Budny 10.00am
L05
ONCE MORE, WITH FEELING: REVERSE-ENGINEERING THE BRAIN
Liza Bruk (lab154@pitt.edu)
brain works and why it sometimes fails. This in itself will
lead to better biotechnological approaches to curing brain
disorders. Technological innovations involving the wiring of
electronic devices into human bodies to do the job of ruined
nerve cells can restore impaired neurological functions such
as vision, memory, and movement [3].
A NEW HOPE
The brain is undoubtedly the most important organ in the
human body. Without it and its complexity, human beings
could not function at the level at which we currently
function, and when it is damaged, life becomes significantly
more difficult for the affected individual. For years, brain
and nerve injuries were considered the end of the road. If the
brain miraculously repaired itself in some rare incidents, the
person was considered inexplicably lucky. Severe damage to
nerves meant years of distress with no real hope for a cure.
Today, these scenarios are still mostly unchanged. However,
attempts to reverse-engineer the brain in recent years have
given people hope of regaining lost neural function and
relief from suffering.
Because of the potential implications of reverseengineering the brain in creating artificial intelligence, it can
be considered a controversial issue. Some may argue that the
potential for creating increasingly human-like computers is
too dangerous and will result in some sort of robotic
armageddon. These claims are preposterous, and
furthermore, unethical. The benefits of reverse-engineering
the brain far outweigh any remote possibility of computers
surpassing human intelligence.
Furthermore, it is important to discuss engineering
education in regard to ethics, social responsibility, and
helping students choose which discipline is right for them.
IMPLEMENTATIONS: SENSES AND MOTION
With modern-day knowledge of brain functions related to
the auditory system, engineers have already been able to
design cochlear implants, a form of “neural prostheses,” to
treat hearing loss. Likewise, progress is being made in
designing light-sensitive “artificial retinas” to potentially
restore lost vision [3].
In addition, neuroscientists have been working to develop
implants that allow paralyzed people to move prosthetic
limbs using only their thoughts to activate the mechanical
components [4]. Researchers at the Johns Hopkins
University Applied Physics Laboratory have designed the
most advanced model thus far, a prosthetic arm [5]. The arm
works by recording brain signals through microarrays
implanted in the head and sending these signals to the
computer software controlling the arm [5]. It will be a major
accomplishment if this technology, once perfected, will
become widely available to patients with amputated limbs,
allowing them to regain most if not all of the range of
motion they lost along with their limb.
REVERSE-ENGINEERING IN A NUTSHELL
IMPLEMENTATION: MEMORY
Reverse-engineering the brain is one of the National
Academy of Engineering’s grand challenges for engineering.
Reverse-engineering the brain essentially entails developing
software that can replicate and simulate all of the brain’s
functions [1]. In order to reverse-engineer the brain it is
necessary to decode and simulate the cerebral cortex, which
is composed of 22 billion neurons (impulse-conducting
cells) and 220 trillion synapses (impulse-transmitting cells),
and is the center of human cognition [2].
Although one implementation of reverse-engineering is
improving computer intelligence by making it mimic the
functions of the human brain, the more human effect of
reverse-engineering is a deeper understanding of how the
University of Pittsburgh
Swanson School of Engineering
Another significant advancement that will emerge from
reverse-engineering the brain is the possibility of negating
the effects of memory loss caused by trauma to or disease in
the hippocampus, which disrupts electrical signals necessary
to form and recall memories. With knowledge of proper
signaling patterns, scientists and engineers can, and already
have started to, design computer chips that mimic the brain’s
communication skills [2]. In theory, “signals from the
healthy tissue could be recorded by an implantable chip,
which would then generate new signals to bypass the
damage”, allowing normal memory formation in an injured
brain [2].
1
November 1, 2011
Liza Bruk
A similar technology was recently tested by researchers
at Wake Forest University. After implanting rats with a
miniscule electrode array threaded into two slivers of brain
tissue responsible for storing new information, scientists
trained them to press one of two levers to get food [4]. They
then recorded the rats’ brain signals while performing this
action and “replayed” them after using a drug to suppress
one of the tissue slivers, known as CA1. When the implant
was switched on, the rats were able to recall which lever to
press. When it was switched off, the rats were unable to
complete the task [4].
Although there are obstacles to implementation in
humans, technology such as this would be incredibly helpful
to restoring memories to someone suffering from dementia
or Alzheimer’s disease. Because the human brain is so
complex, it is currently impossible to tell if it will ever be
possible to prevent or reverse memory loss entirely.
However, returning basic memory functions to people
afflicted with a memory degrading disease or a brain trauma
affecting memory will greatly improve their quality of life
[4].
neurological damage a healthy life back is a priceless gift
and directly correlates to the directive in the BMES code of
ethics that states “biomedical engineers involved in health
care activities shall…regard responsibility toward rights of
patients” [8]. Those involved in research related to reverseengineering are clearly upholding this directive by working
to ensure patients get the best possible medicine: a cure.
Another important directive on the BMES code of ethics
instructs biomedical engineers to train biomedical
engineering students in proper professional conduct by doing
so themselves [8]. This implies that those in the biomedical
engineering profession are responsible not only for their own
actions and the implications of their work but for the
education of future engineers.
EDUCATION
As stated in the previous section, engineers are responsible
for influencing the future generation of engineers by
teaching proper professional conduct and being models of
such conduct [8]. This must start at the very beginning, in
the freshman engineering curriculum.
It is important for freshman engineering students to
become aware of different challenges and achievements in
their engineering field. Researching and writing on specific
engineering-related topics interesting to students will
encourage them to think more in depth about their chosen
profession. While writing this and the previous papers, I
became even more intrigued by biomedical engineering.
Although I was already incredibly passionate about
bioengineering, it inspired me to further consider my future
and reinforced my belief that bioengineering is the right
choice for me. Most of my peers seem to be equally
passionate about their chosen branch of engineering, but
there are certainly those who are not sure which discipline
they wish to pursue. For these students, completing an
assignment such as this can be endlessly helpful in helping
them choose and make a plan for their future.
According to a recent study done at the University of
Vermont, adding assignments like these to engineering
education resulted in positive self-perceptions of increased
technical knowledge and engineers’ social responsibility [9].
This proves that encouraging students to focus their studies
starting with freshman year teaches them proper ethics and
increases their awareness of their future careers. Based on all
of this evidence, I definitely support researching and writing
on engineering developments and challenges as part of the
freshman engineering program.
ETHICS
When considering the ethical implications of reverseengineering the brain, one must take into account two
important codes of ethics: one for the National Society of
Professional Engineers (NSPE) and another for the
Biomedical Engineering Society (BMES), biomedical
engineering being the specific field under which this
technology falls. The first canon on both these codes is to
uphold and improve upon the safety, welfare, and health of
the public [7][8]. By continuing their research, the scientists
and engineers responsible for the aforementioned
technologies, as well as other related technologies, will be
doing exactly that. According to these ethical codes,
discontinuing research connected to reverse-engineering the
brain and denying people their rights to their personal health
and welfare is inherently unethical.
If we have the technology to do so, how can we deny the
blind man his right to see, the deaf child her right to hear, or
the veteran his right to functioning limbs? That is the
fundamental question to ask when considering the ethics of
reverse-engineering the brain. As previously mentioned,
reverse-engineering the brain will indeed be used to program
computers to mimic human intelligence and there is a certain
group of people terrified by this prospect. Understandably
so, with all the I, Robot-type propaganda out there.
Nonetheless, the ability to give someone suffering from
University of Pittsburgh
Swanson School of Engineering
2
November 1, 2011
Liza Bruk
http://robotzeitgeist.com/2010/08/brain-controlled-modular-prostheticlimb.html
[6] “NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers” [Webpage] Available:
http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html
[7] “Biomedical Engineering Code of Ethics” [Webpage] Available:
http://www.bmes.org/aws/BMES/pt/sp/ethics
[8] Ganapati, Priya. (2010, August). “Reverse-Engineering the Brain Likely
by 2030, Expert Predicts”. Wired. [Online Article]. Available:
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/08/reverse-engineering-brainkurzweil/
[9] Lathem, Sandra A., Maureen D. Neuman, and Nancy Hayden. (2011,
July). “The Socially Responsible Engineer: Assessing Student Attitudes of
Roles and Responsibilities”. Journal of Engineering Education. [Online
Article]. Available: http://www.jee.org/2011/July/03
CONFLICTS AND RESOLUTION
As with any of the grand challenges, reverse-engineering the
brain comes with many problems and disagreement among
the members of the scientific community. The main issues
arise from technical and theoretical obstacles [4]. Due to the
brain’s great intricacy, it will undoubtedly take many years
to fully understand. Furthermore, creating technology to help
cope with neurological trauma will be costly, controversial,
and fraught with uncertainty.
Ray Kurzweil, an expert on artificial intelligence, has
been quoted comparing reverse-engineering the brain to
writing a million lines of code and claiming this can be done
by 2020 [6]. PZ Myers, among others, disagrees, claiming
Kurzweil is grossly underestimating the brain’s immense
complexity [1]. Myers’s basic argument is that the brain’s
function cannot be derived from its underlying protein
sequences in the genome [1], which directly contradicts
Kurzweil’s assertion that “the design of the brain is in the
genome” [6]. Predictably, the scientific community will
continue squabbling long after reverse-engineering has been
achieved.
Despite these and other concerns, it is of the utmost
importance that this task be pursued. It is an ethical
imperative to pursue the technologies stemming from
reverse engineering the brain. Neurological trauma is
possibly the most difficult affliction to cope with as there is
currently little that can be done to help. Technology
developed as a result of better understanding of brain
functions will drastically improve the lives of people with
neurological damage. It would be inhuman to deny such
people the hope that reverse-engineering the brain will give
them.
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
Andrew Revkin. (2008, February) “How Many Grand Engineering
Challenges are Really Policy Changes?”. [Online article]. Available:
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/how-many-grandengineering-challenges-are-really-policy-challenges/
(2011). “Engineering for the Developing World”. [Online article].
Available: http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/cms/7126/7356.aspx
(2011). “Introduction to the Grand Challenges for Engineering”. [Online
article].
Available:
http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/cms/8996/9221.aspx
Stephen H. Unger. “Responsibility in Engineering: Victor Paschkis vs.
Wernher von Braun”. IT Professional.
Volume 12 Issue 3, 2010, p. 6-7, DOI 10.1109/MITP.2010.94.
(2011).
“The
Grand
Challenges”.
[Video].
Available:
http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I must acknowledge my father for being
my inspiration in pursuing bioengineering and neural
engineering. If not for the terrible chronic pain he has
suffered for many years, I would not be so determined to
contribute to finding a cure for neurological trauma. Dr.
Michael Eisen, a cell and molecular biology professor and
researcher at UC Berkeley, also played a significant role in
igniting my passion for medical research. Finally, I would
like to thank my peers, especially Nicole Dejean for
answering my questions and Anthony Cugini for
proofreading this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] Myers, PZ. (2011, August). “Ray Kurzweil does not understand the
brain”.
Pharyngula.
[Online
Article].
Available:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/08/ray_kurzweil_does_not_under
sta.php
[2] (2010, August). “Status of Reverse Engineering the Brain”. Next Big
Future.
[Online
Article].
Available:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/08/status-of-reverse-engineering-brain.html
[3] “Reverse Engineer the Brain”. [Online Article].
Available:
http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/cms/8996/9109.aspx
[4] Carey, Benedict. (2011, June). “Memory Implant Gives Rats Sharper
Recollection”.
The New York Times. [Online Article]. Available:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/17/science/17memory.html?scp=8&sq=ar
tificial%20limbs&st=cse
[5] (2010, August). “Brain controlled prosthetic limb most advanced yet”.
Robotics
Zeitgeist.
[Blog].
Available:
University of Pittsburgh
Swanson School of Engineering
2
November 1, 2011