Editorial: Neural net works

CHENNAI: In a development straight out of a sci-fi movie, the first human received an implant developed by Neuralink, a computer-brain interface company headed by Elon Musk. The patient is recovering well and results showed promising neuron spike detection. Back in September last year, Neuralink announced it would begin recruiting people for clinical trials of the human implant named Telepathy. Individuals with quadriplegia due to cervical spinal cord injury or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, commonly known as ALS or Lou Gehrig’s Disease, were those who made the cut for testing out this groundbreaking innovation.

The initial goal of the brain computer interface (BCI) is to give people — those who have lost use of their limbs — the ability to control a computer cursor or keyboard using their thoughts alone. Neuralink is one of many groups working on linking the nervous system to computers, efforts aimed at helping treat brain disorders, overcoming brain injuries. Experts say the technology could find use cases in treating everything from Parkinson’s disease to brain injuries, dementia, epilepsy, depression, blindness, deafness and chronic pain. Currently, there are as many as 40 brain computer interface trials under way.

Neuralink had previously announced that the USFDA had approved its “investigational device exemption,” which generally allows a sponsor to begin a clinical study “in patients who fit the inclusion criteria.” Researchers have highlighted risks of such implants which include precipitation of seizures, infection, bleeding, haemorrhage and even rejection of the foreign object by the body. If the transmission between the implant and the brain is not well-coordinated, there are chances for the tech to backfire as well.

Stakeholders working in the space of technology ethics believe that the unprecedented opening of a gateway into the brain comes with its own sets of ethical and moral conundrums. One of the big questions posed by ethicists is regarding privacy. Apart from logging the movement of an individual, what other data from the brain can such devices capture? Will memory or thoughts of an individual finally find a way to be decrypted and translated into a storage device? If yes, who gets to own that data, and can such information be used without the consent of the patient.

They have also examined the angle of discrimination and whether such data could be employed in investigating criminal cases. One might recall that such a scenario was explored in the Spielberg film Minority Report, which revolved around Precrime, a specialised police department that apprehends criminals by use of foreknowledge provided by three psychics called precogs, who can read the intent of felons before they commit a crime. There’s also the deeply problematic concern regarding the cost of accessing such technologies, which could widen the chasm between the haves and have-nots.

For all practical purposes, Neuralink is part of a small group of companies that has implanted such high-concept devices in humans. This technology is still in a nascent stage, and has tons of technical, regulatory and ethical checks and balances to comply with. Extensive clinical trials will be required to collect data on the efficacy of such implants. Measuring success and evaluating safety can only be done over the long term, in the light of disclosure of more data from the company on how stable the interface is over time, and how much it benefits the participant.