it can't regrow limbs, which strengthens the idea that it somehow uses and enhances the body's self-repairing properties, and those only go so far.
Ha, and now I'll have to try to scramble small part of pop-science my humanistic mind managed to understand through the years - but there's actually a strong link between scarification and the inability to regrown limbs and fully regenerate tissue. Like, the process of scarification is what makes regrowing impossible, and trying to both stop it and circumvent it, and then re-storing the cells to the fetal "I can create everything" state, afaik, one of the many veins of medical research and the whole scar-free regeneration one of medicine saint Graal-s. Nonetheless, it seems that once the scarification process starts, it's over. Even in our boring mundane medicine it's avoided/minimised where and when we can.
And so, in regard to bacta, if it enhances the body natural response to the damage - without doing something on its own - then, hmmmm, perhaps even for the species it works for it should work differently every time? So, the species which regrows limbs are able to regrown them a lot faster with bacta, for exemple. But if bacta does something of its own - for example heightens the scarification process - then it could just as well be double-edged sword and quite a few of species with the different/better damage healing process might avoid it in non-critical situations for this very reason? Even humans might prefer other method of healing, then, to avoid extensive scarification.
On the other hand, Luke didn't get much scars - and both his and Anakin's prosthesis works very, very well, especially considered their wounds were cauterised, which, imho, would suggest the highly efficient neural connection and it would be much easier to get something like this with a minimal amount of scars. Sooo, I think I'd lean more to the opinion that bacta doesn't just heightens natural body response, but alters it in a more effective - bad wording... into a different, more effective in some aspects, probably terrible in others - methods. Even if just a little. For example, "stops" the scarring process, which should, we in our boring world theorise, open the possibility/enable the creation of shiny new working cells (of course, bacta would also need to re-ignite the total regeneration ability in the affected area, but stopping scarification is an important first step in doing so). Obviously, in human case, not to the point of regrowing the limbs, but perhaps even a bacta can only enhance things so much. Or perhaps actually avoiding scarring for so long would be unpractical/life-threatening, because if not, then once the cells would be in recreating-the-same mode, why wouldn't they be able to regenerate a limb... Hm. There's probably a faux-scientific explanation possible, but I'm just a poor literary theorist, it eludes me.
I've no idea if EU says something about it, but if it's conveniently silent, I bet bacta shouldn't be able to to cure cancers and auto-immunology diseases. Because if it's based on accelerating cells' healing process - no matter, enhanced or not - it means it kicks cells to divide and create themselves faster, which is the perfect environment for feeding cancers - what's a cancer if not a bunch of very, very quickly growing cells - not the other way round. I think things like these even happened in the medical research history, a time or two. But, of course, if we would be able to turn off its cancerous qualities after the healing... I'm sure somebody is working on it. Of course, using the logic of accelerating natural healing response, one should avoid/be very careful administering bacta in the cases of high fever, and I don't think I saw any SW canon taking this into account, which, I admit, ruins my theory. A little (because we can also take the "not only strengthens, but also enhances/alters to better" healing processes route - I guess it would... almost help the body choose the best way of healing, then, like saying "no, this fever is no good, it'll boil you in a few minutes, lower it". which would open the interesting possibility bacta, in fact, influences the brain mostly and the human brain, enhanced, just do the rest, including igniting the abnormal response in the cells. it should be able to cure the cancer, then. placebo/nocebo effect taken to extreme has no bounds... hm, it would suit a world in which some people can move the mountains with a thought nicely). A pity, it would even work from religious/metaphysical point - if the Force is life, then bacta helping every life, even cancerous cells, could be treated as so many things, the liquefied living Force including. ;)
But, yeah, why would bacta not strenghten the bacteria, too, come to think of it, I've no idea, unless it's connected with the Force and the Force is conscious enough to prefer to heal humans, but somehow I doubt it. ;) I guess the "enhancing a brain's response" covers this, too.
Or, if bacta doesn't work for every species, perhaps it doesn't work on viruses and bacteria, too. perhaps it needs a... certain development level to work (like, a brain XD).
Come to think of it, what would the most pious of the Force followers thought about healing in general, I wonder, when it's so often based on killing other living things. Let the Force decide and avoid all healing techniques? avoid only "unnatural" ones? And the whole bacta discussion you envisioned is so fascinating! (and funny. I can't not see a anti-vaxxers like groups there)
So, imho, in sorta conclusion - bacta probably allows for avoiding scarring and therefore re-opens/ignites fetal abilities to regenerate. The question: why not regenerate a limb, then, is an open one, and I prefer to think that leaving such a big wound open - a gate for diseases - for so long could be potentially lethal. Or that too much bacta indeed heightens the risk of the cancer/other deadly auto-immunology diseases greatly and the risk is too high. Or that it actually powers up the brain, but the brain's abilities have its limit, but this seems the weakest one, considering what we know about brain abilities here. Perhaps the body creates the natural resistance to bacta in prolonged undisturbed exposure and so it's impossible to use if for a time required to regrow a limb - and once you stop bacta treatment, the body starts usual human healing route aka scars. And then it's all over.
As for the influence over medicine and science - tsss, no idea, for some reason it's easier to imagine the influence it would have on the poison/venom/killing evolution/market - obviously, every parasite/germ feeding on humans should try to evolve to either be resistant/neutral to bacta or to be strengthened by it, too. I refuse to think the evolution somehow halted, germs are evolving ultra-fast, as we all see on antibiotics case. Anything which might "want" to kill humans/humanoid species/mammals - either via evolving or bio-design, I'm sure there's a market for such things between SW assassins - should do so, though, so probably most of poisons and venom at this point circumvent the bacta healing, too. So, usage of bacta should absolutely create the whole market, literally and metaphorically (evolution market) for either anti-bacta, bacta-circumstancing (e.g. killing to quickly), bacta-neutralising or even "using bacta to strengthen themselves/further destroy the target's body" species and substances. But the exact mechanism(s) they would use depends on the exact mechanism bacta use - and if even I could create a few above, I'm sure there're dozens possibilities for it. BUT I still think that no matter which mechanism it would be, a... germ or substance which would aim for patient's brain and/or focused on using their own cells and its regenerative and growing abilities against them would be more or less safe. Either on a cancer-basis - bacta just quickens its development - or/and via mimicry, pretending to be body's own cells, so the bacta/bacta-kicked brain would treat them as your own and wouldn't be able to strike against them.
Whiiiich, actually, seems like something more or less aligned with what happened to Brendol - his death and symptoms have a lot of similarities to auto-immunitive illnesses. Messing one or two of waste-cleaning processes (or nutrition and waste processes to have a nice combo, since I expect these bees wanted their water to be full of nutrition substances - oooh, like all these nutri-drinks we're giving to the patients. blah, their taste is terrible) might - in the galaxy far far away, so, with some pathos and licentia poetica - lead to something similar.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2018-12-21 10:25 am (UTC)Ha, and now I'll have to try to scramble small part of pop-science my humanistic mind managed to understand through the years - but there's actually a strong link between scarification and the inability to regrown limbs and fully regenerate tissue. Like, the process of scarification is what makes regrowing impossible, and trying to both stop it and circumvent it, and then re-storing the cells to the fetal "I can create everything" state, afaik, one of the many veins of medical research and the whole scar-free regeneration one of medicine saint Graal-s. Nonetheless, it seems that once the scarification process starts, it's over. Even in our boring mundane medicine it's avoided/minimised where and when we can.
And so, in regard to bacta, if it enhances the body natural response to the damage - without doing something on its own - then, hmmmm, perhaps even for the species it works for it should work differently every time? So, the species which regrows limbs are able to regrown them a lot faster with bacta, for exemple. But if bacta does something of its own - for example heightens the scarification process - then it could just as well be double-edged sword and quite a few of species with the different/better damage healing process might avoid it in non-critical situations for this very reason? Even humans might prefer other method of healing, then, to avoid extensive scarification.
On the other hand, Luke didn't get much scars - and both his and Anakin's prosthesis works very, very well, especially considered their wounds were cauterised, which, imho, would suggest the highly efficient neural connection and it would be much easier to get something like this with a minimal amount of scars. Sooo, I think I'd lean more to the opinion that bacta doesn't just heightens natural body response, but alters it in a more effective - bad wording... into a different, more effective in some aspects, probably terrible in others - methods. Even if just a little. For example, "stops" the scarring process, which should, we in our boring world theorise, open the possibility/enable the creation of shiny new working cells (of course, bacta would also need to re-ignite the total regeneration ability in the affected area, but stopping scarification is an important first step in doing so). Obviously, in human case, not to the point of regrowing the limbs, but perhaps even a bacta can only enhance things so much. Or perhaps actually avoiding scarring for so long would be unpractical/life-threatening, because if not, then once the cells would be in recreating-the-same mode, why wouldn't they be able to regenerate a limb... Hm. There's probably a faux-scientific explanation possible, but I'm just a poor literary theorist, it eludes me.
I've no idea if EU says something about it, but if it's conveniently silent, I bet bacta shouldn't be able to to cure cancers and auto-immunology diseases. Because if it's based on accelerating cells' healing process - no matter, enhanced or not - it means it kicks cells to divide and create themselves faster, which is the perfect environment for feeding cancers - what's a cancer if not a bunch of very, very quickly growing cells - not the other way round. I think things like these even happened in the medical research history, a time or two. But, of course, if we would be able to turn off its cancerous qualities after the healing... I'm sure somebody is working on it. Of course, using the logic of accelerating natural healing response, one should avoid/be very careful administering bacta in the cases of high fever, and I don't think I saw any SW canon taking this into account, which, I admit, ruins my theory. A little (because we can also take the "not only strengthens, but also enhances/alters to better" healing processes route - I guess it would... almost help the body choose the best way of healing, then, like saying "no, this fever is no good, it'll boil you in a few minutes, lower it". which would open the interesting possibility bacta, in fact, influences the brain mostly and the human brain, enhanced, just do the rest, including igniting the abnormal response in the cells. it should be able to cure the cancer, then. placebo/nocebo effect taken to extreme has no bounds... hm, it would suit a world in which some people can move the mountains with a thought nicely). A pity, it would even work from religious/metaphysical point - if the Force is life, then bacta helping every life, even cancerous cells, could be treated as so many things, the liquefied living Force including. ;)
But, yeah, why would bacta not strenghten the bacteria, too, come to think of it, I've no idea, unless it's connected with the Force and the Force is conscious enough to prefer to heal humans, but somehow I doubt it. ;) I guess the "enhancing a brain's response" covers this, too.
Or, if bacta doesn't work for every species, perhaps it doesn't work on viruses and bacteria, too. perhaps it needs a... certain development level to work (like, a brain XD).
Come to think of it, what would the most pious of the Force followers thought about healing in general, I wonder, when it's so often based on killing other living things. Let the Force decide and avoid all healing techniques? avoid only "unnatural" ones? And the whole bacta discussion you envisioned is so fascinating! (and funny. I can't not see a anti-vaxxers like groups there)
So, imho, in sorta conclusion - bacta probably allows for avoiding scarring and therefore re-opens/ignites fetal abilities to regenerate. The question: why not regenerate a limb, then, is an open one, and I prefer to think that leaving such a big wound open - a gate for diseases - for so long could be potentially lethal. Or that too much bacta indeed heightens the risk of the cancer/other deadly auto-immunology diseases greatly and the risk is too high. Or that it actually powers up the brain, but the brain's abilities have its limit, but this seems the weakest one, considering what we know about brain abilities here. Perhaps the body creates the natural resistance to bacta in prolonged undisturbed exposure and so it's impossible to use if for a time required to regrow a limb - and once you stop bacta treatment, the body starts usual human healing route aka scars. And then it's all over.
As for the influence over medicine and science - tsss, no idea, for some reason it's easier to imagine the influence it would have on the poison/venom/killing evolution/market - obviously, every parasite/germ feeding on humans should try to evolve to either be resistant/neutral to bacta or to be strengthened by it, too. I refuse to think the evolution somehow halted, germs are evolving ultra-fast, as we all see on antibiotics case. Anything which might "want" to kill humans/humanoid species/mammals - either via evolving or bio-design, I'm sure there's a market for such things between SW assassins - should do so, though, so probably most of poisons and venom at this point circumvent the bacta healing, too. So, usage of bacta should absolutely create the whole market, literally and metaphorically (evolution market) for either anti-bacta, bacta-circumstancing (e.g. killing to quickly), bacta-neutralising or even "using bacta to strengthen themselves/further destroy the target's body" species and substances. But the exact mechanism(s) they would use depends on the exact mechanism bacta use - and if even I could create a few above, I'm sure there're dozens possibilities for it. BUT I still think that no matter which mechanism it would be, a... germ or substance which would aim for patient's brain and/or focused on using their own cells and its regenerative and growing abilities against them would be more or less safe. Either on a cancer-basis - bacta just quickens its development - or/and via mimicry, pretending to be body's own cells, so the bacta/bacta-kicked brain would treat them as your own and wouldn't be able to strike against them.
Whiiiich, actually, seems like something more or less aligned with what happened to Brendol - his death and symptoms have a lot of similarities to auto-immunitive illnesses. Messing one or two of waste-cleaning processes (or nutrition and waste processes to have a nice combo, since I expect these bees wanted their water to be full of nutrition substances - oooh, like all these nutri-drinks we're giving to the patients. blah, their taste is terrible) might - in the galaxy far far away, so, with some pathos and licentia poetica - lead to something similar.