6 ms·

Most complete human brain model to date is a ‘brain changer’

70 points by jaoued 11y ago

pera 11y ago
Why is this being called a "model"?
- streptomycin 11y ago
  Because the word "model" is very overloaded. In this context, it means something like http://www.bio.umass.edu/biology/kunkel/modelsys.html http://www.bio.umass.edu/biology/kunkel/modelsys.html So yeah, it sucks that when you read a headline, you don't know if it's talking about an animal model, an in vitro model, a computational model, or something in between. But that's how it is. They're all models.
- jmount 11y ago
  Standard medical terminology. For example a rat with burned lungs could be "a model for human asthma" (probably not a good one).
themgt 11y ago
Increasing probability that you are in fact a brain in a vat, part of an undergrad science experiment in the outerworld. I mean, more seriously I am pro-choice, but do we draw a line somewhere? "The main thing missing in this model is a vascular system. What is there – a spinal cord, all major regions of the brain, multiple cell types, signaling circuitry and even a retina – has the potential to dramatically accelerate the pace of neuroscience research" Of a 5 week old fetus? Is it ok to make 10,000 of these for random experiments? What about 10 weeks, or 15 or 19 or 40 weeks maturity? I'm not saying I believe this in and of itself is unethical, but it seems extremely dangerous to do this research and publish and promote it without even beginning a discussion of, where would we draw a line? Does anyone really believe the line will be here, and not an inch farther?
- hguant 11y ago
  Having the comparable structure to the brain of a 5 week old fetus is not the same as using the brain of a 5 week old fetus. This seems to be the same sort of technology as the lab grown meat stunt a few months back, only applied to neuroscience. Still some ethical issues here, but I'm much more comfortable with this sort of thing as opposed to actual human brains.
  - olewhalehunter 11y ago
    if this thing is "running" this is horrendously unethical
    - hguant 11y ago
      Oh I agree - but I don't think that's likely. At 5 weeks a human fetus isn't viable in any way shape or form; this 'model' has even less of a case for, well, being considered alive seeing as it lacks a vascular system. Reading the article again, this model seems less of a 'hey we have a brain in a jar lets poke it' and more of a platform for studying neurological diseases/ethically generating brain tissue structure, as opposed to cells. This seems more like raw material, rather than harvesting life.
      - olewhalehunter 11y ago
        I would not be comfortable with an alien of superior intelligence prodding my brain on the grounds that it had the functioning capacity of one of their 5 week old foetuses.
        hguant 11y ago
        Neither me, but you and I have agency and free will. This model has neither of those things. I think the crucial question is does this 'model' have the capacity to develop those things. If it does, that creates a serious problem for continuing research along these lines. If not, then I don't really see them problem - in that case I would compare this to growing and running test on kidney or liver.
cryoshon 11y ago
Cool. Let's see the methods paper they used to produce this model, then let's see the independent validation papers which would show us that the model is accurate in compared to previously established information. Then let's see an independently authored paper on a unique speculative use of this model that has positive results. This model is in its infancy. It still needs a lot of experimental work (5 years? 10 years?) and in general the more complex models take a longer amount of time to be validated and widely trusted. A great example is the humanized mouse model, which is super complex (though not as complex as a brain) and took somewhere between 3 and 10 years depending on who you ask to go from the point of the OP model to mainstream accepted usage for some purposes. Maybe 5 years down the line we'll see something come out of the new brain model. Brain science isn't my expertise, but there's a couple of other tidbits that caught my attention about this model. First, its vascular structure is missing entirely. I'm guessing the level of oxygenation of the fetal brain is important, but there may be ways of controlling for this gap. Second, gene expression isn't 100% equivalent to an actual human fetal brain at this level of development. There are probably ways to control for this also, but it's still a flaw. We don't expect models to be 100% true to reality (after all, it's a model), so I expect that these holes aren't going to prevent this model from being successful and useful.
- stenl 11y ago
  Brain science is my expertise, and you're right that the lack of vasculature will limit the viability of this. It will never grow beyond a few mm, and will have a dead core most likely. Plus, at "5 weeks" there will be no astrocytes or oligodendrocytes. You need astrocytes to make proper synapses and oligos to get proper signalling speeds. Others have shown more advanced brain organoids, incl astrocytes, but this tech is still very far from a conscious piece of tissue in a dish.
  - scrumper 11y ago
    > but this tech is still very far from a conscious piece of tissue in a dish. I suspect that will help its adoption. Not so many ethical or para-ethical issues for the press to get upset about. It's just meat.
logicallee 11y ago
The lab-grown brain...contains 99 percent of the genes present in the human fetal brain. "We are thrilled to have finally created a living human brain in a vat. This is an exciting experiment and one that has absolutely no possible ethical ramifications of any kind whatsoever, now or wherever it may lead in the future," the not-evil scientist Anand added enthusiastically and without visibly fighting the urge to twirl his totally not-evil mustache. "It's simply completely obvious that this is a great direction to go in and one that will never give anyone any pause. More biscuits?"
smithkl42 11y ago
Wait a sec, I thought five week old fetuses weren't human.

70 points by jaoued 11y ago

pera 11y ago

Why is this being called a "model"?

streptomycin 11y ago
Because the word "model" is very overloaded. In this context, it means something like http://www.bio.umass.edu/biology/kunkel/modelsys.html http://www.bio.umass.edu/biology/kunkel/modelsys.html So yeah, it sucks that when you read a headline, you don't know if it's talking about an animal model, an in vitro model, a computational model, or something in between. But that's how it is. They're all models.
jmount 11y ago
Standard medical terminology. For example a rat with burned lungs could be "a model for human asthma" (probably not a good one).

themgt 11y ago

Increasing probability that you are in fact a brain in a vat, part of an undergrad science experiment in the outerworld. I mean, more seriously I am pro-choice, but do we draw a line somewhere? "The main thing missing in this model is a vascular system. What is there – a spinal cord, all major regions of the brain, multiple cell types, signaling circuitry and even a retina – has the potential to dramatically accelerate the pace of neuroscience research" Of a 5 week old fetus? Is it ok to make 10,000 of these for random experiments? What about 10 weeks, or 15 or 19 or 40 weeks maturity? I'm not saying I believe this in and of itself is unethical, but it seems extremely dangerous to do this research and publish and promote it without even beginning a discussion of, where would we draw a line? Does anyone really believe the line will be here, and not an inch farther?

hguant 11y ago
Having the comparable structure to the brain of a 5 week old fetus is not the same as using the brain of a 5 week old fetus. This seems to be the same sort of technology as the lab grown meat stunt a few months back, only applied to neuroscience. Still some ethical issues here, but I'm much more comfortable with this sort of thing as opposed to actual human brains.
- olewhalehunter 11y ago
  if this thing is "running" this is horrendously unethical
  - hguant 11y ago
    Oh I agree - but I don't think that's likely. At 5 weeks a human fetus isn't viable in any way shape or form; this 'model' has even less of a case for, well, being considered alive seeing as it lacks a vascular system. Reading the article again, this model seems less of a 'hey we have a brain in a jar lets poke it' and more of a platform for studying neurological diseases/ethically generating brain tissue structure, as opposed to cells. This seems more like raw material, rather than harvesting life.
    - olewhalehunter 11y ago
      I would not be comfortable with an alien of superior intelligence prodding my brain on the grounds that it had the functioning capacity of one of their 5 week old foetuses.
      - hguant 11y ago
        Neither me, but you and I have agency and free will. This model has neither of those things. I think the crucial question is does this 'model' have the capacity to develop those things. If it does, that creates a serious problem for continuing research along these lines. If not, then I don't really see them problem - in that case I would compare this to growing and running test on kidney or liver.

cryoshon 11y ago

Cool. Let's see the methods paper they used to produce this model, then let's see the independent validation papers which would show us that the model is accurate in compared to previously established information. Then let's see an independently authored paper on a unique speculative use of this model that has positive results. This model is in its infancy. It still needs a lot of experimental work (5 years? 10 years?) and in general the more complex models take a longer amount of time to be validated and widely trusted. A great example is the humanized mouse model, which is super complex (though not as complex as a brain) and took somewhere between 3 and 10 years depending on who you ask to go from the point of the OP model to mainstream accepted usage for some purposes. Maybe 5 years down the line we'll see something come out of the new brain model. Brain science isn't my expertise, but there's a couple of other tidbits that caught my attention about this model. First, its vascular structure is missing entirely. I'm guessing the level of oxygenation of the fetal brain is important, but there may be ways of controlling for this gap. Second, gene expression isn't 100% equivalent to an actual human fetal brain at this level of development. There are probably ways to control for this also, but it's still a flaw. We don't expect models to be 100% true to reality (after all, it's a model), so I expect that these holes aren't going to prevent this model from being successful and useful.

stenl 11y ago
Brain science is my expertise, and you're right that the lack of vasculature will limit the viability of this. It will never grow beyond a few mm, and will have a dead core most likely. Plus, at "5 weeks" there will be no astrocytes or oligodendrocytes. You need astrocytes to make proper synapses and oligos to get proper signalling speeds. Others have shown more advanced brain organoids, incl astrocytes, but this tech is still very far from a conscious piece of tissue in a dish.
- scrumper 11y ago
  > but this tech is still very far from a conscious piece of tissue in a dish. I suspect that will help its adoption. Not so many ethical or para-ethical issues for the press to get upset about. It's just meat.

logicallee 11y ago

The lab-grown brain...contains 99 percent of the genes present in the human fetal brain. "We are thrilled to have finally created a living human brain in a vat. This is an exciting experiment and one that has absolutely no possible ethical ramifications of any kind whatsoever, now or wherever it may lead in the future," the not-evil scientist Anand added enthusiastically and without visibly fighting the urge to twirl his totally not-evil mustache. "It's simply completely obvious that this is a great direction to go in and one that will never give anyone any pause. More biscuits?"

smithkl42 11y ago

Wait a sec, I thought five week old fetuses weren't human.