18 comments

  • aetherspawn 1 hour ago
    Live dissection and experimentation on “alive but drugged” human brains is mental. How do you ensure that you aren’t torturing a brain that can’t see, hear or scream? How are you held accountable?
    • garethsprice 1 hour ago
      From the article:

      > The brains are already almost devoid of the coordinated neural firing necessary even for minimal consciousness, says Brendan Parent, a bioethicist at New York University Langone Health and one of six ethicists on Bexorg’s advisory board. But the company also forestalls any electrical activity with the anesthetic propofol, among other measures.

      • Barbing 53 minutes ago
        I recognized that anesthetic from its famous irresponsible use-

        "Attention to the risks of off-label use of propofol increased in August 2009, after the release of the Los Angeles County coroner's report that musician Michael Jackson was killed by a mixture of propofol and the benzodiazepine drugs lorazepam, midazolam, and diazepam on 25 June 2009." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propofol

        Used properly, however:

        "To induce general anesthesia, propofol is the drug used almost exclusively, having largely replaced sodium thiopental."

        • stavros 36 minutes ago
          Apparently MJ was taking propofol to sleep, which another commenter said was akin to "getting a haircut by undergoing chemo".
          • hungryhobbit 32 minutes ago
            Between what he did to children, and what his parents did to him, it's hard to really blame the guy for having extreme sleep problems though.
            • applfanboysbgon 22 minutes ago
              > what he did to children

              The media and the people who bought into their shameless attention-grabbing lies are the reason he had sleep problems. He was unanimously acquitted of all counts, but the media made his life into a living hell by consistently portraying him as a pedophile because it drove incredible engagement numbers. A justice system should be "innocent until proven guilty", and yet MJ was deemed guilty even after proven innocent. Longform read from an actually good journalist, if you care to learn for yourself: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/one-of-the-most-shameful_b_61...

            • falsaberN1 19 minutes ago
              It's not only not been proven, but the island man stuff and testimony of people like Culkin suggest he actually did the opposite of doing bad things to children and was most likely a scapegoat for the "elites" of Hollywood because of his race.

              At the very least drop an "allegedly" or something to make it sound a little tasteful.

          • poszlem 30 minutes ago
            That "another commenter" was Robin Williams - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/fZkFooaaaSo
            • stavros 26 minutes ago
              Oh wow, I can't believe he was on reddit!
      • 1234letshaveatw 56 minutes ago
        I could've done without reading the word almost
        • pavel_lishin 43 minutes ago
          That's before they apply the anaesthetic.
        • hypfer 51 minutes ago
          Honestly, there is so much terrible terrible terrible stuff going on in the world and happening to real people, I think it is safe to say that those brains are having a blast. Relatively speaking.

          It just invokes a strong emotional response because it's so "abnormal", but if you think about it, there is so much more pain going on where no one bats an eye.

          Perfectly avoidable pain even. So it's not even that aspect.

          ___

          OTOH, this is HN, I guess. Having empathy for real people would be harmful to the business model of most people's employers.

          So instead, mostly performative outrage/empathy with something that is effectively dead can fill in that gap.

    • koolba 57 minutes ago
      > Live dissection and experimentation on “alive but drugged” human brains is mental.

      There’s no such thing as live dissection. It’s vivisection.

    • pavel_lishin 1 hour ago
      Well, we know how to make living brains insensate - that's who we all make it through surgery.

      Presumably they're doing something similar - or using some other well-understood mechanism - to ensure that's not the case.

      > The brains are already almost devoid of the coordinated neural firing necessary even for minimal consciousness, says Brendan Parent, a bioethicist at New York University Langone Health and one of six ethicists on Bexorg’s advisory board. But the company also forestalls any electrical activity with the anesthetic propofol, among other measures. Bexorg obtains brains in partnership with organizations that procure donated organs for transplantation, and Vrselja says once families understand the company’s process and goals, their response is overwhelmingly positive.

      • gavmor 57 minutes ago
        That’s somewhat overstated.

        We know anesthesia "works," and we know some of its molecular targets, but we do not fully know the mechanism by which it produces unconsciousness, ie whether anesthesia eliminates experience, or mainly blocks memory, report, and integrated neural processing.

        • duskwuff 5 minutes ago
          Anesthesia appears to be a fairly broad effect - anaesthetics work on plants, for example [1], even though they lack any neural tissue whatsoever. It would be extremely surprising if those effects were also targeted enough to halt only some types of brain activity.

          [1]: e.g. https://doi.org/10.4161/psb.27886

      • harimau777 11 minutes ago
        My understanding was that we now believe that patients under anesthesia are often "awake" but the drugs prevent them from forming memories so they can't complain once the anesthesia wears off.

        Is that incorrect?

    • cj 10 minutes ago
      I’ll volunteer to waive my rights here. Feel free to do whatever you wish with my brain once it’s detached from my body :)

      Can’t be worse than my organs being harvested for donation.

    • EA-3167 1 hour ago
      It's not a great article, and it glosses over the reality that if you hooked this brain up to an EEG it would show unequivocal brain death. CELLS of the brain are alive, but in terms of being able to function in any sort of coordinated way there that ship sailed minutes after the person who donated their organs died. The wave of depolarization that marks brain death isn't something we can reverse, and what's being done here is all about metabolism and structure rather than those much more subtle functions.

      IMO the more questionable aspect of this entire operation is the use of "AI" to reach conclusions about how the test molecules are being metabolized, but that's a lot less compelling than implying that some company is somehow preserving life in a disembodied brain.

      • genxy 31 minutes ago
        > isn't something we can reverse

        Until you hook it up to a lightening rod in the top of a castle!

        • EA-3167 14 minutes ago
          Just remember to be a good father, or things get really epic in a gothic sort of way.
    • kreyenborgi 1 hour ago
      Reminds me of a certain scene from Knausgård's Morning Star.
    • crooked-v 1 hour ago
      The word "alive" is doing a lot of work here. A brain is pretty much permanently fried after five to fifteen minutes without oxygen, and these are donor brains, not some emergency brain extraction team, so the timeframe will be much longer than that. There might be 'life' left in there in the technical sense, but there's no 'person' left.
    • dostick 16 minutes ago
      Brain does not have physical feelings, and with all other feelings cut off and not possible, even with consciousness it won’t be a horror scenario like in MetallicA’s “One”.
  • acheron 1 hour ago
    “We are all aware that the senses can be deceived, the eyes fooled. But how can we be sure our senses are not being deceived at any particular time, or even all the time? Might I just be a brain in a tank somewhere, tricked all my life into believing in the events of this world by some insane computer? And does my life gain or lose meaning based on my reaction to such solipsism?”

    Project PYRRHO, Specimen 46, Vat 7 Activity recorded M.Y. 2302.22467 (TERMINATION OF SPECIMEN ADVISED)

    • gavmor 55 minutes ago
      Give credit where credit is due: Descartes, Kant, Putnam, etc.
      • mattlondon 31 minutes ago
        Hmm pretty sure I saw this in the thought traces of Claude the other day...
      • sodaplayer 37 minutes ago
        It'll be Brian Reynolds in this case. It's a quote from Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri.
  • prewett 1 hour ago
    I just finished reading "That Hideous Strength" (CS Lewis) this weekend where they have a disembodied head kept "alive", and some convicts in the pipeline whose heads/brains, it is implied, will be experimented on similarly. Lewis was remarkably prophetic.
    • renticulous 1 hour ago
      The Dust Theory in Permutation City by Greg Egan pushes the concept to bizarre levels.
  • NDlurker 1 hour ago
    This is legal but I can't legally pay another adult for sex or take drugs that could harm me? And there are many restrictions on gambling. It's weird how some morals are legislated but not others.
  • abtinf 1 hour ago
    I will be removing my organ donor status. This is horrifying.
    • pavel_lishin 1 hour ago
      It looks like the families have to agree to do this, before your brain can be donated:

      > Bexorg obtains brains in partnership with organizations that procure donated organs for transplantation, and Vrselja says once families understand the company’s process and goals, their response is overwhelmingly positive.

  • unsupp0rted 2 hours ago
    "alive" is not a meaningful term. It makes sense only when you have blunt instruments to measure aliveness, like pulse, respiration, heart beat, etc.

    Once you go much more granular, there's no particular spot to make a distinction between "alive" and "not alive", until you stop seeing any electrical, biochemical and mechanical activity of any kind, at which point you're basically saying "inert".

    • oh_my_goodness 6 minutes ago
      Is this dry humor and/or a deliberate attempt to make the reader even more horrified by the experiment? Or only a different sensibility from mine? No judgement. I just really can't tell.
    • ceejayoz 1 hour ago
      And yet, "my child is alive" versus "my child is dead" have some… meaning.
    • lapetitejort 1 hour ago
      With what we are learning about how gut flora, can a brain be considered conscious while detached from the digestive system?
  • cduzz 1 hour ago
    NEW VISTA, OUTER RIM—Just a cycle ago, the brain was in a living person. Now, hours after its first owner died, it sits on a slab draped in tubes that quiver as they pump liters of blood substitute and other fluids through the organ, supplying oxygen and removing waste. As far as anyone knows, with many of its key functions intact but maybe awarness muffled by drugs, the brain hovers between life and death. As people subject it to experimental drugs, sensors record the brain's reactions, capturing hundreds of data points on its cells, proteins, and physiology. Then, after 24 hours in this state, it will be sliced into hundreds of pieces for more detailed study.
  • kypro 3 minutes ago
    This is literally my biggest fear. The idea that my biology or consciousness could be keep alive and in a state of suffering for years, decades, centuries or longer via neural simulation or biological intervention.

    I do wonder if AI advancements will allow me to see these horrors play out. Hopefully not to myself.

    https://spikeartmagazine.com/articles/libra-season-hello-cru...

  • hokkos 1 hour ago
    I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream.
    • ReptileMan 7 minutes ago
      We don't create the torment nexus, we are creating all the possible torment nexuses
  • WalterBright 58 minutes ago
  • acdbddh 1 hour ago
    To be honest, if my only other option was to be buried, I would love to let my brain be connected to some machine that try to keep it as alive-like as possible.

    Just please don't remove my brain before I'm 1000% certainly dead.

    • saalweachter 54 minutes ago
      To some extent, volunteering for any sort of medical study is signing up to be tortured in the hopes that someone down the line might be saved by the research. Most cancer treatments, for instance, are objectively terrible to go through, and when you're testing and developing the protocols you're pumping already sick people full of poisons and hoping for the best.

      There's some fraction of people who would prefer to be kept alive as a brain in a jar, depending on the alternatives, but getting to that point is going to require a bunch of people to volunteer to undergo excruciating torture as we learn how to keep the brain alive, how to keep them comfortable, how to keep them conscious, sane and let them interact with the world.

  • ReptileMan 10 minutes ago
    They have no mouth and they must scream...
  • ckemere 1 hour ago
    The obvious question I would have asked: given the concern that this may not be ethical if the brains are still “alive” AND the concern that a brain separated from the body probably doesn’t function these same, why wouldn’t we test things in living monkeys (instead of mice)???

    It seems that the likelihood is high that the right animal model would yield superior data???

  • aftbit 41 minutes ago
    “We'll send only a brain"
  • jpwesselink 1 hour ago
    Just no.
  • ethanrutherford 1 hour ago
    [dead]
  • wrecked_em 1 hour ago
    [dead]
  • caconym_ 1 hour ago
    What the fuck? This is beyond the pale.