Medical control of nervous system signals: a new frontier
Red flags
∙ PAID
It’s called Bioelectronic Medicine.
From news-medical.net:
Bioelectric medicine involves the use of implanted devices that stimulate targeted nerves within natural signaling pathways in order to achieve a therapeutic effect.
Neuromodulation can aid with the unmet needs of several diseases, including heart failure, hypertension, inflammation, asthma, arthritis, Alzheimer’s disease, and diabetes. There are also novel approaches that aim to intervene with the neuronal signaling that is involved with cancer progression. Overall, this type of therapy may hold potential for health conditions that conventional pharmaceutical treatments cannot appropriately manage.
This innovative approach utilizes bioelectricity as a fundamental unit of communication within the body, with bioelectric signals traveling through the nervous system in order to carry critical messages that ultimately control the functionality of organs. The electronic signals consist of information that can be recorded and combined with neural digital therapies, which can then be used to achieve a controlled therapeutic effect.
There are many diseases and conditions that can be targeted by bioelectronic therapies. An example includes an implantable electrode that targets the CNS [central nervous system] for the treatment of traumatic and neurodegenerative disorders known as deep brain stimulation (DBS), which first gained Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 1997 for an essential tremor in Parkinson’s disease. DBS can also be used to target pain, obsessive-compulsive disorder, Tourette syndrome, Alzheimer’s disease, and major depression.
Another target comprises the spinal cord, for example, to relieve chronic pain. The FDA approved a spinal cord stimulation system by Nevro Corporation in 2018, which applies electrical pulses to the spinal cord via a battery-powered generator that is implanted below the skin in order to relieve chronic pain.
—Signals that control the functionality of organs. Signals coming in from the outside. Signals broadcast by medical personnel.
Replacing or overwriting the signals the nervous system is sending.
Taking over and changing what the nervous system is doing.
Excuse me, but I’m not jumping for joy.
Later on in the news-medical article, we have this:
…there is also a range of ethical considerations related to bioelectronic medicine, including informed consent, research ethics, as well as the ethical implication of modifying the brain, which can affect autonomy and free will, as well as impact the mind. Institutional review boards play a significant role in addressing ethical and safety concerns to facilitate the appropriate regulatory and educational standards.
Aha. Changing the brain. The “issue” of free will.
I see. Yes.
Institutional review boards would guard against these “adverse effects?”
Excuse me again, but I’m not reassured.
What institutions do these review boards represent? Do they know more about my free will than I do? I think not.
Why does Bioelectronic Medicine remind me of Pavlov?
“Insert signal, change experience.”
“Well, I was having a bad day until ‘the new signal’ was promulgated. Now I feel great. Hmm, it seems like you’re in charge of how I feel…”
Step right up and have your brain changed.
I suppose it would be appropriate to point out that the brain is an exceedingly sophisticated and complex organ. Fiddling with it over HERE could have unanticipated effects over THERE.
Ditto for the human nervous system.
I see no reference to large-scale human clinical trials of this medical technology. Is that because none have been done? And if not, is the reason fear of untoward consequences?
Why do I keep thinking Pavlov. And Orwell, Huxley?
What are odds THE MILITARY has already been conducting Bioelectronic experiments? For example, wouldn’t they like to create imperviousness to pain? More broadly, wouldn’t they like to control the brains of soldiers on the battlefield?
This post is for paid subscribers
Subscribe