Pete Holmes explains why the words we choose really matter

The image of a reviving undead brain is science fiction. Not any science fiction, especially the science fiction B-grade. We immediately think of the black and white horrors of movies like Fiend without a face. Bad game Plastic monstrosities. Visible chains. And a spinal cord that, for some reason, is also a tentacle?

But as in any good science fiction, it's only a matter of time before it spreads in our reality. This week Nature published the findings of researchers who have successfully restored the functioning of brains from clinically dead pigs. At least, what we once thought was dead.

What is dead can never die, it seems

The researchers did not come from Greyjoy House – "What's dead will never die" – but came largely from the Yale School of Medicine. They connected 32 brains of pork to a system called brainEx. BrainEx is an artificial perfusion system – that is, a system that takes over functions normally regulated by the organ. The pigs had been killed four hours earlier in a slaughterhouse of the United States Department of Agriculture; their brain completely removed from the skulls.

BrainEx injected into the brain an experimental solution essentially mimicking the blood flow. It brought oxygen and nutrients to the tissues, giving the brain cells the resources to undertake many normal functions. The cells began to consume and metabolize the sugars. The immune system of the brain came into play. The neuron samples could transmit an electrical signal. Some brain cells have even reacted to the drug.

The researchers have managed to keep some brains alive for 36 hours and do not know for the moment whetherEx may have sustained the brains longer. "It is conceivable that we simply avoid the inevitable, and the brain will not be able to recover," said Nenad Sestan, Yale's neuroscientist and principal investigator.

As a control, the other brains received either a wrong solution or no solution. No brain activity reactivated and deteriorated as usual.

The researchers hope that technology can improve our ability to study the brain and its cellular functions. Disorders and diseases of the brain are one of the main focuses of these studies. This could indicate the way forward to develop new treatments, such as brain damage, Alzheimer's disease, Huntington's disease and neurodegenerative diseases.

"This is an extraordinary and very promising breakthrough for neuroscience, and immediately offers a much better model for the study of the human brain, which is extremely important given the large number of people with mental illnesses. [and] brain, "Nita Farahany, bioethicists from the Duke University School of Law, wrote the study's commentary, said National Geographic.

An ethical gray matter

Before anyone has a Dr. Moreau Island It should be noted that the brain has not approached neural activity near consciousness.

The brainEx The solution contained chemicals that prevented the neurons from firing. To be extremely careful, the researchers also monitored the brain for any activity of this type and were ready to administer anesthetic if they had ever seen any signs of consciousness.

Nevertheless, the research signals a mbadive upcoming debate on medical ethics and our definition of death.

Clinically, most countries define death as an irreversible loss of brain or circulatory function. This definition was already at odds with some interpretations centered on folklore and value, but where do we go if it becomes possible to reverse clinical death by artificial perfusion?

"It's wild," said Jonathan Moreno, bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania, at the New York Times. "If ever an issue deserved a great public deliberation on the ethics of science and medicine, it is that one."

One possible consequence concerns organ donations. Some European countries require emergency responders to use a process that preserves organs when they can not resuscitate a person. They continue to pump blood throughout the body, but use a "thoracic aortic occlusion balloon" to prevent this blood from reaching the brain.

The system is already controversial because it raises concerns about the cause of death of the patient. But what happens when brain death becomes easily reversible? Stuart Younger, bioethicist at Case Western Reserve University, said Nature that if brainEx should become widely available, this could reduce the number of eligible donors.

"There is a potential conflict between the interests of potential donors – who may not even be donors – and those who are waiting for organs," he said.

It will take some time before such experiences go anywhere near human subjects. A more immediate ethical issue is the adverse effects of such experiments on animals.

Ethics committees evaluate research protocols and may reject those that cause undue pain, suffering or distress. Since dead animals do not experience any pain, suffer no trauma, they are usually approved as subjects. But how can these tips judge the suffering of a "cell-activity" brain? The distress of a partially alive brain?

The dilemma is unprecedented.

Set new limits

Another science fiction story that comes to mind when you discuss this story is, of course, Frankenstein. As Farahany says National Geographic: "It's definitely [sic] a good element of science fiction, and it is restoring the cellular function where we previously thought impossible. But have Frankensteinyou need a certain degree of consciousness, a little 'there'. [The researchers] found no form of consciousness in this study, and we still do not know if we ever could. But we are a little closer to this possibility. "

She's right. Researchers have begun their research to improve humanity, and we could one day derive unimaginable medical benefits. Ethical issues, however, remain as troubling as the stories they remind us of.