523
Doctors Remove Woman’s Brain Implant Against Her Will (futurism.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
81 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A woman whose epilepsy was greatly improved by an experimental brain implant was devastated when, just two years after getting it, she was forced to have it removed due to the company that made it going bankrupt.

As the MIT Technology Review reports, an Australian woman named Rita Leggett who received an experimental seizure-tracking brain-computer interface (BCI) implant from the now-defunct company Neuravista in 2010 has become a stark example not only of the ways neurotech can help people, but also of the trauma of losing access to them when experiments end or companies go under.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 2 years ago (2 children)

We need orphan technology program like for orphan drugs. I can't imagine it would be very costly to keep this one woman's device running, but it does take someone somewhere being responsible for it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I expect it would in fact be hugely expensive to keep the woman's implant going: anything medical is even more expensive that aeronautical stuff. And also, who bears responsibility when the company tanks and the woman has an issue with her implant?

    But here's what I think: innovative startups that want to run tests of experimental implants (looking at you Elon) should be legally required to set money aside to support the test subjects' implanted hardware until the end of their natural life or until the implant fails, whichever comes first, if the company tanks.

    The money should pay for a skeletal crew of the original engineers working for a government-owned company set up and dedicated solely to that support after the original company disappears, and it should pay for the test subjects' medical expenses related to their implants.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    But here's what I think: innovative startups that want to run tests of experimental implants (looking at you Elon) should be legally required to set money aside to support the test subjects' implanted hardware until the end of their natural life or until the implant fails, whichever comes first, if the company tanks.

    I wouldn't trust psychopaths like Elon to not try to make those shorter.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent