Controversy

http://neuro.duke.edu/Faculty/Nicolelis.htm

Criticism from a research standpoint:

• The human trial is a "stunt," says Miguel Nicolelis. Donoghue is more concerned with profits made by his company than overall benefit to the patient and to the research.
• The system does not work as well as advertised.
• Reading email and turning on a TV does not improve one’s quality of life dramatically .
• Other non-invasive methods could produce the same result; more applicability to quality of life is needed to justify surgical intervention.
• The electrodes are easily susceptible to obstruction with brain material, thus creating the need for multiple surgeries
• Implantation in a human overlooked what some, such as Miguel Nicolelis, believed are essential steps: "I think they skipped a couple of steps to make this ready for humans." Should something go wrong due to the surgery, the entire field would suffer major setbacks.¹

Criticism from an ethical standpoint:

• The military could potentially use this technology as a means of creating a superior weapon or designing the “super soldier.” This use could ultimately lead to the demise of more people than it helps
• If individuals without a disability attempt to use this technology to alter current abilities and senses, the device would create greater disparity among individuals. This use would raise issues related to cost and who has access to health care.
• Abuse of this technology could potentially threaten the privacy and autonomy of individuals if this technology is used to “read” someone else’s mind and possibly even control another human being like a robot.
  

Analysis:

This technology has shown a great deal of promise in whom it can help and what it can do. There is a potentially large patient population available and in addition, simple communication and control capabilities can be beneficial for those with severe motor disabilities. Donoghue's current trial shows that it can and does work. In order to create a more complete understanding, one must consider the drawbacks and challenges. The design needs additional development and further progress to create a more patient-friendly product. Ethically, a number of issues to explore and discuss exist. This technology has the potential of helping a large number of individuals and at the same time, if it were to be used beyond the purpose of its design, it would have a significantly negative impact on society as a whole. Realistically, at this point, the more immediate benefits of the technology outweigh the potential for misuse.

Something to think about:

John Donoghue, when asked about whether or not brain-computer interfaces will open the door to mind control:

"We do that all the time already. Advertising is mind control. Even pharmaceutical agents are a form of mind control. When people have behaviors that deviate extremely far from the norm, they are given medications that bring their mind back into the realm of behavior that we call normal. So we do it now. If a child were to have a seizure, and we controlled his mind so that he didn't have seizure, that would be a wonderful thing. We want to do that."³

References:
1.http://www.technologyreview.com
2.http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Bioe/BioeMcGe.htm
3.http://www.discover.com/issues/nov-04/features/discover-awards/neuroscience/