The University of Southampton

Author: Gagandeep Singh Josan

Replacing body parts: From fiction to reality

Posted on by

Films like the Six Million Dollar Man (1973) and Robocop (1987) explore the possibility of replacing body parts. Now, nearly 50 years on, are we any closer to turning fiction into reality?

Travelling to the hospital for my first anatomy session was truly eye opening and brought back memories of watching Robocop in school. Examining cadavers, joint replacements, and implants with the smell of formaldehyde lingering in the air was something I didn’t think I would experience. As I saw what progress was being made towards what these films predicted, I left wondering how did we get here and what’s next?

A brief history:

Humans have been trying to replace body parts for a long time. Studies suggest that an Egyptian toe prosthetic from 1000BC may have been the earliest prosthetic. Following this, there is evidence of the Incans in South America having successfully performed a cranioplasty in 1000AD. We have since gone beyond making limb replacements to replacing major organs (including heart, kidney, lungs, and pancreas), functional advancements in bionic prosthetics aswell as using stem cells to “grow” new body parts.

The evolution of prosthetic legs

Current advancements:

Following a lecture on sensing technology, I began to appreciate the next step in this evolution and reflected on what this means for people with disabilities, prosthetics, and even paralysed individuals. This technology is present in Elon Musk’s Neuralink implant, which uses sensors to create a brain-computer interface to restore movement and eyesight. It works by sensing signals in the brain, interpreting the users intentions and sending this information to a receivers to have its effect. Pairing this sensing technology with prosthetics will prove to be vital in making artificial body replacements functional and more lifelike. However, due to a lack of testing, there is still alot unknown about the long term effects.

The first recipient of the Neuralink implant playing a game of chess online, among other examples of sensor technology, demonstrating we have gone beyond merely replacing limbs.

But, what’s the catch?

While these advancements may improve one’s quality of life, there is the potential to create social inequality, therefore ensuring fair distribution and affordability is important. Further, the long term impacts of new technologies like Neuralink implants must be investigated due to concerns regarding nonmaleficence, autonomy and consent. Individuals must be made aware of the treatments and possible long term impacts before making decisions. As we advance, we must consider the effects of these body replacements and what it means to be human? To me, expressing ourselves through our emotions and interactions with the people around us is key. Loosing limbs and the ability to do certain things affects this, so if someone needs a prosthetic, joint replacement, implant, or another type of body replacement in order to feel like themselves, then I think they should have that opportunity. Equally, it is important question, how far is too far? Are there certain limits we shouldn’t exceed and are there any exceptions?

Final thoughts:

This is a complex topic, and we are limited in what we can achieve but advancements are continuously being made. There is a lot to consider regarding ethics, and each situation is different, but we must balance innovation with what is right. It is important to note that this is an interdisciplinary effort, with the need for engineers, lawyers and scientists and this is something I am interested in getting involved in. We have come a long way, but we still have some way to go before we see our own Robocop.

The ethics of genetic engineering

Posted on by

On the 26th of July 1978, Louise Joy Brown, the first test tube baby was born. Nearly 50 years on, are we any closer to editing our imperfections and what are the implications?

What is genetic engineering?

Genetic engineering is the process of modifying an organisms DNA. Aside from helping couples who are otherwise unable to have babies, recent advancements in the field ranges from the eradication of malaria to the production of synthetic human insulin to reducing the risk of genetic diseases. The benefits of genetic engineering also extends beyond humans, with the development food crops that are resistant to extreme weather, ecological and soil conditions. An example of the technology used is Crispr CAS (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Palindromic Repeats), which edits an organisms genome by removing/adding/modifying DNA. The first babies born using Crispr CAS9 edited genes was born on 25th November 2018, suggesting we are getting closer to editing our imperfections.

The ethics debate

However, despite these benefits, the question remains: Is it ethical? Indeed, these technologies are beneficial to couples who are otherwise unable to have children, however, there is potential for this technology to be misused. The ability to select for certain genes has given rise to “designer babies” where features of interest can be selected for with other undesirable features selected against. While this can be beneficial in selecting against genes susceptible to disease, the fact remains that there are multiple ethical issues?

One major issue is the potential to increase social inequality. Due to the financial cost only the rich can afford this technology, increasing the gap between those who can afford it and those cannot. Further, we may also be creating a society where certain traits are seen as more desirable, resulting in discrimination towards those without the preferred features, aswell as a loss of diversity. Another concern is the issue autonomy and informed consent as it is the embryos that are being modified, questioning whether the parents have the right to make life changing decisions of their future children, especially if they are non-medical. Further, the long term consequences are largely unknown and could have side effects in the individual and future generations.

Conclusion

The ethics of genetic engineering are complex. Indeed, the possibility of advancement and improvement to health are massive, but the side effects and potential misuse is equally big and must be considered. Nevertheless, it is important that there is a balance between allowing for innovation and protecting human right.

Links

Guardian Research Department (2011). 1978: The First Test Tube Baby. The Guardian. [online] 2 Jun. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/from-the-archive-blog/2011/jun/02/guardian190-test-tube-baby-1978 [Accessed 1 Mar. 2024].

Mirage News (2023). Designer Babies & Ethics of Human Genetic Engineering. [online] Mirage News. Available at: https://www.miragenews.com/designer-babies-ethics-of-human-genetic-992678/ [Accessed 1 Mar. 2024].

Rose, B.I. and Brown, S. (2019). Genetically Modified Babies and a First Application of Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR-Cas9). Obstetrics & Gynecology, [online] 134(1), p.1. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000003327.

Neuralink: A cause for concern?

Posted on by
Elon Musk's Neuralink brain chip implanted in 1st human - National | Globalnews.ca

Brain implants and robotic limb replacements have become an area of increasing interest. The most recent step in advancement being the implantation of a brain implant into the brain of a human by Elon Musk’s Neuralink company. The aim of this is to allow people to control devices with just their thoughts

Indeed, this isn’t the first instance of brain implants being used. Previous examples include Gert-Jan Oskam who used an implant to allow him to stand and walk. Technology has also advanced with robotic arms being tested in monkeys allowing them to control the arm to eat.

However, this all raises the question of should we still be weary of these developments as well as question the motives behind them. As with an implant, there is the risk of infection. It is also worth noting that despite the advertised successes, there are instances where the public and investors were misled abut the safety of the brain implant. Records showed that monkeys with the implant experienced paralysis, seizures and brain swelling. This forces us to question, is he hiding anything else?