
Man's high-tech paradise lost: bionic eye removed - edward
http://www.thewhig.com/2012/11/28/mans-high-tech-paradise-lost
======
twic
> But the biggest problem facing the 16 patients who had signed up for the
> surgery was that the lead doctor, William H. Dobelle, was ill. He died while
> the 16th patient was still recovering from surgery in hospital.

> The project ended with his death.

> “When he died, there was no medical journal on the 16 patients, with myself
> being the first one implanted. Nothing was ever written and documented.

What the fuck? An experimental surgical procedure is being conducted, and
nothing is recorded outside on elderly doctor's brain?

~~~
jakobe
It's also odd that the patients had to pay for the experimental surgery. This
doesn't sound like a serious clinical trial, it sounds like a hack performed
by some back-alley doc in a dystopic science fiction story...

~~~
Trufa
> it sounds like a hack performed by some back-alley doc in a dystopic science
> fiction story...

I mean, they did manage to give him back his sight for a limited period of
time, that's pretty amazing technology if you ask me, not the kind a hack
would achieve, but yes, it's very unfortunate that he lost it again, that must
be some terrible pain.

I agree it might not sound too professional, but it seems to me that it's more
about how this article is putting it and the reality may be more complex.

~~~
userbinator
The style of experimentation that he did definitely fits the definition of
"hack" in the sense of the hacker spirit, i.e. he didn't really care for
anything other than getting it working. "F*ck the regulations, if these people
want to see again then that's what I'm going to make happen."

------
pocketstar
Ive done quite a bit of research on this recently. The device is a
microelectrode array (MEA), Id hazard a guess that it started failing after 8
weeks because of glial scaring that isolates the device from the nervous
tissue. For those interested I just wrote a paper about these and proposes
some solutions to these issues:
[https://www.dropbox.com/s/93nfqy9luojfwa3/MECH%20450A.rev0.p...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/93nfqy9luojfwa3/MECH%20450A.rev0.pdf)

There is a boat load of research going into MEAs these days.

~~~
Terr_
_Deus Ex: Human Revolution_ borrows from some of that current-science for its
somewhat-dystopic world of the 2027. People with augments are reliant on
Neuropozyne, a drug to prevent scarring and rejection.

------
edward
Wired Magazine article about him having the bionic eye installed:
[http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/10.09/vision_pr.html](http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/10.09/vision_pr.html)

~~~
gfodor
One of my friends is "one of the techs" in that article when the dude has the
seizure. He doesn't like talking about his adventure to Portugal with the
insane mad scientist surgeon.

------
jrochkind1
> _“There I met people who were blind as well. (Blind) people over there were
> so included in society I almost didn’t think about my blindness for a time._

> _“Then, when I came back here I realized that part of why I was chasing
> these dreams of seeing again was because that’s the way, in this society, I
> can be included. Despite the fact that when I’m right here working on my
> property, I’m not traumatized by my vision loss because I’ve moved on. I’m
> able to do what I need to do. It’s just that when I’m among society, I’m
> told I am not really allowed to eat, because we will not give you a job,
> because you cannot see.”_

------
leoc
You can actually do prosthetic vision without surgery, thanks to the magic
(and I use the word advisedly :) ) of sensory substitution:
[http://www.seeingwithsound.com/](http://www.seeingwithsound.com/)
[http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~kuipers/readings/Bach-y-Rita-
natur...](http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~kuipers/readings/Bach-y-Rita-
nature-69.pdf) . The latency of sound-based sensory-subsitution systems is
very high though.

~~~
jaekwon
I remember the story of a guy who could ride a bicycle by using his tongue to
make a loud sound that bounces off of objects. Not sure if it's real, but it
sounds plausible.

And this. All of these are amazing.

~~~
JonoBB
Here we go:
[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19524962](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19524962)

------
Aardwolf
> He says the loss of his sight, the second time, was more profound to him
> than the first, because it was permanent.

Why was the first time non-permanent while the second time was? Did the system
damage his visual system in his brain?

~~~
Udo
There is most likely extensive damage now due to taking the interface out, so
there might not be enough neural substance to attach anything to anymore.

> Did the system damage his visual system in his brain?

I know of no working system that attaches directly to the optic nerve, and the
article is very light on details. I assume these implants worked by projecting
light on retina remnants. In cases where the eye is destroyed but some of the
light-sensing apparatus is still intact, there is the potential for a device
that sends light directly into the remaining rods and cones.

This is different from a direct electrical interface, which remains the holy
grail of brain-machine interfaces.

~~~
pocketstar
I doubt they would have removed the Microelectrode arrays from the brain, that
would have caused serious damage as the MEAs would be encapsulated in glial
scar tissue. The article made it sound like they just removed the two jacks
from his skull.

The devices were probably Utah Microelectrode Arrays(MEAs) the MEAs were no
doubt implanted on the visual cortex on the cerebral cortex to induce
phospehnes.

This is no holy grail, and MEAs have provided computer-brain interfaces since
the 80's.

check out my other comments in the thread for more information

------
dm2
Why did the devices start to fail after 8 weeks? Was it because of the
infection?

Are there any similar devices that have been installed in people that have
been more successful?

$100,000+ for 8 weeks of sight is very sad to think about.

What was the approximate resolution of the image that he saw?

WEAR YOUR SAFETY GLASSES!

~~~
userbinator
That works out to ~$100/hr.

> What was the approximate resolution of the image that he saw?

From the article it says he saw well enough to _drive_ , so it must've been
pretty good.

> WEAR YOUR SAFETY GLASSES!

"Carol never wore her safety goggles. Now she doesn't need them."

~~~
dm2
The Wired article that someone else linked to says that the resolution was 32
x 32 (1024), if that's the same person.

The amazing part is that the brain quickly learns to interpret the signals and
can create an image.

I wonder if the brains image is a higher resolution than the camera
considering it's basically processing the raw data and can apply very complex
"algorithms" to the data to present an image.

I wasn't saying the price was too high, just that it's interesting to think
about how lucky we are to have sight for free and that people with not very
much money would spend everything just for the chance to regain a small amount
of vision.

~~~
rikacomet
There is more. Perhaps its better to encourage the research of methods that
can restore vision partly. If you think about it, the low vision is workable
to a lot of these people, who have known the complete darkness called
blindness.

Maybe start off in the same manner as the television research. First black and
white, low resolution then onwards to full sight. It shouldn't be "All or
Nothing" always. Low cost procedures are really the need of the hour.

Some people do think like this indeed, but majority of people don't. Articles
like this are nice reminders for this.

~~~
dm2
I'm not sure that the device itself is the costly part though (other than the
research to develop it). The main cost right now seems to be the surgery,
brain surgery ain't cheap, especially when it's experimental procedures. An
easier surgery is really what is needed. If surgeons could just lift up the
eye and clamp the device onto the optical nerve then the cost would decrease
dramatically.

There are some research teams working on the lower cost method.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2195683/Bioni...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2195683/Bionic-
eye-breakthrough-Australian-woman-receives-radical-world-implant.html)

Most of the transplants are lower resolution to reduce device size (smaller
computer components and battery). If you can perfect the lower resolution
device then increasing the resolution and adding colors would be relatively
easy.

I'm amazed that scientists can "talk" to the brain and how successful some of
these procedures have been, truly fascinating times we live in.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurostimulation#Visual_Prosthe...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurostimulation#Visual_Prosthesis)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain%E2%80%93computer_interfac...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain%E2%80%93computer_interface)

I was about to say that you'll never see a BCI kickstarter, but sure enough
there is one: [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/openbci/openbci-an-
open...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/openbci/openbci-an-open-source-
brain-computer-interface-fo)

It can't talk back to the brain unfortunately, but it's a step in the right
direction.

[http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/BTO/](http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/BTO/) was
launched 5 days ago (NOT an April fools joke), usually DARPA does a pretty
good job of rapidly advancing technology.

[http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2014/04/01.aspx](http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2014/04/01.aspx)

[http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/BTO/Programs/Reliable_Neural-I...](http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/BTO/Programs/Reliable_Neural-
Interface_Technology_RE_NET.aspx)

I guess the true holy-grail for this would be to pack in some "putty" into the
eye-socket and let the eye re-grow based on your DNA, I doubt that will be
available soon but a biological solution to blindness should definitely be
explored as well.

~~~
rikacomet
I know the main problem right now is the fact that the eye's optical nerve
can't regenerate. If it does works like optical fiber, maybe something could
be made to mend the optical nerve using optical fiber.

Stem cell technology seems ever elusive, but still if not that, than this.

Thanks for the kickstarter and darpa link, it seems really interesting.

~~~
dm2
"the fact that the eye's optical nerve can't regenerate"

It might not regenerate on it's own, but that doesn't mean it can't
regenerate.

[http://www.childrenshospital.org/news-and-
events/2012/may-20...](http://www.childrenshospital.org/news-and-
events/2012/may-2012/first-light-scientists-regenerate-the-optic-nerve-
restore-some-components-of-vision)

"A team at Boston Children’s Hospital reports a three-pronged intervention
that not only got optic nerve fibers to grow the full length of the visual
pathway (from retina to the visual areas of the brain), but also restored some
basic elements of vision in live mice."

[http://webvision.med.utah.edu/2012/07/full-length-axon-
regen...](http://webvision.med.utah.edu/2012/07/full-length-axon-regeneration-
in-the-adult-mouse-optic-nerve-and-partial-recovery-of-simple-visual-
behaviors/)

------
oakwhiz
>He had the jacks removed from his skull at Kingston General Hospital in 2010
as they were infecting badly, due to being made of titanium.

I was under the impression that titanium was one of the few materials
considered to be safe for human implantation.

~~~
waps
The way I understand it is this : if an implant is nice and smooth and well
integrated with it's surrounding tissue then a titanium implant is safe. Safe
in the sense that the immune system won't attack it just because it's there,
like it would with metal or frankly almost any substance (the 2 exceptions are
titanium and gold, just ask someone with earrings what happens if you insert a
silver or metal earring near a scratch).

If the implant has sharp edges, or rips into the surrounding tissue, or
otherwise causes cells to die or prevents repair of damaged tissue somehow,
the immune system will go looking for a culprit[1]. If it decides that the
implant is the culprit, bad luck. It will attempt to surround the implant and
expel it. Depending on the size this may or may not work (this is what happens
to splinters of wood that get into your body, for example). This can even
cause the immune system to decide a bone is the culprit, if it does you have
rheumatoid arthritis (it's a condition that you are very likely to get if you
live long enough)

Furthermore, implants may actually infect, as in a bacterial colony may
develop on their surface (because the contact surface with the immune system
is much smaller, an infection has a bigger chance to maintain that position.
Always keep in mind that the immune system wins against bacteria not because
it's better or smarter, but because it has 80kg of cells working logistics for
it). The same can happen to bones.

[1] To be exact, cells have an "alarm" signal molecule floating inside them.
If the cell is ordered to commit suicide (apoptosis), it will put out an
enzyme that neutralizes this alarm molecule before ripping itself to shreds,
the same will happen if the immune system orders a cell to eat itself
(autophagy). But if the cell dies for some other reason (e.g. getting ripped
to shreds, explosion due to infection, ...) the alarm signal will be spread
into the surrounding tissue where the immune system can find it. When it finds
it, it will come in force to check out the situation. If it keeps seeing this
signal without finding a cause, the immune system will go insane/react badly.

~~~
dm2
The "jacks" they are referring to are the openings in the skin where the wires
come out of, I'm guessing one for data and one for power.

Artificial openings in the body are very difficult to keep from getting
infected.

[http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/10.09/images/FF.Sight...](http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/10.09/images/FF.Sight.SH.29337.r2_f.jpg)

~~~
derekp7
So why not use RF for data, and magnetic induction for power?

~~~
pocketstar
This would be prohibitively large to implant in the brain. Betavoltaics could
provide a novel power source, I believe they are used in some pacemakers. RF
would be a problem because cancer.

People forget that magnetic induction can also be used for data and power
transfer simultaneously, I believe they use this approach with some cochlear
implants.

~~~
robryk
> RF would be a problem because cancer.

Could you provide some evidence for this?

Also, isn't magnetic induction basically RF?

~~~
pocketstar
electromagnetic radiation(photons) is VERY VERY VERY different from magnetic
fields(fucking magnets how do they work?) the driving physics behind magnetic
induction.

Yes RF is non-ionizing, but research linking it to cancer is generally
inconclusive. So I concede I was too bold saying RF causes cancer, but right
now we just don't know.

It would probably be possible to power it with RF power harvesting and
multiplex the MEA with a MSP430. Now that would be a fun research project.

~~~
robryk
In order to transfer power using magnetic induction you need a _variable in
time_ magnetic field, which causes a variable in time electric field to
appear. That seems to me to be exactly the description of an electromagnetic
wave.

------
Gravityloss
The important takeaway is that the social effects of being blind are very big.
They could be mitigated entirely without technology, with cultural changes.

~~~
pmr_
This argument can be made for many different disabilities (mental as well as
physical). While I don't think we should stop pursuing development of cures we
should refocus our efforts on enabling the afflicted to live the life they
want.

------
danford
What's going to happen when things like this become common and they're
attached to storage devices? Like when we have BMIs and neuro prosthetics, how
will copyright law be enforced? will there be a special "data control agency"
that has access to my BMI to make sure I don't copy any information I don't
own? Hopefully we'll have some sane laws regarding copyright and software
patents by that time. IMO we're on our way to a point where the government
needs to step in and keep this kind of hardware/software open source and imho
they also need to make laws that make not reporting a bug a semi-serious
crime, and very serious crime for agencies that exploit bugs in secret.

~~~
userbinator
Our eyes are already attached to a mass storage (and processing) device, and
although it has a very high capacity, it tends to be rather lossy and have
high error rates. :-)

It will certainly be an interesting future, and I hope it is one where
information becomes even more free.

~~~
clef
That mass storage device can even be permanently damaged if dropped on the
floor :)

~~~
deciplex
Rather less damaged by various magnetic fields though, than is typical.

------
watson
Talk about bad luck! Loosing the sight in one eye at a time in two separate,
but almost exact incidents

~~~
jzwinck
I'm sorry to say this but it sounds like bad risk management. At 17 he lost
one eye to flying metal. At that point he might have chosen to be more
cautious with his remaining eye, e.g. wearing some form of glasses at all
times. But just three years later he lost the second eye...in the same sort of
accident. It's not good luck, but it isn't only bad luck.

------
nnq
People do realize that this technology is now proven to work, right? And
because you can now do everything the wireless way (including the charging
part), and using off-the-shelf components (you just need to find a subset of
components that can be easily "approved for medical use"), and you'll have 99%
less risk of infection!

Basically the successors of this technology should already be on the market
now! They aren't simply because nobody found a way to make a huge profits and
medical doctors are too technophobes and/or drowning in other problems that
need their immediate attention to afford take risk* and make the effort of
begging the government to fund this.

~~~
gus_massa
This is still unproven. There are only a few (¿one?) anecdotes of the
experimental subjects, and they can’t show how amazingly good the result were
because the device no longer works.

Another comment says that the device resolution was 32x32 (this article says
that they see “dots”), it’s much better than a 0x0 resolution, but it’s the
resolution of an icon. If you have ever drawn an icon, you’d know that 32x32
is not too much.

There are similar device for audition, but the wires don’t go directly to the
brain.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant)

Let’s hope that this camera device or a similar device gets fixed until it’s
useful in the long term. But it’s important to remember that there are a lot
of technical details that need to get fixed, and a lot of clinical test to
prove that it’s not a scam, snake oil, an optimistic misrepresentation or any
combination of them.

~~~
nnq
To be honest, it was probably a dead-end tech that could've worked, but will
probably not be developed because other approaches are kind of safer and
worked on by more reputable scientists:
[http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/278/1711/1489...](http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/278/1711/1489.short)
(this one is 38x40, and it's probably easier to get it higher res too :) )

But when it was first tested, it was what seemed to work best, but was
abandoned because of the place it was developed in and the (lack of)
scientific reputation of the person working on it. The thing with these kinds
of things is that you need "proof by engineering and experiment", so if you
don't throw money at them before knowing how well they work, you'll never know
if they work at all... or you'll never have more than one working technology
to choose from. The whole "fund just the best ideas" approach in medical
engineering is disastrous imho because the problem space is so huge that you
never know what might turn out to work and for what, and at the same time, you
obviously can't just do "garage/basement experiments" on these kinds of
things, so any equivalent of "wacky garage experiments" actually needs to be
funded... this technology was a nice "exploration" of one way to solve a
problem.

------
T-A
This kind of implant is commercially available now:
[http://2-sight.eu/ee/home-ee](http://2-sight.eu/ee/home-ee)

~~~
mindcrime
Interesting that your nick is "T-A". Tessier-Ashpool?

------
edward
Also:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_prosthesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_prosthesis)

------
0800899g
bionic eye

