this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024
47 points (100.0% liked)

Science

13031 readers
1 users here now

Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Oh sure ... all media is likely some form of garbage, especially when it comes to anything other than the main text.

But a blood bypass would surely be the first major and critical step to isolating a brain from the whole body, except for cranial nerves and spinal cord of course, depending on what purpose anyone has for this. I'm presuming there's some advantage that could be had in certain surgical procedures.

[–] jarfil 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

I guess it could already allow full body transplants for tetraplegic patients... I mean, if they have no muscle control, and get a brain-dead donor, they have nothing to lose and might live who knows how much longer.

Probably a step farther, would be spinal nerve reconstruction, or using stuff like a brain implant to reconnect to the new body. Bridging nerve gaps is one of the first goals, and Neuralink's first human tests are to be performed precisely on tetraplegic patients, so the two might be a good fit.

The article mentions an improved way to maintain blood flow to the isolated part, so that would be beneficial for all surgeries that need isolation (like heart surgery).

Of course the "pump random drugs only to the brain and see how it reacts", is also interesting, just not as sensationalist... and they could even eat the rest of the pig afterwards, if the test drugs don't make it there.

[–] Faydaikin 2 points 9 months ago

That is both fascinating and terrifying at once.

load more comments (1 replies)