Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 46

Thread: Exoskeletons

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Scaper1 View Post
    My fear is that the macro understanding will be something along the lines of robot suit equals problem solved.
    Yes! We must react with all the energy & tools we have!

    Paolo
    In God we trust; all others bring data. - Edwards Deming

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by paolocipolla View Post
    Don't you wonder what would happen on the cure front if let's say one resercher willing to work to cure chronic SCI got 14 millions in two years?

    Paolo
    Not really, 14 million is not a significant amount of money. I certainly don't think that 14 million dollars would cure SCI, if I did I would go raise it. I also fail to see how the two are linked. There isn't a global "only 14 million dollars will be spent on things SCI related" (remember both stem cells and Exo research have uses other than for people who have SCI).

    14 million is NOTHING. In 2010 the US spent 6.9 BILLION dollars fighting AIDS, billions on cancer, Alzheimer's. Hell, PETA gets 34M dollars a year, so people care more about dogs and cats than they do us walking because we don't have good PR. Yet people here persist on this horrible path of attacking any non cure related funding, instead of focusing on growing awareness and getting MORE money for everything. Every negative action taken in the name of the SCI community, one I am unwilling member of, makes it less likely that SCI research will grow to large levels.

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Scaper1 View Post
    My fear is that the macro understanding will be something along the lines of robot suit equals problem solved.
    As opposed to the blizzard of press SCI gets now? Robot Exoskeletons are cool, which gives press to SCI. Whatever it is, it is better than no one talking about SCI at all.

  4. #14
    t8burst - why invest in something that doesn't address bowel/bladder/sexual function? What about tetraplegics? It seems really silly to support an intervention which offers so little to the community.
    I agree that there's no such thing as bad publicity - I just feel that we should be using the publicity to get more support for regenerative medicine (the stuff that's actually going to cure paralysis).
    Also, it's hyperbolic to suggest, as fact, that Exo will help us more in the next decade than any 'cure'. I'm assuming you are referring to paraplegics only? A lot of paralysed people I know don't want help with robotic walking, they want help with bladder/bowel/sexual function, pain, sensation etc etc so I really don't see how the Exo is going to help with any of that lot in the next decade. But then, it's not designed to help with any of that lot, which again begs the question of why this intervention is being supported when it offers so little?
    My intention here is not to be antagonistic. Robotics are really popular right now and people are of course entitled to support them. However, when the dust settles and people realise that they want actual return of function, the fight for regenerative medicine will still be here as it is the only intervention that will eventually repair the spinal cord.

  5. #15
    It is interesting that 4 or maybe more companies are spending on the exoskeletons. I know one that is using trials for MS and stroke so SCI is not their sole interest. Today I watched a C6 quad up in the Indego. He and his mother were positively thrilled AND fully understand it is not a cure NOR is it an elimination of his wheelchair. It is all a matter of perspective and some do view them as useful until a cure arrives.

    I had a fellow object at the raising of about 10 million for a rehabilitation facility who felt it was a waste of dollars that could be spent on a cure. This was in the late seventies. I told him I felt somebody had a duty to provide rehabilitation so those injured could be ready when he delivered the cure. Every time I see him I remind him I am still waiting.

  6. #16
    I think the problem is quite often that these devices are being touted as a cure. To the lay person it would appear that paralysis has been cured and it is this part of the wider message which is particularly detrimental to regenerative medicine as it detracts from the urgency to regenerate the cord. The sales pitch accompanying these compensatory devices has pushed them from the rehabilitation sphere and into the cure sphere and this is really misleading.

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by t8burst View Post
    Not really, 14 million is not a significant amount of money. I certainly don't think that 14 million dollars would cure SCI, if I did I would go raise it. I also fail to see how the two are linked. There isn't a global "only 14 million dollars will be spent on things SCI related" (remember both stem cells and Exo research have uses other than for people who have SCI).

    14 million is NOTHING. In 2010 the US spent 6.9 BILLION dollars fighting AIDS, billions on cancer, Alzheimer's. Hell, PETA gets 34M dollars a year, so people care more about dogs and cats than they do us walking because we don't have good PR. Yet people here persist on this horrible path of attacking any non cure related funding, instead of focusing on growing awareness and getting MORE money for everything. Every negative action taken in the name of the SCI community, one I am unwilling member of, makes it less likely that SCI research will grow to large levels.
    Do you know the total amout US invest in general SCI research?
    And how much of the total goes to cure research relevant to get us out of W/C?

    I don't think you know these numbers...

    Then don't you agree with Wise that in a few years he believes we can fix someone so no one would know you had sci?

    Paolo
    In God we trust; all others bring data. - Edwards Deming

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Tayberry View Post
    I think the problem is quite often that these devices are being touted as a cure. To the lay person it would appear that paralysis has been cured and it is this part of the wider message which is particularly detrimental to regenerative medicine as it detracts from the urgency to regenerate the cord. The sales pitch accompanying these compensatory devices has pushed them from the rehabilitation sphere and into the cure sphere and this is really misleading.
    Great points!

    Paolo
    In God we trust; all others bring data. - Edwards Deming

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by c473s View Post
    It is interesting that 4 or maybe more companies are spending on the exoskeletons. I know one that is using trials for MS and stroke so SCI is not their sole interest. Today I watched a C6 quad up in the Indego. He and his mother were positively thrilled AND fully understand it is not a cure NOR is it an elimination of his wheelchair. It is all a matter of perspective and some do view them as useful until a cure arrives.

    I had a fellow object at the raising of about 10 million for a rehabilitation facility who felt it was a waste of dollars that could be spent on a cure. This was in the late seventies. I told him I felt somebody had a duty to provide rehabilitation so those injured could be ready when he delivered the cure. Every time I see him I remind him I am still waiting.
    Ok, but if we keep investing most of the research money in NON cure research how do you think a cure will ever happen?

    We need a serious reserach spending review in SCI, I believe.

    Paolo
    In God we trust; all others bring data. - Edwards Deming

  10. #20
    Here's a link to the annual NIH spending by disease. You can click on the dollar amount to see the specific projects. Paolo, you probaly will go nuts looking at it! By the way, this year only $94 million was spent on SCI research by the NIH, so $14 million is a huge amount. Considering, some of the current, in human, trials cost around $250,000 per person in the U.S.A..

    http://report.nih.gov/categorical_spending.aspx

    As a high level quad, exoskeletons have a long way to come to work for me, but I definitly wouldn't turn one down if it were financially and physically available to me. In my opinion they will be more application for labor jobs in the general population that require high physical stress. I see some merit in SCI rehab with exoskeletons but there should be a minimal amount should be spent developing these for SCI at this point in time. I can see exoskeleton companies using SCI research funds to launch their product and cover R&D costs, then ditching our population when they try actually make a profit and target to a mass market.

    Besides, I want an actual cure, not more paint on a broken fence, which I think will happen sooner than later.
    Last edited by Skipow; 06-10-2014 at 07:27 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. Walking Exoskeletons: End-user Perceptions
    By maestro in forum Surveys & Research Studies
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-17-2014, 05:16 PM
  2. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-24-2011, 12:36 PM
  3. exoskeletons i need comments for my article
    By peter667 in forum Equipment
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-24-2011, 11:00 PM
  4. Exoskeletons
    By jadedsimiles in forum Cure
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-09-2011, 09:09 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-30-2011, 02:08 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •