Week 6: Biobusiness and the Healthcare Industry

Today was part one of our discussion on biobusiness. As soon as class started, I began to realise how much of the world’s activities related to biobusiness. We started off by watching another video: Microsoft Future Vision – Healthcare. Microsoft envisioned healthcare in the future as one which makes use of touch pads and e-transactions. After watching the video, I came to realise that the future of healthcare was very bright. In fact, it was a not so very distant future. Most of the technology is already being used by the world’s population, one of them being Apple’s iPad. The rest of the technologies shown in the video were simply improvements to existing technology.

We went on to discuss how biobusiness activities were currently low value-added activities. According to the Shahi Landscape Model for Technology Assessment, most biobusiness activities can be considered valleys rather than summits. They had low barriers to entry. The key to changing this was to use biotechnology to modify and innovate, to turn these “valley” activities into opportunities and make them high value-added. A “cloud” opportunity could be wellness management. It is a proactive activity rather than a reactive one. It advocates prevention rather than cure; encouraging people to take responsibility of their health by staying healthy instead of treating their illnesses.

Unfortunately, the world is currently experiencing some problems with the healthcare industry. The most widespread problem is inefficiency in the industry and has been unsolved for many years. Many a time, people have to be experiencing life-threatening injuries or illnesses to be treated immediately; the rest just keep waiting for an appointment with the doctor. In the reading Will Disruptive Innovations Cure Healthcare? by C.M. Christensen, R. Bohmer and J. Kenagy, they suggested that nurses should actually be allowed to treat or diagnose minor illnesses. Nurses are trained to diagnose minor illnesses such as common flu, cold, fever. Some with more expertise are even able to treat more serious sickness, but patients make the assumption that nurses do not have the adequate knowledge, training and expertise (no matter how long they have been in the profession) to make the correct diagnoses. This results in inefficiency as the doctor is then required to attend to every single patient no matter how minor or serious the situation. To share a personal experience, I went for a medical check-up when I was 12. The doctor mentioned that I had a condition called heart murmur and recommended that I have it checked in case it affected my sports. Naturally, I went to a hospital to make an appointment. To my dismay, I was scheduled an appointment nine months from that day. What was worse was the consultation fee for that appointment was to be $100++. Therefore, I cancelled my appointment. (It can’t be so serious since they gave me an appointment so long after right?) A few years later, at a different medical check-up, another doctor told me about my heart murmur and strongly advised that I have it check out. Once again, I was given an appointment half a year later (which I cancelled again). After those two incidents, I lost faith in the healthcare industry as it just proved to be inefficient. However, maybe it is so only for public hospitals and not private ones.

The session was ended with three presentations on prosthetics, electronic skin and cloning. Electronic skin was something new to me and it was interesting how it was being used in very diverse areas of life. What was exciting was the discussion on how it can be used in the future. One suggestion was how the skin can be stuck on fingertips and used to control machines and other weaponry as if we were playing a game.  If this was suggested ten years ago, I probably wouldn’t have believed it. But looking at how quickly technology is advancing now, it’s probably possible within a couple of decades.

Personal rating: 8/10

TWC Group Project Outline

My group's project outline can be viewed at the link below:
http://twcsharing.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/group-report-outline/

Week 5: ICT

It is widely known that energy from the burning of fossil fuels have the most detrimental effects on the environment. People have discovered other sources of energy such as solar, hydro, natural gas, nuclear and wind. Wireless power generation or transmission is an area which is currently being explored. Some devices have started using this technology. For example, electric toothbrushes are charged by wireless power transmission. It doesn’t require wires or need to be plugged in. It actually isn’t a very recent technology. The idea originated from Nikola Tesla in the form of electromagnetic induction. However, this form of power generation has not been used much. It is said to be a more efficient and less expensive form of energy. I would have thought that this form of energy has not been used much in applications. However, I found that I was so very wrong about this. Radiowaves are also a form of wireless power transmission, and it has now become an integral part of our lives. Hardly anyone living in an urban community is able to live without sending a text message, making or receiving a phone call, or using Wifi. Although small, this technology has the potential to become a huge and important part of our lives.

Another interesting innovation we discussed in class was about the creation of avatars. We watched a video of voice-and-motion recognition game “Milo & Kate”. This technology was adopted and made known to the public by Kinect. What I found scary (yet exciting) was that the avatars, man-made characters in cyberspace, were able to interact, display a set of emotions and think for themselves. Prof also made a prediction that avatars will become very “real” in the future as people try to keep their loved ones by their side by creating an avatar. If we are able to keep an avatar of our loved ones, it means that our loved ones will never die. This may be able to solve people’s fear of ever being lonely; but is this just another form of an imaginary friend? When some children are young, they create imaginary friends to kill boredom. Is an avatar similar to an imaginary friend, and the only difference being that the avatar is visually present while some imaginary friends aren’t?

The class was rounded up by Javier, who shared with us an interesting invention by Apple. They created an app called TigerText. This app allows text messaging to be more confidential. However, there may be some issues raised here.

1.       This encourages people to be less cautious about what they say as the text message can be deleted at a chosen time. People are less pressured to think twice about what they say. This is detrimental to society as it may accelerate the degradation of human’s morals. All our lives, we have been taught to think twice before we speak. Unfortunately, the emergence of instantaneous forms of communication, such as e-mails, text messaging and online chats, have already caused a dent in the moral values of society and the human race. With TigerText around, the process will be sped up.

2.       May tempt people to engage in infidelity. Since their spouse or partners are unable to check and recover their messages if they have been deleted, the spouse or partner who is unfaithful will be less afraid of being discovered. Again, this results in the degradation of values.

3.       Blackmail is also possible. The receiver will find it hard to prove to others that he has been blackmailed or threatened.

However, all these are not definite. If there’s a will, there’s a way; if people want to prove to others they have received a particular message, there are ways to record or take a screen shot of the text.

Personal Rating: 7/10

Individual Report: Has technology been a boon or bane in the sport of swimming?

Specific innovation of interest

The Speedo LZR Racer Swimsuit was introduced in 2008 and was eventually banned in mid 2009. There was a huge controversy after the 2008 Beijing Olympics about how swimsuits were “helping” swimmers swim faster, thus resulting in numerous records being broken. The suit was introduced in February 2008, and by the end of the year, over 100 new records were set. Within 17 months of its release (till the suit was banned), more than 130 records had been broken by swimmers wearing the suit.

Although swimsuits have been around for a very long time, and full-body suits have also existed for a number of years, they were not subject to such scrutiny as the LZR Racer had. The LZR Racer was different from others because the technology used to construct the suit was much different from the usual.

Rationale for selecting this innovation

This technology was revolutionary because it caused people to look at swimsuits as the catalyst to record-breaking feats instead of an improvement of a swimmer’s skill. These suits became the focus at a competition, rather than the swimmer’s speed and strength he possessed – which resulted in the banning of the LZR Racer suit (among many others).

It has transformed the sport of swimming into something similar to F1 racing. To be able to win the Grand Prix, not only does the driver have to be good and have exceptional skill, but the car he’s driving also needs to be better than others – possessing technologies that others do not have.

Proposed approach to development of paper

-          Purpose of swimsuits in the past

-          New technology of swimsuits (LZR Racer)

-          What swimmers wearing the LZR Racer have achieved and the purpose of LZR Racer

-          How it has changed swimming as a sport

Week 4: “Now, are you gonna adapt to me?”

I found this week’s lesson both interesting and insightful.

Among Christians, there’s a common misconception that the theory of Evolution is completely false and contradicts the Gospel. However, although I do not believe Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, I do believe that every species does evolve to some extent, but solely to survive in the environment they’re in. The famous saying by Charles Darwin very aptly describes this situation: “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent; it is the one that is most adaptable to change." This means that we have to be flexible and have the ability to adapt to changes happening around us to be able to survive; resisting change will not give us our desired results.

George Bernard Shaw, on the other hand, said something that at first glance may seem the complete opposite to Darwin’s opinion. Shaw said: “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” Before one analyses this statement, it would seem like stubbornness and inflexibility (rather than flexibility in Darwin’s case) would be able to progress. However, studying it further, I realised that it’s not really stubbornness and inflexibility that would result in progress. In fact, it would do the exact opposite; stubbornness and inflexibility would bring humans nowhere. What it actually is is that only the subjects of change are different – the first being ourselves as individuals, and the latter being our environment. This means one has to create his own world so one can “adapt the world to himself”.

One other thing I found interesting was the Prof’s various Bird approaches when change occurs.

1.       Eagle Approach: When you see change and something happening, you make things happen.

2.       Ostrich Approach: When change occurs, you let things happen (and bury your head in the sand).

3.       Dodo Bird Approach: This person is unaware of change occurring and wonders what happened. (This explains why Dodo birds are extinct. We are unable to survive if we’re oblivious to everything that’s going on around us.)

It is important how we view change in today’s society. Everything is advancing and changing so quickly. If we are oblivious to it, or simply ignore and refuse to change ourselves, we’ll lose out as individuals. So, step out and change yourselves!

Personal Rating: 9/10

Week 3: Is Sustainability Possible?

Class began with a video: Story of Stuff – How Things Work, About Stuff. The video raised many issues. However, they largely revolved around excessive consumption. It began with USA’s overconsumption of natural resources. It was shown that although US is low on natural resources, they managed to consume about 30% of the world’s resources. Needless to say, US was and still is the biggest consumer in the planet. However, what shocked me was that if the whole world were to have the same consumption habits as the US, we would need 3 to 5 planets to survive. What is worse is that to satisfy consumption habits of first-world countries, these countries take from third-world countries which are rich in resources. As a result, third-world countries are unable to reach its potential growth expected of them considering the amount of resources they have. Thus, this explains the widening income gap among countries.

The second form of excessive consumption is in the form of consumerism. In the video, consumerism is represented by the “Golden Arrow”. This arrow is essential to the US economy. It keeps the linear production chain active. People depend on this link to be fed, to survive. How this happens is that, if Americans do not engage in consumerism, factory workers (who were forced to work there because of the US’ failure to protect the environment) do not get paid.

Something else that was discussed in the lecture was that although we are moving gradually moving towards a sustainable society, at present, societies are at a dilemma whether to conserve the environment and sacrifice economic development, or to sacrifice the environment for economic development. However, I believe that in either option, we’ll have to sacrifice both environment and economic development; the difference is to what extent we have to sacrifice each. If we choose Option 1, which is to conserve the environment and sacrifice economic development, we’ll not be able to protect the environment because of the lack of capital in the long run. Protecting the environment requires new technology to be introduced, however if there is a lack of capital, new technology cannot be implemented, hence leading to environmental degradation. The same can be said of Option 2 (sacrifice environment for economic development).

In Karishma’s presentation, she raised an issue for discussion: Should companies act environmentally sustainably even though that would negatively impact their profits?

Here’s my take on this. Society is slowly moving to a sustainable one. People are increasingly becoming more aware of how the environment is being affected by industrialisation. Although helping the environment may lead to lower profitability of the company, in the long run, it may actually be a benefit. What happens is that in the future, other companies will see that it is indeed wiser to be environmentally-friendly instead of searching for resources as these resources start to dwindle and become scarce and prices of these resources increase. In the long run, the more sustainability-driven company will win because they have had a longer time to experiment and find more ways of how to be sustainable. And considering the shift towards a more sustainable one, the benefit may be twice as much.

In the report Sustainability for Tomorrow’s Consumer: The Business Case for Sustainability, the same reasoning can be used in Pg 6. It says “Companies that take the lead on sustainability will be market makers rather than market takers.” If companies start embarking on sustainable methods of production before others, they may make losses initially, but in the end when consumers are aware of the benefits of sustainable methods of production, these companies will be able to benefit from having found successful ways of achieving them.

Followers are only able to be as good as those they follow, never better; but leaders are the ones that break new grounds.

Personal Rating: 8/10