To get around the problem of damaging 10,000 neurons just to connect with 1,000, Biohybrid is experimenting with an approach that makes donor neurons a part of the implant itself - potentially allowing for dramatically better connection scaling.
To get around the problem of damaging 10,000 neurons just to connect with 1,000, Biohybrid is experimenting with an approach that makes donor neurons a part of the implant itself - potentially allowing for dramatically better connection scaling.
Do you see these eventually evolving into more a practical medical purpose or convenience/commodity purpose or both?
The most practical medical purpose I’ve seen is as a prosthetic implant for people with brain/spinal cord damage. Battelle in Ohio developed a very successful implant and has since received DARPA funding: https://www.battelle.org/insights/newsroom/press-release-details/battelle-led-team-wins-darpa-award-to-develop-injectable-bi-directional-brain-computer-interface. I think that article over-sells the product a little bit.
The biggest obstacle to invasive brain-computer implants like this one is their longevity. Inevitably, any metal electrode implanted in the brain gets rejected by the immune system of the brain. It’s a well-studied process where a glial scar forms, neurons move away from the implant, and the overall signal of the device decreases. We need advances in biocompatibility before this really becomes revolutionary.
ETA: This device avoids putting metal in the brain and instead the device sends axons into the brain. Certainly a novel approach which runs into different issues. The new neurons need to be accepted by the brain, and they need to be kept alive by the device.
If they move the cell bodies into the brain and then had the device house axons and dendrites (neuron input and output), they could maybe let the brain keep the device alive. But that is a much more difficult installation procedure
Fascinating, thank you for answering