• Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    What’s the alternative? We either don’t create this technology at all or we do and accept the fact that it’s going to involve a lot of trial and error. You don’t just skip all that and jump to the final product. There’s only so much you can test on animals which exactly isn’t the most ethical thing to begin with anyway. At some point you’re going to need to stick it in a human brain.

    The first heart transplant recepient died after 18 days. Should we have not done that either?

    • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      That’s just untrue. There are a lot of options between “give up” and “proceed irresponsibly”. After all the animals they’ve scrapped why are the human subjects having the EXACT SAME PROBLEMS that were identified in the animals. This is Musk’s typical “fail fast” strategy to advance research faster, but in the medical field the failures damage real humans.

      Completely irresponsible!

      The FDA regulatory failure with neuralink is as bad as the FAA’s failure with Boeing.