Elon Musk’s Brain Implant Coming: What Are the Risks?
Imagine searching Google with your mind, committing your thoughts to a journal without lifting a finger, and directing superhuman robotic strength
Imagine: all of your thoughts decoded into a language compatible with computers. Running through a server. Controlled by—hopefully, someone who’s trustworthy.
Consider all that, and you have a taste for the context surrounding Neuralink.
For those who haven’t been following, Neuralink was started by Elon Musk in 2016 to develop microchips that can send and receive data directly from the human brain.
The subject is undeniably fascinating and very portentous. However, as with many frontier scientific topics, this emergent technology has risks and concerns. As Spiderman’s Uncle Ben once said: “With great power comes great responsibility.”
What Is the Neuralink Chip?
The Neuralink chip is a small piece of hardware a little wider and thicker than a quarter. Attached to the chip are 64 wires, each just a few microns thick and with 16 microscopic electrodes on it. (For reference, a micron is one-fifteenth the width of a single hair.)
Part of how brain cells communicate is by sending tiny electrical impulses. For this reason, clinicians and scientists use devices with electrodes—most commonly, a noninvasive encephalography (EEG) cap—to gauge brain activity by measuring cell signaling.
It follows that if neurons use electrical impulses to coordinate their functions, then we can also affect brain function by sending impulses from an electrode to the cells. In some serious neurological cases—such as epilepsy, Parkinson’s disease, or chronic pain—deep brain stimulation (DBS) uses electrical signals to modify cell signaling therapeutically.
The advantage of implants is precision. With external devices, the skull and tissue attenuate part of the signal. Thus, for fine-grained functions like, say, flexing your finger, invasive electrodes provide better accuracy when both measuring and delivering impulses.
How Is the Neuralink Chip Used?
The Neuralink chip is surgically implanted. During the procedure, a precision robot drills a hole into a person’s skull, then gingerly pushes the threads into the brain. The process takes a few hours.
After healing, the device is invisible but for a minimal scar and is designed to be charged through customized items, like a special pillow or baseball cap. The surgery is expected to cost insurers about $40,000.
Neuralink has begun a patient registry, and the current focus of first-phase trials will be enabling those with quadriplegia to control a computer with their thoughts. The brain works fine in these cases, but the nerve connections to muscles are damaged.
By measuring signals in an area controlling finger and hand movements, called the motor cortex, the Neuralink chip transmits the data to a computer.
Thus, instead of moving their hand, a patient would simply think about it. This supports things like texting, surfing the web, and navigating menus with the mind.
Neuralink’s chief competitors, Synchron and Onward, have had a head start on tests with humans, enabling computer navigation along with walking, cycling, and swimming. Additionally, implant BCIs have been around for about 20 years, pioneered by Blackrock Neurotech.
However, Neuralink hopes to offer a less clunky device with much higher resolution, with a boost from the company’s cutting-edge AI. In BCIs, this could mean more precise capabilities.
At a Neuralink demonstration on Aug. 28, 2020, Mr. Musk shared his belief that not only will most people develop brain or spine problems eventually, but also that an implantable device like the Neuralink can solve these and other problems.
The Potential Risks of Biotechnology
Understandably, the potential biotechnology has for medical applications, cognitive enhancement, quality of life, and cutting-edge research has many intrigued.
Yet the new tech isn’t without concerns. For one, there’s the question of consent. Families of vulnerable persons may be desperate for a cure and opt in for their paralyzed family member. In the case of those who cannot communicate freely due to paralysis (“locked-in syndrome”), new beta-test technology may put them at risk of undesirable outcomes.
Additionally, new biotechnology comes with unknown risks and side effects, especially if it artificially influences biochemical activity. Targeting one symptom may unintentionally produce another.
While Neuralink has been tested on animals for several years, other issues may arise in its in-human trials. Even in medical treatments that have become more mainstream, we are still learning that some have long-term, far-reaching, and negative consequences.
Another issue that comes with the potential neuroenhancement that Neuralink could enable is a similar one discussed regarding gene therapy and sports drugs. That is, if you change the playing field, will it create more inequity?
Moreover, for those resistant to this emerging technology, does it promote a world where they face pressure to “keep up” with those who embrace such a shift?
Where to from here?
Many scientific breakthroughs are driven by competition—the desire to build something grand, to be the first, and to “do one better” than one’s predecessors.
Yet Mr. Musk has said that he pushes his team so hard because he believes this chip is a way to help millions and save humanity from the looming threat of artificial intelligence.
But to what end? Is humanity ready for this step? Will we still be human? Something better? Different?
Or, will we have crossed a line that leads to a good life at the expense of augmenting certain aspects?
This is a conversation we must have as a society—one that will undoubtedly grow more necessary as time rolls on.
See more here theepochtimes
Header image: H Ko / Shutterstock
About the author: Robert Backer, Ph.D., is a psychologist, neuroscientist, academic researcher, and consultant. His work has spanned multiple institutions, including the University of Pennsylvania, University of Delaware, Columbia, Yale, NYU, and the NIH. His background encompasses clinical psychology and health care, as well as social, cognitive, and organizational psychology.
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Howdy
| #
Aside from the negatives, hacking and control etc, I wouldn’t trust anything produced with this guy in charge. History shows that his tech cannot be trusted to do what it says. Too erratic, and the focus is not on the person, more the tech, and what glory it can garner.
Reply
Tom
| #
This is the clown we trust for our future? Along with those turds fauci and gates, no thanks.
Reply
VOWG
| #
The primary risk is that it WILL kill people.
Reply