What is novel is that there is a drastically greater density of probes that can be inserted, far more precisely and far more quickly, and much thinner compared to the previous state of the art.It's not exactly novel. Another company performed a similar implantation a year prior.
May have something to do with those ideas so far being unfounded, and under investigation by regulators for animals rights abuse.
Nothing is 'unfounded' about the ideas.
As to the 'animal rights abuse' - the complaint was that a university surgeon doing work for Neuralink implanting the electrodes used 'BioGlue' during the implantation.
The holes were then filled with a surgical adhesive called BioGlue. Soon thereafter, Neuralink and UC Davis staff killed Animal 8.
BioGlue had never been approved for use in the experiment, which is a serious violation—or “noncompliance” in USDA’s language—of the Animal Welfare Act.
https://www.pcrm.org/news/news-rele...-free-pass-animal-welfare-act-violations-usda
It is a substance that had previously been successfully used and determined safe and effective for neurological cranial and spinal surgery,
https://thejns.org/view/journals/j-neurosurg/133/6/article-p1928.xml
The USDA ended the investigation - I don't think there was any sanction, and no real reason for there to be.
The only legit issue I'm aware of is "improper packaging of hazardous waste" for which they were fined.
https://www.fiercebiotech.com/medte...us-material-transport-rules-docs-show-reuters
Upvote
-35
(8
/
-43)