> Such nanoparticles do not occur naturally in the human body and must be administered as markers
So if I’m reading this right, much like radioactive markers, these must be surgically implanted before they can capture the imaging? In other words, it’s not a direct replacement for MRI or X-ray imaging technologies, though it could potentially be safer for long term care patients that need frequent imaging.
Not implanted, just injected into a vessel with a needle or catheter. Any time you introduce something like this into the blood though, there are consequences. X-Ray contrast reactions can be lethal and MRI contrast (more similar to these since it’s metal-based) occasionally kills the arteries going to kidneys, which is bad. So, it’s easy to administer, but this is far too soon to claim it is safe at scale.
I wish the article touched on the nano particles more… like, what happens to them after you’re done? Are they dissolved or expelled (or do they pile up in various parts of the body and cause chronic issues…)?
