Re:Walking naturally after spinal cord injury using a brain–...
by 0xbadc0de5 on Wednesday May 24, 2023 @01:51PM
(#36061703)
The research subject has an incomplete C5/C6 injury and still cannot walk unassisted. Not to mention still has limited use of their hands and likely severely impacted somatosensation. It's not physically possible to manufacture implants dense enough to re-map the entirety (or even a useful fraction) of motor and sensory pathways. Attempting to implant a significant number of artificial electrodes also risks further damage.
I'm not claiming that regenerative treatments and implants can't progress in parallel. I'm simply claiming implants are a dead-end and are distracting resources away from regenerative research.
Re:Walking naturally after spinal cord injury using a brain–...
by _joel on Wednesday May 24, 2023 @02:08PM
(#36061913)
You literally said this wouldn't help spinal injuries, which the PoC has and now you're changing it to 'unassisted'
Do you have data to show funding gets moved away from regenerative research?
Apart from the person in their study who can now walk, that had the spinal injury (with the use of a crawler)...
In relation to your second point, you are aware regenereative science and this implant approach can progress in parallel? This offers something tangible, plus with more refining can be rolled out en masse. What regenerative science can be applied now that would give such a quality of life improvement?