DOCSLIB.ORG

Synthetic Biology 11 2.1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Synthetic Biology 11 2.1 EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT Science and Technology Options Assessment S T O A MAKING PERFECT LIFE BIO-ENGINEERING (IN) THE 21st CENTURY INTERIM STUDY Monitoring Report (IP/A/STOA/FWC-2008-96/LOT6/SC1) PE 446.046 DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT E: LEGISLATIVE COORDINATIONS AND CONCILIATIONS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS ASSESSMENT MAKING PERFECT LIFE BIO-ENGINEERING (IN) THE 21st CENTURY INTERIM STUDY Monitoring Report - Phase II Abstract The report describes four fields of bio-engineering: engineering of living artefacts (chapter 2), engineering of the body (chapter 3), engineering of the brain (chapter 4), and engineering of intelligent artefacts (chapter 5). Each chapter describes the state of the art of these bio-engineering fields, and whether the concepts “biology becoming technology” and “technology becoming biology” are helpful in describing and understanding, from an engineering perspective, what is going on in each R&D terrain. Next, every chapter analyses to what extent the various research strands within each field of bio-engineering are stimulated by the European Commission, i.e., are part and parcel of the European Framework program. Finally, each chapter provides an overview of the social, ethical and legal questions that are raised by the various scientific and technological activities involved. The report’s final chapter discusses to what extent the trends “biology becoming technology” and vice versa capture many of the developments that are going on in the four bio-engineering fields we have mapped. The report also reflects on the social, ethical and legal issues that are raised by the two bio-engineering megatrends that constitute a new technology wave. IP/A/STOA/FWC/2008-096/LOT6/SC1 OCTOBER 2010 PE 446.046 EN STOA - Science and Technology Options Assessment ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS), Karlsruhe, as members of ETAG. Project Leader: Rinie van Est, Rathenau Institute, The Hague. AUTHORS Mr Rinie van Est (Rathenau Institute, The Hague) Mr Dirk Stemerding (Rathenau institute, The Hague) Ms Ira van Keulen (Rathenau Institute, The Hague) Ms Ingrid Geesink (Rathenau Institute, The Hague) Ms Mirjam Schuijff (Rathenau Institute, The Hague) RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATORS Mr Theodoros Karapiperis (Administrator) Mr Vittorio De Crescenzo (Seconded National Expert) Science and Technology Options Assessment (STOA) Directorate E: Legislative Coordination and Conciliations DG Internal Policies European Parliament Rue Wiertz 60 - ATR 00K070 B-1047 Brussels E-mail: [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN ABOUT THE EDITOR To contact STOA or to subscribe to its newsletter please write to: [email protected] Manuscript completed in October 2010. Brussels, © European Parliament, 2010. This document is available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/default_en.htm DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. Making Perfect Life ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Contents 1. Introduction 6 1.1. NBIC convergence: The new technology wave 6 1.2. Two bio-engineering megatrends 7 1.2.1. Biology is becoming technology 8 1.2.2. Technology is becoming biology 8 1.3. A societal debate perspective 8 1.3.1. Biology is becoming technology 8 1.3.2. Technology is becoming biology 9 1.4. Content 9 References 9 2. Engineering of Living Artefacts: Synthetic Biology 11 2.1. Introduction 11 2.2. Scientific-tecnological state-of-the-art 12 2.2.1. Framing the Field 13 2.2.2. Ambitions and activities in the field of SB 14 2.2.3. The engineering approach in SB: its role and limits 16 2.2.4. The Promise to deliver 18 2.2.5. The novelty of SB 19 2.3. Relevance to European research 21 2.3.1. Research programmes 21 2.3.2. Criteria for assessing projects 23 2.4. Ethical, legal and social issues 24 2.4.1. Disruptive technoscience – or business as usual? 24 2.4.2. Playing God, altering nature - An ontological argument? 25 2.4.3. Playing God as a metaphor of disruptiveness 26 2.4.4. The mundane world of risks and benefits 29 2.4.5. Safety and security: accidents and intentional misuse 29 2.4.6. How to govern benefits: intellectual property protection 33 2.4.7. The relation to the public 34 2.5. Governance issues 35 2.6. Conclusion: living machines and artificial life 38 References 39 References for Table 1 43 Annex 1: Projects funded by EU funded institutions 46 STOA - Science and Technology Options Assessment ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 3. Engineering of The body 51 3.1. Introduction to the field 51 3.2. Scientific and technological state of the art 56 3.2.1. Elucidating information on how the body functions: Molecular Medicine57 3.2.2. Studying and engineering materials of the human body: Advanced therapies and regenerative medicine 59 3.3. Research in the 7th framework programme 67 3.3.1. Gaining information about key life processes – Research needs and challenges for research policy 67 3.3.2. Material derived from humans for technology: Research needs and challenges for research policy 69 3.3.3. Conclusion 70 3.4. Ethical, legal, social, R&D policy impacts 72 3.4.1. General considerations 72 3.4.2. Ethical, legal, social, R&D policy issues related to elucidating and using genetic and medical information 73 3.4.3. Ethical, legal, social, R&D policy impacts of using material derived from humans for medical technology - Efficacy, safety and quality 76 3.5. Conclusions 78 References 79 4. Engineering of the Brain 85 4.1. Introduction 85 4.1.1. The engineering approach 86 4.1.2. How to read this chapter 89 4.2. Reverse engineering of the brain 90 4.2.1. Narrow reverse engineering: rebuilding the brain Blue Brain project 90 4.2.2. Neuromorphic engineering: building supercomputers 92 4.2.3. In vitro engineering: cultured neuronal networks 94 4.3. Forward engineering of the brain 96 4.3.1. Neuromodulation 96 4.3.2. Brain computer interfaces 100 4.4. Engineering the brain in European research programmes 104 4.4.1. Trends in FP6 en FP7 104 4.4.2. Trends in ESF projects 109 4.5. Ethical, legal and other impacts of neural engineering 109 4.5.1. The ethics of neural engineering 111 4.5.2. Reverse engineering 113 4.5.3. Forward engineering 114 4.6. Conclusion 121 References 123 Making Perfect Life ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 5. Engineering of intelligent artefacts 128 5.1. Introduction 128 5.2. State of the Art 129 5.2.1. The Chequered History of Artificial Intelligence 129 5.2.2. Robots 133 5.2.3. Agents and Avatars 140 5.3. Relevance to European Research 149 5.4. Ethical, Legal and Societal Aspects 153 5.4.1. Ethical and Legal Aspects 154 5.4.2. Broader Societal and Policy Aspects 158 5.5. Conclusions 162 References 164 6. Conclusions 168 6.1. Bio-engineering in the 21st century 168 6.1.1. Biology becoming technology - and vice versa 168 6.1.2. Bio-engineering and science 172 6.1.3. Bio-engineering and the bio-debate 175 6.2. Bio-engineering the 21st century 178 6.2.1. Hypes, hubris, hopes and fears 178 6.2.2. Towards an ELSA agenda of bio-engineering 180 6.3. Safeguarding human dignity in the 21st century 189 6.3.1. Bio-engineering in the 21st century 189 6.3.2. The European Commission’s governance challenge 190 References 191 Making Perfect Life ___________________________________________________________________________________________ General information This monitoring report Making Perfect Life: Bio-engineering (in) the 21st Century is the result of the second phase of the STOA-project “Making Perfect Life”. This phase ran from December 2009 to November 2010. This document provided input for a conference which involved both Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) as well as other experts, which was held on 10 November 2010 in Brussels, in the European Parliament. This phase elaborates on the horizon scan and preliminary research that was done during the first phase, which ran from September to November 2009. That preparatory phase led to an interim study (Van Est et al., 2010), which was instrumental in defining the research focus of the current second phase of the STOA-project “Making Perfect Life” and setting up a team of researchers from the Dutch Rathenau Institute in the Hague, the Austrian Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA) in Vienna, the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (Fraunhofer ISI), and the Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS) at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT). The latter two German institutes are both located in Karlsruhe. This study presents the state of the art of four domains of bio-engineering: engineering of living artefacts, engineering of the body, engineering of the brain, and engineering of intelligent artefacts. Moreover, this study depicts the relevance of each of these four engineering fields within the European Framework program, and it provides an overview of the various social and ethical issues that relate to the further development of these fields. The third and final phase of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Phenomenological Perspectives on Technological Posthumanism
    Master thesis Phenomenological perspectives on technological posthumanism Supervisors: prof. dr. Paul Ziche, dr. Iris van der Tuin Date: 10. 8. 2017 Name: Tomáš Čech Student number: 5656664 Number of Words: 24 678 i Content 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Posthumanism/transhumanism – how to make sense of it all ......................................................... 4 2.1. What is transhumanism and transhuman? ............................................................................... 7 2.2. Transhumanist perception of technology and science ........................................................... 11 2.3. Comparison between transhumanism and religion ................................................................ 13 2.4. In Summary ........................................................................................................................... 15 3. Debate about transhumanism ........................................................................................................ 15 3.1. Transhumanism as an ideology ............................................................................................. 17 3.2. Reaction to transhumanism - bioconservatism ...................................................................... 21 3.3. Bioconservative arguments – why transhumanism is not such a great idea .......................... 26 3.4. Human dignity and the transhumanism debate.....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia University Journal of Bioethics 1 2 Fall 2008
    Columbia University Journal of Bioethics 1 2 Fall 2008 Columbia University Journal of Bioethics And Supplement on BIOCEP Volume VI. No 1, Fall 2008 Editorial Board Faculty Editors Editors-in-Chief Dr. John D. Loike Dr. Ruth L. Fischbach Copy Editors Soo Han Cover Design: “Entwine‖ Komal Kaothari Robyn Scheinder and Dr. John D. Loike Please send your comments to Dr. John D. Loike at: [email protected] Production & Creative Directors Robyn Scheinder Jana Bassman Web Version is available through the undergraduate page: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/ Or through http://www.bioethicscolumbia.org/ Copyright 2008 by: Columbia University Center for Bioethics NO PART OF THIS JOURNAL MAY BE COPIED OR USED WITHOUT PERMISSION. All views in the articles reflect those of the authors only. Columbia University Journal of Bioethics 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................. 5 Introductions by Dr. John Loike and Dr. Ruth Fischbach ............ …………………………………..…….6-7 Section I: Genetics The Sound and the Fury By Katie O‘Neill and Wei-Jen Hsieh……………………………………………….. Majority Report: DNA Data-banking As an Opt-Out System By Emilia Javorsky and Robyn Schneider………………………………………... Could Genetic Research Interfere with Medicine? By Jorge Jara and Joanna Etra………………………………………………. Charging You for Being You By Elisa Fung and Gabriela Vargas…………………………………………. Section II: Stem Cells and Reproductive Medicine Altered Nuclear Transfer: A Novel Way of Developing Pluripotent Stem Cells By Sarah Eberle and Tabby Khan………………………………………………... Secrets and Lies: Mandating Disclosure in Oocyte Donation By Tiffany Hsieh………………………………………………………………….. Diagnosing Disability… And Keeping It by David Yin and John Tseng……………………………………………….. Section III: Neuroethics Programmed Free Will By Elisa Fung and Lindsay Kugler………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Volume III - Article 2 Legislating Limits on Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Sïna A. Muscati1 Spring 2003 Copyright © 2003 University of Pittsburgh School of Law Journal of Technology Law and Policy Introduction Research on embryonic stem cells has generated great intrigue in the scientific community. Many medical researchers consider stem cell-based therapies to have the potential of treating a host of human ailments and yielding a number of medical benefits. They are motivated by the possibility of treating incurable diseases or facilitating effective treatment methods. Their enthusiasm is shared by many of those who are afflicted with these debilitating diseases. However, the methodology of this research raises numerous ethical and public policy concerns. The extraction of embryonic stem cells for research destroys the human embryo. This has generated a storm of debate about if, and in what circumstances, this research can be legally and ethically justified. The concerns are heightened further when embryos are created specifically for use in the very research that occasions their destruction. In response, numerous countries have passed legislation that attempts to control some of the more controversial aspects of embryonic stem cell research. For example, in May 2002, Canada introduced draft legislation that would govern and restrict a number of practices related to this fast-growing field of research. 1 L.L.B., third year, University of Ottawa; B.Sc. (Hons.) 2001, Carleton University. The author gratefully acknowledges the financial support of the Centre of Innovation Law and Policy of the University of Toronto. The author also wishes to thank Professor Ian R. Kerr of the University of Ottawa for his guidance throughout the writing of this Article.
    [Show full text]
  • Could Artificial Wombs End the Abortion Debate?
    Philosophy Faculty Works Philosophy Summer 2005 Could Artificial ombsW End the Abortion Debate? Christopher Kaczor Loyola Marymount University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/phil_fac Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Christopher Kaczor, “Could Artificial ombsW End the Abortion Debate?” National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 5.2 (Summer 2005): 73-91. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Philosophy at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Faculty Works by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Could Artificial Wombs End the Abortion Debate? Christopher Kaczor Although artificial wombs may seem fanciful when first considered, certain trends suggest they may become reality. Between 1945 and the 1970s, the weight at which premature infants could survive dropped dramatically, moving from 1000 grams to around 400 grams.1 In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court, in deciding Roe v. Wade, considered viability to begin around twenty-eight weeks. In 2000, premature babies were reported to have survived at eighteen weeks.2 Advanced incubators already in existence save thousands of children born prematurely each year. It is highly likely that such incubators will become even more advanced as technology progresses. Researchers are working to make super-advanced incubators, “artificial wombs,” a reality. Temple University professor Dr. Thomas Schaffer hopes to save premature infants using a synthetic amniotic fluid of oxygen-rich perfluorocarbons. Lack of funding has thus far prevented tests on human infants born prematurely, but Shaffer has successfully transferred premature lamb fetuses from their mother’s wombs and used the synthetic amniotic fluid to sustain their lives.3 At Cornell University, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bio Revolution: Innovations Transforming and Our Societies, Economies, Lives
    The Bio Revolution: Innovations transforming economies, societies, and our lives economies, societies, our and transforming Innovations Revolution: Bio The The Bio Revolution Innovations transforming economies, societies, and our lives May 2020 McKinsey Global Institute Since its founding in 1990, the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) has sought to develop a deeper understanding of the evolving global economy. As the business and economics research arm of McKinsey & Company, MGI aims to help leaders in the commercial, public, and social sectors understand trends and forces shaping the global economy. MGI research combines the disciplines of economics and management, employing the analytical tools of economics with the insights of business leaders. Our “micro-to-macro” methodology examines microeconomic industry trends to better understand the broad macroeconomic forces affecting business strategy and public policy. MGI’s in-depth reports have covered more than 20 countries and 30 industries. Current research focuses on six themes: productivity and growth, natural resources, labor markets, the evolution of global financial markets, the economic impact of technology and innovation, and urbanization. Recent reports have assessed the digital economy, the impact of AI and automation on employment, physical climate risk, income inequal ity, the productivity puzzle, the economic benefits of tackling gender inequality, a new era of global competition, Chinese innovation, and digital and financial globalization. MGI is led by three McKinsey & Company senior partners: co-chairs James Manyika and Sven Smit, and director Jonathan Woetzel. Michael Chui, Susan Lund, Anu Madgavkar, Jan Mischke, Sree Ramaswamy, Jaana Remes, Jeongmin Seong, and Tilman Tacke are MGI partners, and Mekala Krishnan is an MGI senior fellow.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cybernetic Revolution and the Forthcoming Epoch of Self-Regulating Systems Grinin, Leonid; Grinin, Anton
    www.ssoar.info The Cybernetic Revolution and the Forthcoming Epoch of Self-Regulating Systems Grinin, Leonid; Grinin, Anton Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Monographie / monograph Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Grinin, L., & Grinin, A. (2016). The Cybernetic Revolution and the Forthcoming Epoch of Self-Regulating Systems. Moscow: Uchitel Publishing House. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-57569-8 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Basic Digital Peer Publishing-Lizenz This document is made available under a Basic Digital Peer zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den DiPP-Lizenzen Publishing Licence. For more Information see: finden Sie hier: http://www.dipp.nrw.de/lizenzen/dppl/service/dppl/ http://www.dipp.nrw.de/lizenzen/dppl/service/dppl/ The International Center for Education and Social and Humanitarian Studies Volgograd Center for Social Research Leonid Grinin and Anton Grinin The Cybernetic Revolution and the Forthcoming Epoch of Self-Regulating Systems Moscow 2016 ББК 30г 60.5 63 Leonid Grinin and Anton Grinin The Cybernetic Revolution and the Forthcoming Epoch of Self-Regulating Systems. Moscow: Moscow branch of Uchitel Publishing House, 2016. – 216 pp. ISBN 978-5-7057-4877-8 The monograph presents the ideas about the main changes that occurred in the devel- opment of technologies from the emergence of Homo sapiens till present time and outlines the prospects of their development in the next 30–60 years and in some respect until the end of the twenty-first century. What determines the transition of a society from one level of development to another? One of the most fundamental causes is the global technological transformations.
    [Show full text]
  • Synthetic Biology an Overview of the Debates
    SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY PROJECT / SYNBIO 3 SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY Ethical Issuesin SYNBIO 3/JUNE2009 An overview ofthedebates Contents Preface 3 Executive Summary 4 Who is doing what, where are they doing it and how is this current work funded? 6 How distinct is synthetic biology from other emerging areas of scientific and technological innovation? 9 Ethics: What harms and benefits are associated with synthetic biology? 12 The pro-actionary and pre-cautionary frameworks 18 N OVERVIEW OF THE DEBATES N OVERVIEW OF A Competing—and potentially complementary—views about non-physical harms (harms to well-being) 23 The most contested harms to well-being 25 Conclusion: Moving the debate forward 26 References 29 ETHICAL ISSUES IN SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY: ETHICAL ISSUES IN SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY: ii The opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect views Sloan Foundation. Wilson International Center for Scholars or the Alfred P. of the Woodrow Ethical Issues in SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY An overview of the debates Erik Parens, Josephine Johnston, and Jacob Moses The Hastings Center, Garrison, New York SYNBIO 3 / JUNE 2009 2 ETHICAL ISSUES IN SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY: AN OVERVIEW OF THE DEBATES Preface Synthetic biology will allow scientists and where such topics are divided into two broad engineers to create biological systems categories: concerns about physical and non- that do not occur naturally as well as to physical harms. While physical harms often re-engineer existing biological systems to trigger debates about how to proceed among perform novel and beneficial tasks. This researchers, policymakers, and the public, emerging field presents a number of non-physical harms present more difficult opportunities to address ethical issues early conundrums.
    [Show full text]
  • Abstracts: Oral Presentations *All Oral Presentations Will Take Place in the Devon Room at the Times Listed Below*
    Abstracts: Oral Presentations *All oral presentations will take place in the Devon Room at the times listed below* Augustine & Culture Seminar Program (ACSP) (2:00 p.m.) Playing Mother: The Daunting Possibilities of Artificial Womb Technology Author: Hanlon, Erin Advisor: Dr. Peter Busch So often in our society, technological advances are met with the reaction that we must be wary of “playing God.” Yet, we often ignore this concern when the technology is created for the betterment of society and to solve a critical problem. This was the case for the CHOP research team that created an extra-uterine physiologic support system for the extreme premature lamb, a bio-bag system that could support an extremely premature lamb within a womb-like environment that would allow for survival and development up to a fuller point of gestation. This research, when translated to humans, would give extremely premature babies an increased chance of survival and ability to thrive post-birth with limited health complications. What I focused my research on is, what comes after this technology? We most likely will continue building upon this research until a baby could survive within this system from as early as conception. With a fully artificial womb and no need for a woman to carry a child, what possibilities does this allow for? How does this change women’s role within society? Would we even need women involved in the process? Could women donate eggs as men donate sperm and men can have a child independently? Could this possibly eliminate the abortion debate? What kind of policies will we need surrounding fetuses and the process? What potential risks does this allow for? The very real possibility of artificial womb technology brings to light many questions and ethical dilemmas that we, as a global community, may face in the very near future and we must begin to explore these possibilities in order to make the most ethical and just decisions for the future of our society.
    [Show full text]
  • Unique Benefits of Ectogenesis Outweigh Potential Harms
    Unique benefits of ectogenesis outweigh potential harms Citation of the final article: Kendal, Evie 2019, Unique benefits of ectogenesis outweigh potential harms, Emerging Topics in Life Sciences, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 719-722. Published in its final form at https://doi.org/10.1042/etls20190112. This is the accepted manuscript. © 2019, The Author Reprinted with permission. Downloaded from DRO: http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30131603 DRO Deakin Research Online, Deakin University’s Research Repository Deakin University CRICOS Provider Code: 00113B Title Unique benefits of ectogenesis outweigh potential harms. Author details Dr Evie Kendal Lecturer of Bioethics and Health Humanities Deakin University, School of Medicine Waurn Ponds, Victoria, Australia [email protected] Abstract This article will consider some of the ethical issues concerning ectogenesis technology, including possible misuse, social harms and safety risks. The article discusses three common objections to ectogenesis, namely that artificial gestation transgresses nature, risks promoting cloning and genetic engineering of offspring, and would lead to the commodification of children. Counterbalancing these concerns are an appeal to women’s rights, reproductive autonomy, and the rights of the infertile to access appropriate assisted reproductive technologies. The article concludes that the unique benefits of promoting the development of ectogenesis technology to prospective parents and children, outweigh any potential harms. Introduction Full ectogenesis refers to the artificial gestation of human embryos until independent viability, without the need for a woman’s womb at any stage.1 It represents the closing of a gap between existing artificial reproductive technologies, including in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and humidicrib incubation, to cover the entire development period.
    [Show full text]
  • Wired 13.03: Mind Control
    Wired 13.03: Mind Control http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.03/brain.html Issue 13.03 - March 2005 Subscribe - save over 80% and get a FREE Gift! Mind Control Matt Nagle is paralyzed. He's also a pioneer in the new science of brain implants. By Richard Martin Matthew Nagle is beating me at Pong. "O, baby," he Feature: mutters. The creases in his forehead deepen as he moves the onscreen paddle to block the ball. "C'mon - here you go," Mind Control he says, sending a wicked angle shot ricocheting down the Plus: screen and past my defense. "Yes!" he says in triumph, his Thoughts Into Action voice hoarse from the ventilator that helps him breathe. "Let's go again, dude." The remarkable thing about Nagle is not that he plays skillfully; it's that he can play at all. Nagle is a C4 quadriplegic, paralyzed from the neck down in a stabbing three years ago. He pilots a motorized wheelchair by blowing into a sip-and-puff tube, his pale hands strapped to the armrests. He's playing Pong with his thoughts alone. A bundle of wires as thick as a coaxial cable runs from a connector in Nagle's scalp to a refrigerator-sized cart of electronic gear. Inside his brain, a tiny array of microelectrodes picks up the cacophony of his neural activity; processors recognize the patterns associated with arm motions and translate them into signals that control the Pong paddle, draw with a cursor, operate a TV, and open email. Nagle, 25, is the first patient in a controversial clinical trial that seeks to prove brain-computer interfaces can return function to people paralyzed by injury or disease.
    [Show full text]
  • BRAIN-COMPUTER INTERFACE N. S. Sirobaba — Student, Group IK
    BRAIN-COMPUTER INTERFACE N. S. Sirobaba — student, group IK-91 D. O. Marchenko — EI. Advisor A brain–computer interface (BCI), sometimes called a direct neural interface or a brain–machine interface (BMI), is a direct communication pathway between the brain and an external device. BCIs are often aimed at assisting, augmenting or repairing human cognitive or sensory-motor functions. The field of BCI has advanced mostly toward neuroprosthetics applications that aim at restoring damaged hearing, sight and movement. Thanks to the remarkable cortical plasticity of the brain, signals from implanted prostheses can, after adaptation, be handled by the brain like natural sensor or effector channels. Following years of animal experimentation, the first neuroprosthetic devices implanted in humans appeared in the mid-nineties. Invasive BCI research has targeted repairing damaged sight and providing new functionality to persons with paralysis. Invasive BCIs are implanted directly into the grey matter of the brain during neurosurgery. As they rest in the grey matter, invasive devices produce the highest quality signals of BCI devices but are prone to scar-tissue build-up, causing the signal to become weaker or even lost as the body reacts to a foreign object in the brain. In vision science, direct brain implants have been used to treat non-congenital (acquired) blindness. One of the first scientists to come up with a working brain interface to restore sight was a private researcher William Dobelle. Dobelle's first prototype was implanted into "Jerry", a man blinded in adulthood. A single-array BCI containing 68 electrodes was implanted onto Jerry’s visual cortex and succeeded in producing phosphenes, the sensation of seeing light.
    [Show full text]
  • Engineering Biology
    WHITE PAPER ENGINEERING BIOLOGY: A PLATFORM TECHNOLOGY TO FUEL MULTI-SECTOR ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND MODERNIZE BIOMANUFACTURING IN CANADA National Engineering Biology Steering Committee November 2020 National Engineering Biology Steering Committee • Dr. Bettina Hamelin, President and CEO, Ontario Genomics (Chair) • Andrew Casey, President and CEO, BIOTECanada • Dr. Doane Chilcoat, Leader, Applied Science and Technology at Corteva Agriscience • Dr. Lakshmi Krishnan, Acting VP, Life Sciences, National Research Council • Dr. Krishna Mahadevan, Professor, University of Toronto • Dr. Vincent Martin, Director, Centre for Applied Synthetic Biology, Concordia University • Dr. Keith Pardee, Canada Research Chair in Synthetic Biology in Human Health, University of Toronto • Dr. Steve Webb, Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, Global Institute for Food Security • Dr. Peter Zandstra, Director, Michael Smith Laboratories, University of British Columbia Observers • Pari Johnston, Vice-President, Policy and Public Affairs, Genome Canada • Dr. Yale Michaels, Banting Postdoctoral Fellow and Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research Trainee • Amy Yeung, CSBERG Director of Leadership Development, cGEM Co-Founder and Co-Director Supported by: Engineering Biology: A Platform Technology to Fuel Multi-Sector Economic Recovery and Modernize Biomanufacturing in Canada 2 Executive Summary Engineering biology tools and technologies are disrupting global markets and creating incredible opportunities for the most innovative organizations. Leading G20 jurisdictions
    [Show full text]