the pharmaceutical industry should stop creating and along with the FDA, stop allowing these neurotoxins, glutamates, and excitotoxins, etc into our food supply that are causing these health issues you are highlighting. However that would put an end to the billions of dollars profited via a sick society. 🙂

  • Reply SpookyJohnathan February 9, 2013 at 11:39 am

    I really like where this is going, but it seems an awful lot of research, time, and money for something that we could already do if it weren't for the public's squeamishness about cloning and genetic engineering. We're talking about new technology that could allow us to simulate the systems inside a living organism when we already have the technology to grow living organisms from scratch. With simulated reflexes it needn't have a brain and would only be considered "alive" in the broadest terms.

  • Reply SpookyJohnathan February 9, 2013 at 11:42 am

    Like "The Island," but without the need to murder and chop to bits a gorgeous Miss Johansson.

  • Reply princeofexcess March 2, 2013 at 10:12 pm

    you believe this based on what evidence? Are people more sick then they were back in the day? do they live shorter lives in worse conditions? NO! the opposite is true. People not only live longer but they live healthier. There is no evidence to the contrary just people that want to believe otherwise. There is huge profit in health thats why there are so many doctors (they dont invent new medicines btw) And being driven by profit is good NOT bad. Drug engineering is also good.

  • Reply princeofexcess March 2, 2013 at 10:14 pm

    The reason why drugs are so expensive is because its expensive to run the trials on animals and then on humans. It is actually very risky to be in the business of drug creation thats why only richest of the rich are able to do it. You need to invest billions into a project before you see any of your money back. And that is the fault of the government.

  • Reply princeofexcess March 2, 2013 at 10:17 pm

    How ignorant can you be? Did you ever took a class that studies cancer? Do you know how complicated cancer actually is? And you are doubly ignorant because curing cancer is like winning a lottery. If you can patent something that cures one type of cancer you put all your competition out of a job but you put yourself as the monopoly over the business. People are still going to get cancer but now they are forced to buy your treatment to cure it. Anyone would be rich beyond their imagination.

  • Reply princeofexcess March 3, 2013 at 3:16 am

    Cancer is not that complex to you because you know nothing about it. If cancer is not a mystery to you then why dont you discover a cure for it.

    I have a feeling the second part describes you not me. Its so easy to call someone names like deluded.

    You have a "feeling" that finding a cure is not profitable you dont realize that your "feeling" is wrong. You have to compete with other people in order to treat cancer. A cure would have monopoly.

  • Reply princeofexcess March 3, 2013 at 5:39 am

    I actually do believe that greed and selfishness is really beneficial. And no selling poisonous food doesnt bring much profit. First of all unhealthy food is not necessarily cheaper to produce than healthy food. Second of all people will not buy unhealthy food if its labeled properly. Third of all you will get sued and loose all your money and go to jail since its illegal to mislabel products.
    &you dont know waht cellulose is. Its not saw dust. Its actually good for you because it acts as fiber

  • Reply princeofexcess March 3, 2013 at 10:41 pm

    ok your first paragraph just restates your belief with no backing. Its not profitable to sell poisonous food. Most food is not poisonous in nature so you would need to make it poisonous and on top of that you would loose your customers pretty quickly. Making very little profit if any.

    You can prove a product gave you cancer there are known carcinogens and if you find these in your food you can sue the person who sold it to you.

    Your last sentence-what evidence you have for this?

  • Reply princeofexcess March 3, 2013 at 10:43 pm

    Dude dont claim i live in a different reality when its you that just makes claims and doesnt back them. You need evidence to state something. You say government helps in exchange for money but what proof do you have for that?

  • Reply princeofexcess March 4, 2013 at 8:37 am

    first of all pick up a container of organic milk. All organic milk has to say by law that there is no difference in molecular structure of organic and non organic milk. Cows treated with the hormone do not have that hormone in their milk. The milk is identical. Just google image "organic milk government label" Fourth image its on all organic milk containers. So much misinformation!

  • Reply princeofexcess March 4, 2013 at 8:41 am

    The other things you are talking about are scandals that cause huge losses for the companies. (if true) SO if there is melamine mixed with cyanuric acid in the baby formula it causes the company to loose tons of money if they are discovered. And sure government is far from perfect but believing in conspiracy theories with little to no evidence is much more harmful. Saying that companies usually benefit from harming its consumers is obviously not true.

  • Reply princeofexcess March 4, 2013 at 8:43 am

    Saying that nobody is looking for cure for cancer because there is no profit in that is ridicules.

  • Reply princeofexcess March 4, 2013 at 8:47 am

    And there are fucked up things government did and is probably doing right now, but instead of naively believing in falsehoods try to find out what is really true or not. Skeptics.stackexchange is a good website to start on. And if you looking for a shocking true story done by government look up MK Ultra and especially MK Delta. Where government was raising little children to be prostitutes. making little girls suck on male parts instead of breasts to increase sexuality.

  • Reply princeofexcess March 5, 2013 at 5:13 am

    You know what a rationalization is? You are prevented with evidence counter to your argument and you use it to support your argument. If government was so corrupt that this label was false than it be pretty easy to prove it by testing it. Why isnt it a scandal and why arent people mass suing government to take that label off? You know why thats not happening because the label is true. You live in a reality you create for yourself

  • Reply princeofexcess March 5, 2013 at 5:16 am

    btw dude you just got your lucky day. I will give you 200 dollars if you can prove that organic milk is different from rBHG milk in any way. I would give more but im pretty broke at the moment. maybe other people can join in to help me out. I keep my promises so you are guaranteed 200 dollars if you prove it.

  • Reply princeofexcess March 5, 2013 at 5:20 am

    btw by different i mean you have 2 milks and you can tell which one is which. Or prove that the one from cows treated with rGHB contains rGHB in it.

  • Reply princeofexcess March 6, 2013 at 12:39 am

    This search yielded no results.

  • Reply SouthernPrinceKenny April 17, 2013 at 4:22 pm

    Wow, Nina's Gorgeous…… Please come grace us with a lecture at my astronomy organization here in Mississippi… Rainwater Observatory, French Camp, MS

  • Reply Yu Lee Ahn May 17, 2013 at 10:47 am

    twas about damn time

  • Reply NORMALIZATION OF IGNORANCE June 22, 2013 at 2:34 am

    Why does she keep looking at her phone for Christs sake?

  • Reply NORMALIZATION OF IGNORANCE June 22, 2013 at 2:35 am

    Oh I get it, she's not really a scientist – she's just a talking body.

  • Reply Pharaoh Prince August 28, 2013 at 11:38 pm

    You got like 20 or 30 mins to talk. Didn't watch all the video. She probably only had certain amount of time I don't know.

  • Reply Pharaoh Prince August 28, 2013 at 11:40 pm

    Nice jeans Nina. High heels with bell bottoms?

  • Reply Pharaoh Prince August 28, 2013 at 11:41 pm

    Yeah Im not into medical field or biology. A little about biology but not enough of it. I took the other fields.

  • Reply Sharkiuli March 1, 2014 at 11:24 pm

    those new medical achievements will be used to get bigger penises …. Trololololo

  • Reply tibstar8812 March 6, 2014 at 5:19 pm

    beauty with brains… im in love..

  • Reply Allen Michael Cohen March 12, 2014 at 6:47 am

    She used improper grammar:  "Between you and I"

  • Reply 陶渺 March 16, 2014 at 7:51 am

    I'd say,the girl is amaziiiiing.

  • Reply Reticulus March 21, 2014 at 8:43 am

    This is like immortality type of progress where if you can just grow new cells from existing ones makes it harder for one to die naturally.

  • Reply Jack Jones April 23, 2014 at 2:36 pm

    no, I woulda' never guessed! A tissue engineer! Diz is why she's hot!

  • Reply SFSylvester April 25, 2014 at 5:22 pm

    The Island…

  • Reply Sam girrl May 21, 2014 at 12:47 am

    wow maybe they could grow me a new brain so Id be like soo much more smarter

  • Reply Joe Zhu May 24, 2014 at 9:09 am

    good !

  • Reply The Regeneration Center June 5, 2014 at 3:31 pm

    Personalized medicine is the future period. What we envisioned in sci-fi movies and TV shows like Star Trek will become reality this century. I dont think there is any question about the leaps humans can make when they put their collective minds to it. Public support will be the key.

  • Reply AfroNinjaX June 26, 2014 at 10:33 pm

    imagines the future

    OMG m8 wt r u doing 2 may!?

    Controversy 🙂

  • Reply Doominist September 25, 2016 at 7:34 am

    What is tissue? is it like paper

  • Reply Ratna Siti Khodijah March 24, 2017 at 4:06 pm

    I found it from here

  • Reply moriani August 6, 2017 at 11:57 pm

    dava jonas aprova

  • Reply Ebad Ur-rehman April 14, 2018 at 5:17 pm

    Nina Tandon's so hot😌

  • Leave a Reply