A giant leap for mankind.


Not my words - incidentally, don't miss the VW ad

Two monkeys have been trained to eat morsels of food using a robotic arm controlled by thoughts that are relayed through a set of electrodes connecting the animal's brain to a computer, scientists have announced.

The astonishing feat is being seen as a major breakthrough in the development of robotic prosthetic limbs and other automated devices that can be manipulated by paralysed patients using mind control alone.

This is just so very interesting on so many different planes. There is work being done all over the world in so many different research organisations, a partial list here. Inevitably, there is a good wiki on the subject.

The possibilities are astounding, and the implications go far beyond the medical applications. Theoretically, we could be talking about just keeping somebody alive for their brain function alone, which throws up immense moral and social questions about the advisability of doing this to someone with no sensory inputs, or a physical (and sexual - we talk about this all the time now, thanks to K) cripple in terms of output.

The most interesting part in all this, of course, is identifying the neural networks related, not just to motor or sensory processes, but related to the areas controlling the cognitive process.

.

--

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Personally I can't wait (#96768)
by Sulla

for the army battalion of fully armed and armored robot monkeys.

--

"That Sam-I-am! That Sam-I-am! I do not like that Sam-I-am!"- Dr. Seuss

It will already happened (#96777)
by Punditus Maximus

The Future Preenactment Society has given us our clues.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

Robots? (#96774)
by aireachail

Bring 'em on.

--

Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. - W. Somerset Maugham

Just Send. . . (#96772)
by M Scott Eiland

. . .a few of these.

--

Question for our insurance experts. (#96771)
by hobbesist

If I'm attacked by some monkey/robot hybrid, would this kind of policy cover it?

--

Brevis esse laboro, obscurus fio.

Well, they could get it into your Death and Dismemberment (#96787)
by BlaiseP

policy. But only if you don't have a pacemaker. You'd run afoul of their Cyborg caveat. And those motorized wheelchairs they show on the late-nite tee-vee from the Scooter Store, all those suspiciously cheerful oldsters in their gated communities in Potemkinville, with their sinister Cylon grandchildren handing them bouquets of flowers? No self-respecting human child would do such a thing, not without a kick and a prod from his mother on Grandma's birthday.

What if they doped your prune juice, spirited you away and screwed hideous robot parts onto your wrinkly old body and you didn't know until it was all done? Unscrupulous orthopedic surgical residents, oh they're everywhere, scheming and plotting with Ralph the nursing home janitor and Esmeralda that truculent beady-eyed Filipino nurse, the one who smokes by the dumpster in back. Next time the crash cart comes sailing down the hall to defibrillate some semblance of peristalsis back into your colon, you might wake up to find yourself with mechanical appurtenances maybe God didn't intend for people to have attached to 'em.

Can't be too careful these days.

I wouldn't diminish the significance of this experiment (#96667)
by BlaiseP

but this is but a crude foreshadowing. We must achieve non-intrusive mechanisms of reading the mind's intentions. We have barely begun to explore the medulla, the Olivary bodies, especially the inferior olivary process, which seems to be a dandy point to look at the switching system from the midbrain to motor coordination. We don't know jack about the medulla, what with all the focus on the much sexier brain box, the medulla oblongata and cerebellum are the breakout boxes for proprioception and motor functions. We're busily oohing and ahhing over the shiny engine, ignoring the steering wheel and gearshift.

I've got moral qualms about primate research. I suppose I shouldn't, but I do. Not going to point fingers or cast aspersions, but I wouldn't do it. Call me an old softy, but it hurts my soul to see such things.

OK, but would you be willing to forego the benefits of (#96669)
by mmghosh

primate research - say if you developed Parkinson's after 20 years?

That's really the sticking point. Although I also agree that primate research has a lousy past.

Ugh! Don't we have enough humans with Parkinson's? (#96674)
by BlaiseP

You are willing to induce Parkinson's in a sentient primate? Hell no, Manish! We already know other primates aren't useful in vivo Parkinson's candidates. How many times are we going to have to go round the block, as we did with Huntington's Chorea and stroke medications. Didn't the Carbenoxalone fiasco teach us a goddamn thing? We cure a gastric ulcer and induce a fatal sodium imbalance. How many people died because of isoprenaline-related arrhythmias? Because it worked so well in primates. Gosh.

If primates were a useful analog, there'd be some validity to experimenting on them. We're learning they're not. Beyond any moral scruples, it's just bad science.

I was actually talking about cell culture in primate research. (#96681)
by mmghosh

And no, its not rejected science, not yet, anyway.

But that's not what I was talking about, in a sense. My point was more philosophical. More clearly, are there any circumstances where you would forego the possible benefits of primate research?

I'm deliberately making a grey area somewhat more black and white for the sake of argument, of course.

My position is that I would have no objection, provided the studies met current standards of humane experimentation.

Heh. When we can get a rhesus monkey to sign a consent form (#96685)
by BlaiseP

we'll have something to talk about. Meanwhile, primate research has yielded many valuable drugs for the alleviation of artificially-induced conditions in communities of sentient primates isolated in tiny steel cages, though they naturally congregate in troupes to groom each other and care for their babies collectively.

Perhaps we can also administer psychiatric drugs to relieve their psychotic fugues and rages. Let's attenuate their misery with valium and thorazine: those drugs worked so well on them in the past when the pharmaceutical industry was ready for in vivo experiments and needed to calculate lethality. Creatures so similar to us, so useful if so obviously inferior, become such obvious candidates for medical research.

Forgive me if I wax prolix on this subject of primates. The pig is a far more obvious candidate for in vivo experiments.

There is that little problem of trafficking in primates (#96696)
by BlaiseP

from the jungles and savannas of the world's last remaining wild places. Let's monetize the capture of disappearing species.

People often wonder why West Africa is so completely screwed up in present times. During the heyday of the slave trade, the once-prosperous and reasonably efficient societies of the west coast of Africa went through a catastrophic collapse, as the warlord slavers would capture their fellow men and march them off to the great slave markets of the Benin and Port Harcourt. The White Man didn't have to do the dirty work of capturing these people: the locals did it all for them.

In like manner, we are witness to a trade in primates, our fellow beings, creatures I have loved since I was a small boy. I raised a tiny vervet monkey child my father rescued from a marketplace. Her mother had been killed, and she was secured by a piece of coat hanger which had ulcerated around her waist.

She grew up, first in the house, then took up residence on the veranda, then moved out into the mango tree over the henhouse. Never confined, she left for longer and longer periods of time, then left for quite a while. We figured she'd matured and gone back into the savanna.

She returned one afternoon, with her babies in tow. It was obviously her, the scar around her waist gave her away. She let me hold her, but would not let me touch her babies. She left and never returned. Her name was Jojo, and part of my heart will always be given to that tiny, battered creature who once licked the sugar from the bottom of my teacup and curled up in it, for it was warm and held her whole body.

I don't like anthropomorphizing animals. They are what they are, and they'd suffer in the wild, probably end up eaten by a eagle or a snake. I admit I'm prejudiced, and told you why. But Jojo taught me what's real about vervet monkeys. They don't belong in individual steel cages any more than human beings do, reduced to artificially-induced misery and blank screaming madness. These are our fellow beings. We are destroying their forests, we are monetizing their capture. And it must stop. It is unnecessary, it serves no good scientific purpose and it is evil.

Primate research has been essential in polio vaccine development (#96711)
by mmghosh

and neurotoxicity research. While it is true that cell lines and trangenic mice are being increasingly used in poliovirus preparations (and these are derived from vervets as in the Vero cell lines), live animal research is still mandatory by the WHO

NHPs (Non Human Primates) are the only experimental species that can be successfully infected with the poliomyelitis virus and are, therefore, extensively used for producing and testing polio vaccine. Since the 1960s, only captivebred long-tailed macaques and wild-caught vervet monkeys have been used, both of which are free from the SV40 virus. A major polio vaccine producer based in Europe uses kidney cells derived from approximately 150 vervet monkeys per annum to produce between 600-1000 million doses of the vaccine.

Unfortunately, the primate test remains the gold standard for OPV neurovirulence testing, and the WHO Committee recommended that this test
should still be used to assess new virus seedlots or changes in the manufacturing process.

OTOH Rhesus macaques are the standard primate experimental model.

They are generally obtained from Northern Indian strains, and are generally not ill-treated while in captivity.

The Rhesus Macaque is well known to science owing to its relatively easy upkeep in captivity, and has been used extensively in medical and biological research. It has given its name to the Rhesus factor, one of the elements of a person's blood group, by the discoverers of the factor, Karl Landsteiner and Alexander Wiener. The Rhesus Macaque was also used in the well-known experiments on maternal deprivation carried out in the 1950s by comparative psychologist Harry Harlow. NASA launched Rhesus Macaques into space during the 1950s and 60s, and the Soviet/Russian space program launched them into space as recently as 1997 on the Bion missions.
In January of 2000, the Rhesus Macaque became the first cloned primate with the birth of Tetra. January 2001 saw the birth of ANDi, the first transgenic primate; ANDi carries foreign genes originally from a jellyfish.
Work on the genome of the Rhesus Macaque was completed in 2007,[3] making Rhesus Macaque the second non-human primate to have its genome sequenced. The study [4] shows that humans and macaques share about 93% of their DNA sequence and shared a common ancestor roughly 25 million years ago.
Though most studies of the Rhesus Macaque are from various locations in northern India, some of our knowledge of the natural behaviour of the species comes from studies carried out on a colony established by the Caribbean Primate Research Center of the University of Puerto Rico on the island of Cayo Santiago, off Puerto Rico. There are no predators on the island, and humans are not permitted to land except as part of the research programmes. The colony is provisioned to some extent, but about 50% of its food comes from natural foraging. In other more controlled settings, these macaques often enjoy Fig Newtons and apricots, and are particularly keen on "pouching" large quantities of marshmallow.

Rhesus macaques, whatever else they might be, are not an endangered species. In fact, over here, they have a somewhat greater reputation as pests.

Rhesus and Bonnets are among the most commensal of non-human primates in India, often thriving in agricultural areas and human habitats: villages, towns, cities, temple sites, and public parks. They live in forest areas, but
are most conspicuous in human-dominated environments where they are frequent pests. As such, they are at the opposite end of the conservation spectrum—the problem becomes one of population control of excessive numbers, rather than total protection of declining numbers.

The export of Rhesus macaques for biomedical research has been banned from 1978, and the colonies of Rhesus macaques in laboratories is maintained by breeding.

As for types of African vervet monkeys that are used for biomedical research, they do not seem to be actually a threatened species.

One might think the trade in illegally obtained primates (#96716)
by BlaiseP

has stopped completely. Gosh, to think all this has completely stopped.

India is by far the guiltiest party in the trade in primates used for biomedical research.

Bio-medical research: Primates are captured and traded for use in experiments in bio-medical research. Among animals experimented upon in Indian labs, monkeys form ca. 3%, of which 90% are Rhesus macaques, followed by the Hanuman langur and Bonnet macaque (8%), while the remaining 2% comprises other primate species (Dr Iqbal Malik, Primatologist, pers. comm.). The experiments range from infectious diseases to animal behaviour, with the Pig-tailed macaque in current demand for HIV (AIDS virus) research by medical medical laboratories (Srivastava, 1999). Rhesus macaques are used in investigations on toxicology, organ transplant, testing of drugs, tissue transplant, liver disease, caloric studies, drug abuse and several other diseases. Field interviews with traders suggest that several hospitals and laboratories obtain primates from dealers based in Varanasi and Lucknow.

This paper is fairly old, perhaps India has put a stop to this sort of thing. I'd like to think so. But my guess is, not much has. I'd love to be proven wrong.

The vervet monkey is, well, just beyond the pale for me personally. I've already said why. Again, I'd take the folks who think it's so necessary to use captive wild creatures for medical research aside and at least let the monkeys live some semblance of a normal life, in a troupe setting, and not in abominable steel cages.

Your figures are not correct today. (#96727)
by mmghosh

You are correct that it used to be that way. However, here is the true picture
http://www.wii.gov.in/envis/primates/downloads/page81statusofprimates.pd...

Forty years of population counts of Rhesus macaques in an area of approximately 500 km2 showed different stages of population trend. An initial population of 337 monkeys in 17 groups in 1959 increased to 403 in 22 groups by 1962. Then a period of population decline occurred over the next 8 years, which led to a population of only 163 monkeys in 10 groups by 1970. This was attributed to excessive trapping and export of monkeys for biomedical research, vaccine production, and pharmaceutical testing during the 1960s when the export trade in Rhesus monkeys from India was often 50,000 juvenile monkeys/year.

By the 1970s, the export trade of Rhesus monkeys had declined to less than 20,000 monkeys/year. Rhesus population numbers stabilized and began to show slight increases. In 1978, a total ban on Rhesus export resulted in an increase in their population numbers, since then the Rhesus population of Aligarh district has more than doubled, from less than 250 monkeys to over 500 (Southwick & Siddiqi, 1999). Extensive village and roadside surveys throughout Uttar Pradesh have shown population increases of several hundred per cent (Southwick & Siddiqi, 1999).

In selected areas, such as Tughlaqabad at the southern edge of New Delhi, Rhesus populations increased from less than 100 to over 400 between 1970 and 1988 (Malik, 1989). At Qasimpur, northeast of Aligarh, a translocated group of 20 Rhesus monkeys in 1983 increased to 140 by 1998, a seven-fold increase in 15 years.

The basic cause of such large increases in Rhesus numbers is the high reproductive rates and low mortality rates given adequate food supplies. The Aligarh Rhesus population has consistently shown annual birth rates averaging 80% and annual mortality rates < 30% over 40 years.

An oh, monkeys don't get Parkinson's Disease (#96689)
by BlaiseP

You have to artificially induce it by destroying dopamine production in the primate brain. Go Team Science. Put the monkey in the guillotine, he's small, won't put up much of a struggle. It's fecking disgusting. It revolts me to my core. It should nauseate everyone with a conscience, but it doesn't. Because humans are well, just superior to our fellow creatures in every way imaginable.

Animal experiments are the basis of treatment of Parkinsonism (#96694)
by mmghosh

in the modern age. This includes research on a wide variety of animals from rats to primates.

The discovery of the effectiveness of the most widely used drug in Parkinsonism today - levodopa - was the result, in part, of much animal experimentation.

You are right in that Parkinsonisn is not a natural disease of animals, but few animals get diseases that correlate to human diseases.

Your guillotine analogy, though visually stunning, is not technically accurate. The animals are usually given the street drug MPTP (in the past it was another drug called reserpine).

In a sense, therefore, anybody getting treatment for Parkinson's disease has to acknowledge the value of animal experimentation. I'm not sure that you can make a morally justifiable case for pig or rat experiments versus primate experiments.

I suspect you are as morally uncomfortable with rat experimentation, as much as with primates, and you would also need to be convinced of the real value of any live animal experiment before granting permission, if you were a layperson on an ethics commitee.

This is a perfectly valid position to take, of course, as long as it doesn't actually hamper the experimentation process itself. This uncomfortableness has also made scientific researchers much more careful in performing human experiments.

I know whereof I speak. Monkeys are guillotined. (#96702)
by BlaiseP

We don't have a clue what causes Parkinson's, and we're only simulating it with MPTP. That, Manish, is bad science. Really, really bad science.

Let's have none of this threadbare excuse-making. The appalling living conditions under which these monkeys live out their horrific lives should turn the stomach of every human being. As Eisenhower and Patton force-marched the Germans through the concentration camps, the facile and ill-informed defenders of primate research should be marched at gunpoint through these laboratories, to see the suffering of these creatures, and confined to just such a cage for a few weeks.

The pig's different. He's a far more suitable candidate. He breeds well in captivity. He's even used as first round skin graft donor, his immune system and neurochemistry is very close to ours. He's not confined to a miserable cage. I've got no problem with Mr. Pig, mainly because he's not trafficked from the rain forest.

I'm not averse to animal research, insofar as it's done in a reasonably humane manner.

Maybe you do know about things that I don't. (#96705)
by mmghosh

Guillotining is not a procedure by which Parkinsonism is induced, AFAIK. And, contrary to your argument, I think we do have a reasonable clue about Parkinson's, more so than about many other neurological conditions (most do not depend on the lack of a single neurotransmitter).

While I share your abhorrence at the inhumanity of research in the past, I will not refuse the medical advantages that primate research has created, either for myself or those near and dear to me.

Given the sorry state of affairs in the procurement of primates (#96713)
by BlaiseP

for research, and the abysmal conditions under which they live at present moment, I feel compelled to point out the cost/benefit ratio ought to be re-examined, with some spokesman for the primates allowed to speak, without being shouted down by the modern-day Mengeles whose children should be obliged to live in such cages. I am not some PETA freak. If you can't breed a monkey, don't buy him from the jungle.

The monkey isn't guillotined to induce Parkinson's disease. That's a very nasty cheap shot, Manish. That monkey is guillotined so someone can take a peek at the lesions he's induced into that once-sentient brain. The pig has basal ganglia, too, and embryonic stem cells from the pig have been used to attenuate Parkinson's in humans for well over a decade.

Ok I agree that was a cheap shot, and apologies. (#96726)
by mmghosh

However! Your metaphor of guillotining expresses the idea that primates are killed inhumanely.

While this might have been the case in the past, I would hope evolving sensibilities, principally among ethics committees, have stopped inhumane forms of killing. Otherwise more work needs to be done to stop this.

To speak of "having a peek" is disingenous. Again it expresses the thought that what scientists are doing is in some way underhand. Of course scientists have to examine the organs - that is the point of the whole research. Why is that objectionable?

And yes, as I mentioned upthread, not only pigs, but several other approaches are being taken to reduce the dependence on NHP (Non Human Primate) experimentation. I am as concerned as you are to see that this is reduced to the minimum.

However that case may be, I am not prepared to accept that past NHP research has not provided huge benefits to mankind, and that we are, as a race, somehow demeaned by our involvement in it. At a particular time period in history it was the only way to do the research. As a result of it, polio has been eradicated and Parkinson's disease sufferer's are much better off. While one cannot make an equivalence of human and animal misery, I would think that the case for NHP experimentation in the past has considerable justification behind it.

I'll summarise my point of view on this matter. (#96735)
by mmghosh

I agree with your point that NHP in biomedical research, and in fact, live whole animal biomedical research makes me uncomfortable.

It would be better if we could do without it, and confine ourselves to cell culture experiments.

But - and its a big but, it was necessary in the past, and until better models are available in the future it remains the only way to investigate certain human medical problems. I take the view that such research, performed humanely, as far as possible, with as many checks and balances as regarded as necessary by the community of people (not just scientists, but also laypeople in ethics committees) - is both ethical and moral, in the sense that it allows us to understand disease and improve its treatment. And that past experimentation, while full of fault, technical and ethical, when viewed in the light of the present, has contributed immensely to our present well-being and is far from being a stain on us, collectively.

Recent Diaries
Links

Conservative
Liberal
Moderate/Mixed/Non-Partisan
Non-Political/Reference

Related Sites -

Polisci Applied (Aaron)
Intrepid Liberal Journal (Intrepid Liberal)
Obsidian Wings (Bird Dog)
Open Hand/Open Eye (locutas)
Red State (Bird Dog)
Swords Crossed (brendanm98)
Wagster Speaks (Wagster)
WatchingAmerica (BlaiseP)
The Social Pathologist (TSP)

Foreign Affairs -

Abu Aardvark
'Aqoul
American Footprints
Council on Foreign Relations
CSIS
Democracy Arsenal
Intel Dump
The Fourth Rail
The Head Heeb
War and Piece

Politics -

Ace of Spades HQ
Andrew Sullivan
Balloon Juice
Belgravia Dispatch
Captain's Quarters
Crooked Timber
Curmudgeonly & Skeptical
Daily Kos
Democracy Arsenal
Eschaton
Firedoglake
Glenn Greenwald
Global Guerrillas
Hugh Hewitt
Instapundit
Jawa Report
Lawyers, Guns and Money
Liberals Against Terror
Matt Yglesias
Michael J. Totten
Michelle Malkin
Moon of Alabama
New America
OxBlog
Patterico
Political Animal
Political Wire
Publius Pundit
QandO
Reality Based Community
Talking Points Memo
The Agitator
The Belmont Club
The Corner
Truman Project
Winds of Change.net

War -

Counterterrorism Blog
Iraq the Model
Jihad Watch
Small Wars Journal Blog

Economics and Business -

Angry Bear
Brad DeLong
Daniel Drezner
Mahalanobis
Marginal Revolution
Roubini Global Economics
The Big Picture

Science and Tech -

Bad Astronomy
New Scientist
Real Climate
Science Blogs
Scientific American
The Panda's Thumb

Legal -

Balkinization
Conglomerate
Ideoblog
Jurisdynamics
Law and Letters
Overlawyered
ProfessorBainbridge
ScotusBlog
Talk Left
The Becker-Posner Blog
Volokh Conspiracy

Sports -

Baseball Crank
Baseball Musings
Baseball Reference.com
ESPN.com
NFL.com
Only Baseball Matters
The Sports Economist

Books, Film and Music -

Amazon.com
Internet Movie Database
All Music Guide

News and Aggregators -

Asia Times
Boingboing
CNN
Digg
English Russia
Fark
Los Angeles Times
Memeorandum
MSNBC
Politico
Poynteronline
Slashdot
The New York Times
The Washington Post

References -

Wikipedia
Your Dictionary