Human brain extended: Neuralink's brain-computer interface trial starts

Abstract

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), an advanced technology that is designed to record and decode brain activity, may transmit information communication between the brain and external devices, such as computers, wheelchairs, and robotic arms¹ (Figure 1). Elon Musk recently tweeted: his Neuralink company revolutionizes BCI technology, announcing a clinical trial of the implantation of a “brain-reading” device into a human, which has enlightened the field of neurotechnology. This trial represents a milestone in the long journey to improve BCIs, a scientific area aimed to restore functionality to those with severe paralysis and expanding the boundaries of human-machine interaction.

This innovative technology might transform the lives of individuals with motor disabilities, enabling them to control a computer, robotic arm, wheelchair, or other device by thinking about it and interact with the world through these devices. Neuralink's device is not the only BCI technology under development. Other companies and research groups, like BCI Pioneers Coalition, are also working on similar technologies, and some of them have earlier entered to human trials. If proven its effectivity and safety, Nerualink's device may significantly change the field (Figure 1).

However, announcing the trial has also raised a slew of concerns. First, the lack of detailed information about the trial has frustrated some neuroscientists and engineers. While we heard information about the trial's commencement that may be found in a proper channel. The main source of public information lacks crucial details, such as the location of implantations and exact outcomes, which may complicate the trial and cause anxiety in the public.

In addition, there is no registration about this trial at ClinicalTrials.gov, raising ethical concerns. Registration at this online repository is typically required by trial institutes to ensure transparency and adherence to ethical principles designed to protect participants in clinical trials. If bypassed these important checks and balances, the trial may compromise the safety and well-being of the participants.

Another dispute with the Neuralink's trial is that its pre-existing animal experiments caused too many animal deaths. According to the Reuters in December 2022, Neuralink's trials resulted in the deaths of more than 1500 animals, and an employee wrote internally to point out that the company's rush to meet the schedule caused many employees to be nervous, thus increasing the non-essential suffering and death of the animals under test. Miguel Nicolelis, professor of neuroscience at Duke University School of Medicine in the United States (father of brain computer interface), has previously said that invasive brain computer interfaces are for scientific research, and are not the best choice for patients, and the implantation method should be limited to very serious cases.

Despite these potential adverse issues, the scientific community and public are happy and excite to see this progress as commented by the president of the international BCI Society, Dr. Mariska Vansteensel. This cautious optimism reflects the potential significance of Neuralink's work but also the need for rigorous testing and validation before this technology can be widely used. On the contrary, Cai Lei, an ALS campaigner and former vice president of JD.com Group, believes that brain-computer interfaces can't save lives, but only increase communication.

Perhaps most important, some implantable BCIs sit on the surface of the brain and record the average firing of clusters of neurons, but the Neuralink's device and at least two other devices can penetrate the brain and record the activity of individual neurons.² Whether Neuralink's trial will have success is totally unknown and dependent on critical factors, like the safety and tolerability of the implanted device, its ability to accurately record and decode brain signals, and the effectiveness of the interface in enabling patients to control external devices. Because of the acute need for individuals with motor disabilities or healthy individuals seeking to enhance their cognitive and physical capabilities, the public hope to hear more positive results that the trial may eventually achieve.

With the continued efforts of Neuralink and other companies, the future of BCI technology may be very bright as the AI technology fast progresses (i.e., the recent Sora's birth). Patients that are unable to move freely for physical reasons, with BCI technology, could control machines with their minds, be free to travel around the world, and communicate with others, resulting in much improved life quality and regaining their independence and dignity.

Nevertheless, we must admit facing plenty of challenges with any new technology. It is vital to obtain deeper understanding of how the brain processes and parses information, and how to safely perform implantation procedures without hurting brain function. Moreover, the release of unconventional trial emphasizes the importance of ethical standards and protecting patients’ privacy, warranting a healthy technology development.

Collectively, this Neuralink's brain-computer interface trial boasts a significant milestone in neurotechnology research. Musk more recently announced again that the trail seems quite successful in restoring the patient's neuronal function and improving the life quality². While this trial brings to us a surprisingly exciting progress, lack of transparency and ethical considerations are also surrounding the human trial. Hence, the authority, technology developers and clinicians need to closely monitor its progress, evaluate the safety and efficacy of the implanted device, and ensure adherence to ethical principles designed to protect the rights of the participants. Hence, through rigorous examining and validation alongside many additional innovations, human beings may eventually see the full potential of BCIs for those with the greatest need.

Min Wu provided the conception, funding support, revision and supervision. Yonghan Zhang conducted the literature research and wrote the initial manuscript and drew the figure. All authors have read and approved to publish the article.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Not applicable.