4 ms·
This product just feels like it's way ahead of its time, and not in a good way. There's at least a half dozen fundamental problems with this sort of implant; th
by Filligree 2y ago
This product just feels like it's way ahead of its time, and not in a good way. There's at least a half dozen fundamental problems with this sort of implant; they really shouldn't be used outside of medical necessity until we have a better grasp on... everything.
- op00to 2y agoWhy shouldn’t people be able to submit themselves to experimentation?
- jplona 2y agoI could imagine that in practice you end up with a bunch of vulnerable people submitting themselves to experimentation by powerful companies, which is an unhealthy dynamic.
- Hammershaft 2y agoI agree that it could be an unhealthy dynamic but who should ultimately have the power to make that decision? The patient who wants to participate in a trial because it may offer a chance of improving his quality of life, or us? Beyond that, allowing for these experimental trials, regardless of their success or failure, can accelerate medical progress that can enable better care for many more people in the future.
- DoesntMatter22 2y agoThat's what I see a lot with Cancer drugs. People are dying and want to take a chance on really experimental stuff but the FDA will deny it. They want to try it because it could help them, or if not, at least help others by eliminating useless paths. It's so strange that people feel it's wrong for patients to make their own choice on this, but they are okay forcing others to not have treatment. It's a "My decision is better than yours, I can decide what is better for you.
- op00to 2y agoThere are regulations in the us to protect human subjects from undue influence.
- jauntywundrkind 2y agoAgreed. People should have a strong right to repair that gives them liberty over hardware and software in their property especially in their body. Anti-cirumvention ought be illegal by default. The law should protect people from being prayed up on by controlling interests. Would that.
- hehdhdjehehegwv 2y agoBecause desperate people will be taken advantage of by people trying to make a quick buck. That includes pharmaceutical or medical device manufacturers who are answering to investors. This is why universities have institutional review boards and it’s broadly forbidden to conduct experiments on prisoners.
- jryle70 2y agoThat's FDA's role, to be the gatekeeper to make sure trials and experiments meet acceptable safety standards. Worth noting that FDA has allowed Neuralink to have the 2nd patient in the coming month.
- Hammershaft 2y agoExperiments on prisoners are nonconsensual, so it doesn't map to cases like this.
- bastawhiz 2y agoWhy shouldn't people be able to submit themselves to ride on an experimental rocket ship that has known issues and is not expected complete its mission?
- voldacar 2y agoIf they're aware of that, I don't see the problem?
- bastawhiz 2y agoIt's not so much allowing people to sign up for it, it's preventing companies from killing and maiming people in the interest of profit. Because that's literally what it is. There's not a big asterisk in our laws next to murder that says "oh, unless they're cool about it".
- Dig1t 2y agoThat is a good question, people should absolutely be allowed to do that if they want to. Sign a consent form, why not?
- bastawhiz 2y agoYou can consent to be murdered but that doesn't make the company murdering you free and clear to murder you.
- maxerickson 2y agoDo you think broader society should be able to impose any limits? Is there any experiment too stupid to countenance?
- op00to 2y agoThere are limits in place. All human testing in the US is reviewed by an Institutional Review Board and covered by numerous regulations.
- DoesntMatter22 2y agoSo just wait forever? That's why they do the trials, to figure out. I guess this comes to what is more important, his desire to take a chance or your desire to prevent that, ostensibly 'for his best interest'
- alan-hn 2y agoWhat we need is to understand more about how the brain actually works and we do that with animal models not jamming half assed devices into the heads of humans
- Filligree 2y agoWait forever? No, do the grounding research first. They didn't even know how much the brain was likely to move, for pity's sake. Nor do we have a good handle on scar formation, any necessary immune therapy, ...more or less anything that would be needed if anything at all goes wrong.
- whamlastxmas 2y agoLiterally all of this is wrong. Those mechanics and risks are well understood
- navjack27 2y agoDBS exists and works. It saves people's lives who have essential tremors.
- DoesntMatter22 2y agoYou make it like you are there and know all the details. Obviously the regulating bodies approved it so they felt there was enough to go forward with it. The way you discover a lot of problems is because of the trial patients. This happens ever day in medicine.
- numpad0 2y ago> The way you discover a lot of problems is because of the trial patients. I don't think that's the case with medical researches at all. They have good ideas of outcome with petri dishes and chimera mice before verifying the result with human trials. They didn't made COVID vaccines by trial and error on living humans, that could have taken a century. Especially with neural stuffs. If they can't make it work not with cultured cells and guinea pigs, there's nothing to be gained from scaling it out to an explosive failure on a launchpad.
- pelorat 2y ago> they really shouldn't be used outside of medical necessity until we have a better grasp on It's a medical study whose purpose is just to get a better grasp of things.