
Scientists Are Giving Dead Brains New Life - milsorgen
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/magazine/dead-pig-brains-reanimation.html
======
no1youknowz
> Sestan did acknowledge that, yes, theoretically there is nothing stopping a
> scientist from immediately building a perfusion machine that could support a
> human brain. The BrainEx technology is open-source, and pig and homo sapiens
> brains have a fair amount in common. And there are plenty of conceivable
> applications for a human-optimized BrainEx.

Imagine that you are a billionaire. Money is absolutely no object at all. And
yet, you are in an accident. A car crash for example, your body was gravely
injured but your head intact. You are flown to a facility but die on route.

This technology is a get out of jail card. What's interesting to me, is where
is the cut off point. Right now I assume its within minutes? But one day it
could be a week? Your head in a jar until they either create a new body for
you or find a donor body?

Then there is this:

> Consider, Greely suggested, the case of the Italian neurosurgeon Sergio
> Canavero and his associate, the Chinese scientist Xiaoping Ren, who claim to
> have transplanted a head from one cadaver to another. Undoubtedly, a
> scientist with fewer scruples than Sestan, fewer moral qualms about human
> experimentation, will emerge. “Somebody will perfuse a dead human brain, and
> I think it will be in an unconventional setting, not necessarily in a pure
> research manner,” Greely told me. “It will be somebody with a lot of money,
> and he’ll find a scientist willing to do it.”

Putting the current ethical concerns aside. I find this absolutely
fascinating. How long until the technology is perfected and some form of
immortality is reached?

How would it work. Do you get to 90 years old and they pull out your brain and
put it into a newer body?

Just so happens that in 50 years I'll be 90 myself. I a more ethical version
of this tech is around in some form or another. I'd love another 90 years!

Oh and for over population concerns, don't worry. I'll be happy to be part of
the new expedition on Titan or Ganymede or further out. :)

~~~
heymijo
> _Your head in a jar until they either create a new body for you or find a
> donor body_

Could you imagine the horror of waking up and being just a head?

~~~
pepr
For me, it sure beats dying!

~~~
solotronics
In its current form it would probably be horrific torture at best.

------
firethief
> Perhaps the most innovative modification involved fluid mechanics, one of
> Vrselja’s specialties in graduate school. As the British mathematician John
> Womersley managed to quantify more than half a century ago, blood does not
> circulate through our arteries at a uniform rhythm — it circulates in
> pulses, in concert with the shudder of our hearts. To account for that
> dynamic, the BMI unit had shipped with an automated “pulse generator,” a
> device that replicates the heartbeat’s pulsatility in the organs.

> But the pulse generator’s settings proved unsuitable for brains, which have
> a different flow pattern than the rest of the body. Before Sestan’s team
> adjusted the settings, the fluid might not completely permeate the
> vasculature of the organ, leaving parts of the brain essentially untreated.
> In such tissue, Daniele told me, “you’d end up with this sludgy, white
> yogurt-ish substance. It was a mess.” Conversely, if the pressure was too
> high, “the brain could just physically not stand it.” The organ fell apart.

> By that summer, Vrselja and Daniele had fine-tuned the pulse generator and
> attached a number of custom sensors[...]

It sounds like it was a lot of work getting the pulsation right. If they
actually needed pulsation at all that seems like an interesting finding unto
itself, since humans and cattle do fine with continuous-flow hearts:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3423277](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3423277)

------
sverige
"Nam Sibyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere, et
cum illi pueri dicerent: Σιβυλλα τι θελεις; respondebat illa: αποθανειν θελω."

‘I saw with my own eyes the Sibyl of Cumae hanging in a jar, and when the boys
said to her, ‘Sibyl, what do you want?’ she replied, ‘I want to die’.’

------
d1zzy
I see many comments on this article on people's choice to do anything to avoid
dying. One argument I haven't seen covered is the fairness of it.

Is it fair to younger generations that we keep on living? If we don't die
there will be fewer opportunities for the younger generations, the resources
we have all have access to are after all rather limited. Population growth is
already too high, immortality can only make it worse. We can see how
millennials are struggling with a tight job market and housing market, all
because previous generations who now have longer life spans than their parents
are holding on these resources.

There are aspects to immortality that go beyond selfishness, such as the
experience and knowledge that is lost of the people dying, being a negative to
the society. I'm in support of pursuing technology to allow all or most of
that knowledge to be preserved and passed on to younger generations but at
some point I think we have to accept our role in this world and that role
includes having to stop existing and let others have their chance at a full
life.

~~~
UnFleshedOne
This brings up a question of how you value people who don't exist yet.
Technically (not saying anything about politically) the problem you describe
can be solved by population control -- "just" don't make more people than can
be comfortably supported. We already do that with birth control or by simply
not having sex.

But that means people who would have been otherwise born would not be. If that
is not an issue, perfect, you have your technical solution. If that _is_ an
issue, then you have more problems than immortals hoarding resources (one of
them is Repugnant Conclusion [0]).

Another way to look at it -- would you want current lifespan artificially
shortened if you knew for sure that it would make things fairer for new
generations?

[0] -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere_addition_paradox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere_addition_paradox)

------
CodexArcanum
I find this sort of thing fascinating both for what it means about our own
consciousness, but also what it means for emergent consciousnesses. We're not
sure when a dying brain stops being conscious; and we're not sure when a once-
dead brain that's revived starts being conscious again. Why do we think we'd
have any idea when an artificial brain awakens to consciousness?

I feel like the same ethical concerns raised in the article about accidentally
reviving a person into a sensory-deprivation nightmare could also apply to
accidentally generating a thinking being that can only express itself though
shopping recommendations.

We're a long ways off yet from a comprehensive ethics of universal
consciousness.

------
flavius29663
Al I can think about is Metallica - One

    
    
      Now that the war is through with me
      I'm waking up, I cannot see
      That there is not much left of me
      Nothing is real but pain now
      Hold my breath as I wish for death
      Oh please God, wake me
      Back in the womb it's much too real
      In pumps life that I must feel
      But can't look forward to reveal
      Look to the time when I'll live
      Fed through the tube that sticks in me
      Just like a wartime novelty
      Tied to machines that make me be
      Cut this life off from me
      Hold my breath as I wish for death
      Oh please God, wake me

~~~
elliotec
Or "I have no mouth, and I must scream"
[http://www.mikedidonato.com/images/2009/04/harlan-
ellison-i-...](http://www.mikedidonato.com/images/2009/04/harlan-ellison-i-
hav-no-mouth-and-i-must-scream.pdf)

~~~
the_af
A wonderful classic.

Though I must point out -- and I've absolutely no qualms that you shared this,
mind you! -- that Harlan Ellison used to be furious and very vocal about it
when people shared his stuff online. I don't mind; I'd rather more people read
these good old classics of the New Wave of scifi.

------
dang
This has been discussed a fair bit:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19684386](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19684386)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18766920](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18766920)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19753418](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19753418)

------
Trilkhai
Reminds me a little too strongly of Infocom's interactive-fiction game
Suspended: A Cryogenic Nightmare
[http://gallery.guetech.org/suspended/suspended.html](http://gallery.guetech.org/suspended/suspended.html)

 _They said you would sleep for half a millennium — not an unreasonable length
of time, considering you 'd be in limited cryogenic suspension. Your body
would rest frozen at the planet's nerve center, an underground complex 20
miles beneath the surface. Your brain, they told you, would be wired to a
network of computers; your mind would continue to operate at a minimal level,
overseeing maintenance of surface-side equilibrium. And you would not awake,
so they promised, until your 500 years had elapsed — barring, of course, the
most dire emergency._

 _Then, and only then, you would be awakened to save your planet by
strategically manipulating six robots, each of whom perceives the world
differently. But such a catastrophe, you have been assured, could not possibly
occur._

 _Good morning._

------
sideshowb
Didn't CS Lewis cover this in his highly prophetic sci-fi "That hideous
strength" /s ;-)

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Or Robert Heinlein in Recalled to Life.

In that book, the tech works, except that one time out of six the person wakes
up insane.

~~~
ThrowawayR2
> _Or Robert Heinlein in Recalled to Life._

Silverberg, not Heinlein.

(Had me wondering if there was a Heinlein I hadn't read for a second.)

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Ah, my error. Silverberg is correct.

------
slg
It is nice to see that whoever wrote that headline acknowledges that this is a
story you see being discussed on a TV in the background of the first 10
minutes of a zombie movie as the protagonist prepares for their day.

------
danilocesar
Please someone tell me that he is considering using viruses to bring those
dead brain cells alive!

------
orblivion
Where did the truism "you can't stop the progress of science" come from in the
first place? I think we're going to have to reexamine it pretty soon.

~~~
qwdqpowdkop
Unfortunately, the opportunity to reexamine it has already passed. Even
without brain-in-jar sci-fi devices, technology is already sufficiently
advanced to create artificial nightmares. Consider the case of state-sponsored
torture, which now has at its disposal near-perfect surveillance, VR, genetic
modification, a litany drugs, remotely controlled robotics, etc. It's a
tragedy that scientific progress itself is a control system that is capable of
overshooting its target.

~~~
thestartup
There is nothing scarier to me than primates discovering ways for a sentient
brain to be effectively immortal. There is still time to re-examine the
implications of this, as such technology is quite a ways off still.

------
j2d3
This reminds me of the lifetime movie classic starring Mare Winningham, "Who
is Julia?"

------
djohnston
This rings familiar to Yun Tianming's voyage in Deaths End (Three Body).

------
zazzlez
Omg so many letters why can't they just summarize in a few paragraphs

------
macawfish
Next thing you know they'll be offering chakra transplants.

------
emilfihlman
Again it seems "ethics" is holding us back.

This is absolutely something we need to put lots of research and
experimentation into.

~~~
wdqwodjkqwpo
Without relying on "ethics" then, what is your justification that more
resources should be allocated for this?

~~~
emilfihlman
Research? Understanding? Reaching dominion over death? The usual?

Nothing really matters, you can only strive to achieve.

~~~
wdqwodjkqwpo
Why do any of _those_ matter? Ultimately, for something to be "worth"
anything, it requires a system of values, which is exactly what ethics is.

My point is not that research is worthless. My point is that relying on ethics
to assign positive value to research in one hand whilst denying the existence
of valid ethics when convenient is hypocritical.

------
erik_landerholm
Zombies

------
0815test
"What could possibly go wrong?" Because clearly we have _never, ever_ seen
this before and its consequences, I guess. _Braaaaiiiinnsssss_

~~~
ajuc
Zombies make no sense. They would starve to death quickly without farming and
modern supply chains or eat each other to extinction.

And the zombies that can go on without any source of energy for years break
thermodynamics.

~~~
darkpuma
The premise of this technology is however startlingly close to the cult-
classic zombie horror movie _Re-Animator_.

~~~
Dylan16807
There are hundreds of ways to make a zombie in fiction. Pretty much any
experiment involving death or near-death or hibernation is going to resemble
one of them. I have to disagree on 'startling'.

~~~
darkpuma
Most zombie fiction is premised on a contagious pathogen or a botched
scientific response to such a pathogen _(28 Days Later, The Last of Us, I am
Legend, Shaun of the Dead etc.)_ Some use accidental exposure to radiation or
extraterrestrial contamination, with unclear mechanisms _(Night of the Living
Dead)_

Zombie movies outside of the contagious pathogen paradigm are more uncommon.
Some zombie movies, particularly the older ones predating Night of the Living
Dead, are premised on religious supernatural voodoo stuff _(White Zombie
[1932!])_. In others, the condition is not strictly contagious, but exposure
to a chemical substance causes a reversal of death _(Re-Animator, and Return
of the Living Dead (my personal favorite and the origin of zombies who desire
'Braaaaiiiiiins'))_ In only a few, the creature[s] are created by a mad
scientist deliberately trying to reverse death using something other than a
contagious pathogen _(Frankenstein (should that count?), and Re-Animator.)_

Mad scientist in an academic setting attempting to reverse death and
accidentally creating an outbreak of non-contagious zombies is a pretty narrow
list of zombie movies. Re-Animator is the only one that comes to mind. Anyway,
a zombie outbreak obviously isn't going to happen, but if the public becomes
generally aware of this research, now might be a good time for Hollywood to
reboot Re-Animator. Gods know they hate making original movies these days. I'm
aware that a zombie movie fan complaining about a lack of originality may seem
ironic.

