by This was not the first tiny device implanted in the human brain. Still, Elon Musk’s announcement on Monday roused the small community of scientists who have spent decades working to treat certain disabilities and conditions by going directly into the body’s nervous system.
“Putting a device into a person is not a big act,” said Robert Gaunt, an associate professor in the University of Pittsburgh’s department of physical medicine and rehabilitation. “But I don’t think even Elon Musk would have taken on a project like this if it wasn’t for the research and the ability he’s shown in neuroscience over the years.”
Musk’s announcement was sudden and did not provide much information other than the news itself: “ @Neuralink yesterday and he is recovering well. Initial neuron spike detection results show promise.”
Many scientists applauded Neuralink’s announcement, while also carefully noting that the company’s clinical trial is in very early stages and not much information has been released publicly. Still, the researchers said Neuralink has made significant gains and is doing exactly what startups are good at: taking what’s been learned through basic science and trying to make a real, viable product.
It’s too early to know whether Neuralink’s implant will be effective in humans, but the company’s announcement is an “exciting development,” said Gaunt, whose own work focuses on the use of implants — devices called brain-computer interfaces – to restore motor control and functions. like people’s sense of touch.
He said Neuralink’s new milestone is an industry that has already made rapid progress over the past 15 years.
The first brain-computer interface was implanted into humans in the late 1990s, research led by a pioneering neuroscientist named Phil Kennedy.
The idea was that these devices could take advantage of brain circuitry that is still intact after injury to perform basic movements and functions. For example, when a person thinks about moving their hands or watches another person move their hands, many of the same neurons in the brain are active as if they were making the movement themselves, said Jennifer Collinger, associate professor in the Department of Physical Education. medicine and rehabilitation at the University of Pittsburgh.
“You can find patterns of activity in the neural data associated with those movements, so you can flip that relationship around to give them control over the actual movement,” she said.
In 2004, a tiny device called the Utah array was implanted on the person for the first time, enabling a paralyzed man to control a computer cursor with his nerve impulses. The device, invented by Richard Normann at the University of Utah, looks like a small chip with thin spikes that actually have many tiny electrodes. The array is designed to attach to the skull through an opening in the skin.
Using the Utah array, scientists were able to demonstrate how brain-computer interfaces can help people control a robotic arm with their mind, stimulate their own muscles and limbs, use computers and other external devices , and even decode handwriting and speech.
“All of that was a really important proof of concept to show that this technology could be useful,” said Collinger, whose own work is focused on restoring hand and arm function to allow patients to they are paralyzed not only to move these appendages, but also to use them. them to manipulate objects and perform more skillful movements that incorporate tactile cues and other forms of sensory feedback. The idea is to enable a wider range of functions that are necessary for everyday life.
Enter Neuralink. Essentially Musk’s startup, along with other private ventures like Synchron and Precision Neuroscience, are taking what has been learned over the years to make brain-computer interfaces more practical for more patients.
Neuralink received approval last year from the Food and Drug Administration to conduct its first human clinical study. Details about who was selected and the procedure for implanting the device that Musk said took place on Sunday were sparse, but the company is developing a brain implant that would allow people, such as patients with severe paralysis, to control a computer , phone or other external device using their thoughts.
The startup has already taken some big steps forward.
Unlike the Utah array, Neuralink’s device is fully implantable, which means patients may end up being less constrained—most implants require people to perform activities in a controlled lab setting.
“It was a huge engineering challenge,” Gaunt said. “That’s the kind of thing that academics and others have been risking for years, but it took a difficult and concerted engineering effort to actually build it.”
There were some bumps along the way. The company was embroiled in controversy after activist groups and complaints from internal staff alleged that Neuralink mistreated some of the animals used in experiments. A federal investigation turned up no evidence of any violations other than an “adverse surgical incident” in 2019 that the company reported itself, according to Reuters.
Neuralink isn’t the first to put a fully implantable brain-computer interface into a human patient, but Gaunt said the company has improved what these devices can record by leaps and bounds.
Neuralink also uses innovative robotic surgery, rather than a specialized neurosurgeon, to implant the device.
“That’s quite different from what people have done before,” said Sergey Stavisky, assistant professor in the Department of Neurological Surgery at the University of California, Davis, and co-director of the UC Davis Neuroprosthetics Lab.
Stavisky said automating the procedure with a robot could make it more efficient and effective down the road.
“You can put more of them in, you can put them in quickly, you can avoid blood vessels,” he said, “but it’s also difficult and new, and you have to show that the safe robot.”
Demonstrating safety will be one of the main functions of Neuralink’s clinical trial. In the coming months, the startup will have to show that its device can function without any serious adverse effects.
It remains to be seen if the implant works as intended. In his announcement on X, Musk said the patient is “recovering well” and that initial results show “promising neuronal spike detection.”
Without details, it’s hard to know what that means, but Gaunt said it likely indicates that the electrodes are in place, that nearby neurons are firing and that the implant can pick up the activity. to detect that basically.
“It basically means that, at least on some level, it’s working,” he said.
Musk said the early clinical trials will aim to treat people with paralysis or paraplegia. If the device works, it could one day be used to address a range of ailments.
Dr. David Brandman, a neurosurgeon who co-directs the UC Davis Neuroprosthetics Laboratory with Stavisky, already uses fully implantable devices to treat patients with Parkinson’s disease, seizures and abnormal pain.
When it comes to medical needs, brain-computer interfaces can have a big impact, he said, including for stroke survivors and patients with spinal cord injury, paralysis and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).
Beyond clinical applications, it’s easy for the imagination to run wild with sci-fi concepts of bioengineering. Musk himself put those fantasies into action, saying in 2022 that he plans to get one of the Neuralink implants someday.
However, many scientists think that kind of thinking is too far into the distant future – and not very practical.
“I think it’s too early to talk about that,” Brandman said. “People are in need, and any emphasis on ‘what ifs’ and ‘what ifs’ is doing a disservice to people who need a device.”
And while the idea of brain-controlled devices may suggest the possibility of increasing a person’s abilities, scientists agree that there is no indication so far that these implants can improve functions beyond what a non-disabled person can. to do.
“The idea that these devices will allow us to achieve any kind of superhuman ability is science fiction at this point,” Gaunt said.
However, the Neuralink clinical trial is a major development for the field of neuroscience and bioengineering. And rather than overshadowing their own efforts, Gaunt and others said it’s only natural for industry to build on what academia has achieved.
“Universities and academic labs are places that really break new ground, places where no one has ever gone before and tried things that are far too risky for companies and investors to put their money into,” a said Gaunt.
As soon as brain implants showed real capabilities, for example, private companies began to step in with resources and capital that disrupt what is available through research grants to build a commercially viable product, he said.
If anything, Gaunt said Neuralink’s early success is a testament to the importance of funding basic scientific research.
When all industry developments leave those in academia, however, it can be more difficult to predict.
Stavisky said it’s up to the scientific community to figure out the next frontier in the field, likening the process to surfing ahead of the wave and pushing science forward in a way that could be future commercial developments.
That doesn’t necessarily mean all the flashy headlines and attention to Musk and Neuralink aren’t having an effect, Gaunt said.
“Every time things like this happen, I wake up with a bit of a crisis,” he said, “but then reality sets in, and I think about how there’s always going to be challenges and basic science. solution.”
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
