Slashdot Mirror
Scientist to Implant Electrode in His Own Brain?
BartlebyScrivener writes to tell us the MIT Technology Review is reporting that even thought scientists know quite a bit about the brain, one researcher is trying to take it a step further towards understanding consciousness by implanting an electrode in his own brain. From the article: "Bill Newsome, a neuroscientist at Stanford University in Palo Alto, CA, has spent the last twenty years studying how neurons encode information and how they use it to make decisions about the world. In the 1990s, he and collaborators were able to change the way a monkey responded to its environment by sending electric jolts to certain parts of its brain. The findings gave neuroscientists enormous insight into the inner workings of the brain."
I've been looking for a remote controlled neuroscientist for years!!!
Finding other idiots on
Most hardcore scientist ever. He's going to implant it in his own head with no anesthesia.
to the "Wire" from Ringworld... where do I sign up?
Hmm, I wonder how likely it is that he'll end up with a Darwin award...
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
n the 1990s, he and collaborators were able to change the way a monkey responded to its environment by sending electric jolts to certain parts of its brain.
Hey, I can get a monkey to respond differently to its environment by sending electric shocks to any part of its anatomy, why go to the bother of wiring up its brain directly.
That would have worked if you hadn't stopped me.
This story sounds shocking to the mind.
Join the TWIT army now!
Taking the brain out was the easy part. The hard part was taking the brain out.
In the 1990s, he and collaborators were able to change the way a monkey responded to its environment by sending electric jolts to certain parts of its brain.
But were they able to finally help monkeys write A Tale of Two Cities without that pesky "It was the best of times, it was the BLURST of times..." typo? Stupid monkey!
Join the TWIT army now!
I mean, what will happen when the implant is turned on and the neuroscientist becomes self-aware?
"In the 1990s, he and collaborators were able to change the way a monkey responded to its environment by sending electric jolts to certain parts of its brain. The findings gave neuroscientists enormous insight into the inner workings of the brain."
And from this we have come to the conclusion that the monkey really hated it
It's good to see that "thought scientists know quite a bit about the brain."
The article is full of how he wants to do it, but would probably have trouble getting approval and so on. If this is news, alert the media that one day I "want" to fly around in a jetpack while robot slaves do all my work and it rains Kool-Aid.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
I am Locutous of Borg...
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
Can you really gather that much information from a single electrode in a single location? I would have thought this would be of pretty limited benifit. Still I'm not a neuroscientists - maybe it's going to give stacks of data.
I can't believe we still know so little about how the brain works actually. It feels like all our attempts to understand it (PET, MRI, electrodes, etc), while amazing, as still at the caveman stage of development e.g. hit it with a rock until it does something. I would have thought there would have been far more interest into researching how the brain functions.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
Isaac Newton poked a bodkin through his eyelid and prodded the outside of his eyeball to convince himself that sensations of light originated in the eye.
. implicit all IIRC IM*HO £0.02 YM?V
Isn't this how most comic book supervillians get created? Scientist tries new procedure on themselves to produce extraordinary results. I'm thinking we should take names for what his supervillian name should be and who his archnemesis is.
And since he will then be no longer in a position to make an objective observation, the monkeys will start making experiments with him.
But seriously, experiments like this will ultimately lead to a more inhuman society. Think of cops with satellite aided
vision or marines with remote controlled wapons. There should be an international law/treaty against it, like we have for certain biological wapons or nukes.
I'm sure his tombstone will read:
...
Chased a dream
... but never got around to
reading the second half of
Michael Chrichton's
"The Terminal Man."
My work here is dung.
How many times do we have to say it? "Don't Experiment on Yourself!" That is what Igor and the unsuspecting villagers are for.
Doesn't this guy READ the Journal of Mad Scientists and Eccentric Inventors?
Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
The scientist is from Stanford. The technology review that printed the article is from MIT.
RTFA, this was supposed to be a romantic Valentine's Day present for his girlfriend (complete with remote).
My work here is dung.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"The findings gave neuroscientists enormous insight into the inner workings of the brain"
Funny this is the exact way that the functions of the brain where mapped out. When cancer patients went in for surgery local anesthetic was given (the brain has no pain receptors, only the skin, skull, and the membranes around the brain). The doctors after surgery would stimulate different areas of the brain with extremely low voltages and observe the response in the patient. Sometimes the patient would smell a rose, other times muscles would twitch, and sometimes the patient would fall asleep. There is a study from the 50's that linked aggression to a certain region in the brain. When a cat had its lateral hypothalamus stimulated it became ferocious and would attack anything in sight. On the other hand when the Ventral Hypothalamus was stimulated the cat would recoil in fear when it saw even a baby mouse.
Now it is true that we are learning more and more about the brain and its region specific functions everyday. But take it from me this is more of a publicity stunt then someone trying to do real science.
I should point out that Newsome is a fairly well known name in the Neuroscience field. And however crazy this idea is (which, IMHO, is really high up there), he wouldn't be the first neuroscientist to do an experiment on himself. I can't remember his name, but another person vivesected his own arm to understand how sensory nerves worked. Not to mention, researchers put themselves in TMS machines, that essentially shuts down parts of the brain by means of large magnetic fields.
Not only that, but apperently the chip is implanted by means of a 28-gauge shotgun.
Can we even scientifically study consciousness? A large component of what most of us mean by consciousness is probably metaphysical. Certainly it is inherently subjective. While I think that neurobiology and neuropsychology are worthy enterprises, it seems like they should invent a new term for what they mean by consciousness.
This is a huge undertaking though. It took physics a long time (what, ~170 years after Newton) to be able to understand how microscopic physics related to the behavior of a simple macroscopic gas. They really even didn't really get it right until after Planck. The brain is, of course, much more complicated than a simple gas, and the chemistry controlling the action of individual neurons is much more complicated than Newton's physics. Maybe the standards for "understanding" are lower, but all the same, this is going to be extremely difficult, I imagine, if it is even possible. (As I understand it, there are certain philosophers who think it is not, but I am not in a position to have an opinion.
This somehow reminds me of Tom Tucker's apology on a season 2 episode of Family Guy. I wonder what this guy did to seek an apology?
*beep beep*
Security guard: Sir, could you step over here for a moment. You've set off the metal detector.
Dr. Newsome: Oh, you must be referring to my cleverly implanted electrode that I put in my brain. Here's my doctor's note explaining the whole thing.
Security guard: Right, you put an electrode in your own brain?
Dr. Newsome: Just read the note, it'll explain everything.
Security guard: Sir, this note is signed by yourself. You can't write your own doctor's note. Do you have any other documentation? A note from your mother perhaps...
Dr. Newsome: No, but can I get on the plane now?
(I'm all for deep brain stim, as it has been proven to help with Parkinson's and other nervous disorders, but putting it in *yourself* is just hotdogging.)
"When he went deeper into the brain, into the temporal cortex, he could elicit complex perceptions. A patient would say things like, 'I'm sitting on the back porch of my mother's house and she's calling me to dinner.'"
Could this be developed further? How realistic was the perception? I guess that's exactly the question Newsome would like to answer. The mind reels.
from TFA:
Getting approval to do something like this would be difficult. Any human experiments in this country are under rigorous scrutiny. Lawyers and administrators at institutions take a dim view of this kind of thing because of the liability issues. And there is a definite slippery slope argument. I might be able to make a case for my own experiment, but it could set precedent for others for whom it would be more risky...Some young graduate student might see it as a way to get ahead in his career and decide to do it.
Would these regulators find it easier to approve of such things if this scientist were an idiot and merely did these things for fun? It seems like even an elementary respect for personal autonomy - which suffices to allow skydiving and elephant training and smoking - ought to allow someone to take risks that are far lower, for rewards that, at least to me, appear rather more noble and inspiring. In fact, I'd assume anyone who pierces their dick or forks their tongue or something faces long-term risks from injury or infection that much higher than anything this man's considering with (his own!!) head under controlled circumstances.
Don't get me wrong...I'm NOT arguing that any of the other things I mentioned ought to be more strictly regulated. I just think we're succumbing a bit too much to mad-scientist paranoia in treating this experiment differently.
I did it, and there was no brain damage-amage-amage-amage-amage.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere