Tag: collateral damage

The Future of Medicine: Injectable Sponges and Foam

xstat-combat-injury-treatment-injectable-spongesMedicine may be advancing by leaps and bounds in certain fields – mind-controlled prosthetics and bioprinting come to mind. But in some respects, we are still very much in the dark ages. Considering gunshot wounds, for example. When it comes to modern warfare, uncontrolled hemorrhaging caused by a bullet is the biggest cause of death. In fact, “bleeding out” is responsible for 80% of deaths caused in battle, more than headshots, chest wounds, or IEDs combined.

This startling statistic doesn’t just apply to soldiers who are wounded in the field, as about the same proportion of those who sustain bullet wounds die after being evacuated to a medical treatment facility as a result of hemorrhaging. In the ongoing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, about 5,000 US troops have been killed, and some 50,000 injured, while combined military and civilian losses are estimated to have been some 500,000 people killed.

xstat-combat-injury-treatment-injectable-sponges-5The immediate cause of death in most of these cases was bleeding out, which is usually associated with deep arterial wounds that simply cannot be treated using tourniquets. As a result, combat medics pack these wound with a special gauze coated with a material that stimulates the clotting process, then applies strong direct pressure over the wound in the hopes that a clot will seal off the artery. If the bleeding is not controlled, the medic has to remove the gauze and try again.

This process is so painful that, according to John Steinbaugh, a former Special Ops medic, the patient’s gun is first taken away so that he will not try to kill the medic or himself to stop the agony. And in the end, people still die, and all because medical science has yet to find an effective way to plug a hole. Luckily, RevMedX, a small Oregon startup, has developed an alternative approach to treat such potentially survivable injuries.

xstat-combat-injury-treatment-injectable-sponges-4That’s Revmedx and its new invention, the XStat, comes into play. Contained within this simple plastic syringe are hundreds of small sponges (1 cm, or 0.4 inches, in diameter) made from wood pulp and coated with chitosan, a derivative of crustacean shells that triggers clot formation and has antimicrobial properties. When they are injected into a deep wound, the sponges expand to fill the cavity, and apply enough pressure to stop arterial bleeding.

And since they adhere to wet surfaces, the sponges counter any tendency for the pressure to push them out of the wound. After conducting tests of early prototypes, the final development was carried under a US$5 million U.S. Army contract. In most cases, an arterial wound treated using XStat stops bleeding within about 15 seconds. The sponges are also marked with an x-ray absorbing material so they can be located and removed from the wound once surgical treatment is available.

????????????XStat is currently awaiting FDA approval, bolstered by a request from the US Army for expedited consideration. Combined with a new Wound Stasis Technology (aka. a medical foam) that earned its inventors a $15.5 million from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) back in Dec of 2012, army medics will likely be able to save a good many lives which in the past would have been written off as “casualties of war” or the all-too-common “collateral damage”.

Similar to the XStat, the idea for this injectable foam – which consists of two liquids that, when combined, form a solid barrier to stop bleeding – the inspiration for this idea comes from direct experience. As a military doctor in Iraq and Afghanistan, David King – a co-investigator of the foam project and a trauma surgeon at Massachusetts General Hospital – saw a great many deaths that were caused by uncontrolled internal bleeding.

DARPA-FoamLocated in Watertown, Massachusetts, Arsenal Medical designed this substance that consists of two liquids to fill the abdominal cavity and form a solid foam that does not interact with blood. This is key, since the hardened foam needs to remain separate and stop the blood from flowing. Comprised of polyurethane molecules, this foam belongs to a family of materials that is already used in bone cement, vascular grafts, and other medical applications.

The team began by testing the foam in pigs that were subjected to an internal injury that cut the liver and a large vein. With the treatment, nearly three-quarters of the pigs were still alive three hours later. Afterward, the team began monitoring how the pigs fared once the foam was removed. In 2013, the company began working with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to determine how to test the technology on the battlefield (though no dates as to when that might have been available yet).

gun_violenceAs always, developments in the armed forces have a way of trickling down to the civilian world. And given the nature and prevalence of gun violence in the US and other parts of the world, a device that allows EMTs the ability to seal wounds quickly and effectively would be seen as nothing short of a godsend. Between saving young people for gang violence and innocent victims from mass shootings, NGOs and medical organizations could also save countless lives in war-torn regions of the world.

Source: gizmag.com, technologyreview.com, medcrunch.net

Judgement Day Update: Banning Autonomous Killing Machines

drone-strikeDrone warfare is one of the most controversial issues facing the world today. In addition to ongoing concerns about lack of transparency and who’s making the life-and-death decisions, there has also been serious and ongoing concerns about the cost in civilian lives, and the efforts of both the Pentagon and the US government to keep this information from the public.

This past October, the testimonial of a Pakistani family to Congress helped to put a human face on the issue. Rafiq ur Rehman, a Pakistani primary school teacher, described how his mother, Momina Bibi, had been killed by a drone strike. His two children – Zubair and Nabila, aged 13 and 9 – were also injured in the attack that took place on October 24th of this year.

congress_dronetestimonyThis testimony occurred shortly after the publication of an Amnesty International report, which listed Bibi among 900 other civilians they say have been killed by drone strikes since 2001. Not only is this number far higher than previously reported, the report claims that the US may have committed war crimes and should stand trial for its actions.

Already, efforts have been mounted to put limitations on drone use and development within the US. Last year, Human Rights Watch and Harvard University released a joint report calling for the preemptive ban of “killer robots”. Shortly thereafter, Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter signed a series of instructions to “minimize the probability and consequences of failures that could lead to unintended engagements.”

campaignkillerrobots_UNHowever, these efforts officially became international in scope when, on Monday October 21st, a growing number of humans rights activists, ethicists, and technologists converged on the United Nations Headquarters in New York City to call for an international agreement that would ban the development and use of fully autonomous weapons technology.

Known as the “Campaign To Stop Killer Robots,” an international coalition formed this past April, this group has demanded that autonomous killing machines should be treated like other tactics and tools of war that have been banned under the Geneva Convention – such as chemical weapons or anti-personnel landmines.

UAVsAs Jody Williams. a Nobel Peace Prize winner and, a founding member of the group said:

If these weapons move forward, it will transform the face of war forever. At some point in time, today’s drones may be like the ‘Model T’ of autonomous weaponry.

According to Noel Sharkey, an Irish computer scientist who is chair of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control, the list of challenges in developing autonomous robots is enormous. They range from the purely technological, such as the ability to properly identify a target using grainy computer vision, to ones that involve fundamental ethical, legal, and humanitarian questions.

As the current drone campaign has shown repeatedly, a teenage insurgent is often hard to distinguish from a child playing with a toy. What’s more, in all engagements in war, there is what is called the “proportionality test” – whether the civilian risks outweigh the military advantage of an attack. At present, no machine exists that would be capable of making these distinctions and judgement calls.

X-47B_over_coastlineDespite these challenges, militaries around the world – including China, Israel, Russia, and especially the U.S. – are enthusiastic about developing and adopting technologies that will take humans entirely out of the equation, often citing the potential to save soldiers’ lives as a justification. According to Williams, without preventative action, the writing is on the wall.

Consider the U.S. military’s X-47 aircraft, which can take off, land, and refuel on its own and has weapons bays, as evidence of the trend towards greater levels of autonomy in weapons systems. Similarly, the U.K. military is collaborating with B.A.E. Systems to develop a drone called the Taranis, or “God of Thunder,” which can fly faster than the speed of sound and select its own targets.

campaign_killerrobotsThe Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, a coalition of international and national NGOs, may have only launched recently, but individual groups have been to raise awareness for the last few years. Earlier this month, 272 engineers, computer scientists and roboticists signed onto the coalition’s letter calling for a ban. In addition, the U.N. is already expressed concern about the issue.

For example, the U.N. Special Rapporteur issued a report to the General Assembly back in April that recommended states establish national moratorium on the development of such weapons. The coalition is hoping to follow up on this by asking that other nations will join those already seeking to start early talks on the issue at the U.N. General Assembly First Committee on Disarmament and International Security meeting in New York later this month.

AI'sOn the plus side, there is a precedent for a “preventative ban”: blinding lasers were never used in war, because they were preemptively included in a treaty. On the downside, autonomous weapons technology is not an easily-defined system, which makes it more difficult to legislate. If a ban is to be applied, knowing where it begins and ends, and what loopholes exist, is something that will have to be ironed out in advance.

What’s more, there are alternatives to a ban, such as regulation and limitations. By allowing states to develop machinery that is capable of handling itself in non-combat situations, but which require a human operator to green light the use of weapons, is something the US military has already claimed it is committed to. As far as international law is concerned, this represents a viable alternative to putting a stop to all research.

Overall, it is estimated that we are at least a decade away from a truly autonomous machine of war, so there is time for the law to evolve and prepare a proper response. In the meantime, there is also plenty of time to address the current use of drones and all its consequences. I’m sure I speak for more than myself when I say that I hope its get better before it gets worse.

And in the meantime, be sure to enjoy this video produced by Human Rights Watch:


Sources: fastcoexist.com, thegaurdian.com, stopkillerrobots.org

U.N. Launches Drone Investigation

Predator_drone_2In a move which will surely strike some as predictable and others overdue, the U.N. announced that it would begin an investigation into the legality of the US’s drone program. For years now, unmanned aerial vehicles have been the mainstay of the United States anti-terrorism efforts overseas, sparking controversy and leading to demands for more oversight and transparency. And as of this past Thursday, it will be the subject of a major international investigation.

Led by special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights Ben Emmerson, the investigation is expected to focus on the legal justification for America’s expansive drone program, which has largely remained secretive and unexamined. What’s more, Emmerson and his team are expected to examine exactly how much collateral damage and civilian deaths the use of drones has caused, which is a major point for those opposed to their use.

In a statement released from Emmerson’s office, he outlines the parameters of the issue and the investigation to be mounted as follows:

“The exponential rise in the use of drone technology in a variety of military and non-military contexts represents a real challenge to the framework of established international law. It is therefore imperative that appropriate legal and operational structures are urgently put in place to regulate its use in a manner that complies with the requirements of international law, including international human rights law, international humanitarian law (or the law of war as it used to be called), and international refugee law.”

Other groups were quick to chime in on the decision to launch an investigation, not the least of which were Americans themselves. For example, Dennis Blair, the former director of national intelligence under President Barack Obama and the current chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, has urged the administration to make more of its drone policies public. “There’s been far too little debate [about the tactics of drone use] said Blair. “The United States is a democracy, we want our people to know how we use military force and that we use it in ways the United States is proud of.”

The American Civil Liberties Union, which has been waging a years-long effort to compel the Obama administration to release its internal legal considerations, also welcomed the U.N. investigation, and urged the U.S. to participate in it. Hina Shamsi, the director of the Union’s National Security Project, released a statement encompassing the ACLU’s position:

“Virtually no other country agrees with the U.S.’s claimed authority to secretly declare people enemies of the state and kill them and civilian bystanders far from any recognized battlefield. To date, there has been an abysmal lack of transparency and no accountability for the U.S. government’s ever-expanding targeted killing program.”

Naturally, the US is not the only nation under scrutiny in this investigation. And neither is the issue of civilian deaths the only focus. The use of drones has increased exponentially in recent years, thanks in no small part to extensive development of UAV technology in a number of countries. And with countries like China and Iran following suit, drone use is only expected to grow and expand. By Investigating the legality and implications of their use now, the potential exists to establish a framework before they become widespread.

Source: Huffingtonpost.com