![](https://crypto4nerd.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/0EVCHHb4iVSGaVM2m.jpeg)
Elon Musk’s ongoing project on Neuralink since 2016 has been recently approved for conducting experiments and testing the device on patients. For years the company had privatized details and data on its research; however, released its approval for in-human studies earlier this month. The release had mixed signals from a society where one side views the new technology as a revolutionary product; in contrast, some questions about the neuroethics involved in this project-regardless, the recent concerns seem to be a prominent part of the discussion within the neurotech field.
Neuralink was founded to give “people with quadriplegia the ability to control their computers and mobile devices with their thoughts” (Neuralink). The device has the potential to incorporate patients diagnosed with quadriplegia into the global network as it connects them with the digital world. Not only does it allow users to access the web, but Neuralink reported its potential to treat neurological conditions researchers have attempted to treat for decades like diseases of Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s. Regardless of the possibility, the audience is still filled with mixed feelings but fascinated by the function and capabilities of the link.
[Quadriplegia: A condition in which a patient is paralyzed from the shoulders down (all four limbs)]
Society has begun to achieve remarkable accomplishments that could accommodate patients with quadriplegia; however, are insufficient. For example, engineers designed robust wheelchairs, but solely supporting the body in a sitting or even a standing position does not possess “life-changing” help for the patients- it mainly serves as a more leisurely transportation mechanism. In addition, current patients largely attend support groups which could be a powerful mechanism to help with education, emotions, etc; however, neither examples have the potential to physically alter a patient’s cognitive abilities. In contrast, Elon Musk’s Neuralink can reverse the daily lifestyles and mental capabilities of its users. Current testing measures are being taken to advance its technology and recent FDA reports show a possibility of human testing starting in late 2023.
The “link” is a type of brain-computer interface (BCI) which means that for a system to function, it uses brain signals and analyzes them to carry out the task correctly. “Brain signals” mean electric signals from neurons called an action potential; using action potential neurons could communicate with one another and generate movement and thought within a body. The link discusses a tiny chip that can be implanted into the skull through a precise surgical process using a needle- about 24 micrometers in size. The small disk has 4 main components to it as the picture below shows:
- Biocompatible Enclosure
- Battery
- Chips and Electronics
- Threads
During the surgical process, the end goal is to conjoin neurons from the brain to the electrodes a part of the link by a process of threading. As the link is essentially conjoined with the human brain, the implant gains the capability to “communicate” with the neurons in the brain and become a part of the neural network while recording the activity from the implanted electrodes. The electrodes will be able to provide data by reading electrical signals produced by the neurotransmitters and communication that happens within the environment. Physicists and medical engineers can gain valuable insights into the current state of neuroscience through the data collected. From a more profound understanding better-personalized medications and care could be provided as well; however, considerations regarding ethics and other factors remain highly debatable.
Neuralinks may have the prospect to reverse the world for patients with quadriplegia; however, as mentioned before moral considerations are to be taken. Through the early stages of the start-up, the company garnered significant attention, and after the recent FDA approval- even better, recognition was within the field of neuroscience and human-computer interaction. On the other side of the spectrum, multiple individuals questioned the legitimacy as the links were reported to permit minds to control their screens, and were vehemently opposed to animal testing violations that had been recently observed.
Pros
This article persists to indicate that linking clinical patients with technology can lead to remarkable progress in the medical industry. Specifically, it would allow a direct connection between the brain and human-machine learning, thanks to electron signals. This technological advancement would offer individuals with paralysis the opportunity to utilize devices, thereby enhancing their efficiency and convenience. Furthermore, the information gathered through this technology could be used by researchers to manage other neurological conditions and explore new possibilities for therapeutic interventions.
Cons
To apply the links to patients, the company used various breeds of animals and multiples of each. Most rejectors of Neuralink established that the sacrifices of animals from animal testing potentially could not be productive and is solely a waste of lives. A major reason why the links will not be utilized in clinical settings is the solemn allegations of animal cruelty, with some reports of federal violations related to animal testing. Though such allegations may not be accurate other factors conclude the cons such as efficiency. At first glance of the project, the potential of the links may seem impressive; however, through further research one could conclude if a surgical process is necessary- there could be better methodologies. The main issue for users could be risk factors. Regardless of whether the operating robot is technologically advanced, risk factors are constantly involved in surgical procedures- accidents could develop.
To envision a society with Neuralinks in effect in clinics may seem like a different dimension for patients. Most remarkably, patients would transcend the barriers of communication as they could simply “text” and communication with other users of technology. Enhancing one’s cognitive abilities can significantly enhance their quality of life by providing one with greater control and decision-making capabilities. Many people might not fully understand the significant challenges individuals with paralysis face. However, many believe that simply acquiring the ability in communication, typing, and digital management has the potential to yield a beneficial transformation in their daily lives. Regardless of the hundreds of patients who could transform their lives, the risks mentioned above could make Neuralinks a danger rather than help per se. A world without Neuralinks could be more desirable to avoid potential risks and ethical concerns. Removing the plausible use of Neuralinks won’t affect patients in any direct way- it would just be the status quo. The only apparent impact would be slower technological advancements, studies, and medical care; however, there is no implication that Neuralinks would 100% provide life-changing assistance. The real questions patients could be asked would be the options of living in the world they are in or trying to enter a new world that seems paramount change but is uncertain.