Looks like there have been ongoing issues with his lab:
https://www.fda.gov/inspections-compliance-enforcement-and-c...
A neurologist who hacked his brain and almost lost his mind (2016)
21–30 of 118 posts
Re: A neurologist who hacked his brain and almost lost his mind (2016)
#22> His early fears of having damaged Kennedy for life turned out to be unfounded; the language loss that left his patient briefly locked in was just a symptom of postoperative brain swelling. While I am glad that there was minimal harm done here, I am perplexed as to why a Neurosurgeon would risk their decades of training and career for such a high-risk low reward surgery. This could have been a terrible ending. We sh…
As someone who intersected with some of this work, my opinion is that it was likely a consequence of dwindling funding.
Re: A neurologist who hacked his brain and almost lost his mind (2016)
#23> His early fears of having damaged Kennedy for life turned out to be unfounded; the language loss that left his patient briefly locked in was just a symptom of postoperative brain swelling. While I am glad that there was minimal harm done here, I am perplexed as to why a Neurosurgeon would risk their decades of training and career for such a high-risk low reward surgery. This could have been a terrible ending. We sh…
On the other hand, if someone wants to experiment on themselves, why not let them? Nobody is harmed if it doesn't work, and we can make quick breakthroughs that might be otherwise impossible due to ethics/etc.
I think its like drugs in sports - in principle you are only risking yourself, but if it becomes normalized you will have to do it no matter how you feel about it or risk getting left behind.
Re: A neurologist who hacked his brain and almost lost his mind (2016)
#24FTA: > For human subjects he would replace the sciatic nerve with a chemical cocktail known to stimulate neural growth. Anyone know what this "chemical cocktail" is they're referring to?
Gotta be Lion’s Mane, or something with it. edit: haters will downvote me but look it up for yourself and upvote if you agree
It's BDNF. Lion's mane is just a supplement which promotes that, but there's other more effective ones. And of course the artificial ones are stronger (Noopept, Semax, ketamine).
Re: A neurologist who hacked his brain and almost lost his mind (2016)
#25This is absolutely crazy cool. Perhaps modern surgical interventions will only progress one crazy risk taker at a time. Reminds me of Werner Forssman and catheterization! An example where overly cautious ethics killed so many people before a brave self-experimenter saved so many lives.
Certainly a unique experiment, however behind the scenes things were let down by poor experimental procedures, minimal experiment designs, outrageously inaccurate data analysis, and poor recording equipment.
Re: A neurologist who hacked his brain and almost lost his mind (2016)
#26FTA: > For human subjects he would replace the sciatic nerve with a chemical cocktail known to stimulate neural growth. Anyone know what this "chemical cocktail" is they're referring to?
Gotta be Lion’s Mane, or something with it. edit: haters will downvote me but look it up for yourself and upvote if you agree
That shit is tasty as hell too - definitely one of my favourite mushrooms.
Re: A neurologist who hacked his brain and almost lost his mind (2016)
#27> His early fears of having damaged Kennedy for life turned out to be unfounded; the language loss that left his patient briefly locked in was just a symptom of postoperative brain swelling. While I am glad that there was minimal harm done here, I am perplexed as to why a Neurosurgeon would risk their decades of training and career for such a high-risk low reward surgery. This could have been a terrible ending. We sh…
On the other hand, if someone wants to experiment on themselves, why not let them? Nobody is harmed if it doesn't work, and we can make quick breakthroughs that might be otherwise impossible due to ethics/etc.
Why not let athletes use steroids? It's unsafe. And people might consider risking their health if they feel it could make/break their career. Better to have a strong stigma against self-experimentation to avoid that.
Re: A neurologist who hacked his brain and almost lost his mind (2016)
#28> His early fears of having damaged Kennedy for life turned out to be unfounded; the language loss that left his patient briefly locked in was just a symptom of postoperative brain swelling. While I am glad that there was minimal harm done here, I am perplexed as to why a Neurosurgeon would risk their decades of training and career for such a high-risk low reward surgery. This could have been a terrible ending. We sh…
Self-experimentation used to be a lot more common in medicine.
There's an interesting history of it in a book called Who Goes First?
https://www.amazon.com/Who-Goes-First-Lawrence-Altman/dp/052...
Re: A neurologist who hacked his brain and almost lost his mind (2016)
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, if someone wants to experiment on themselves, why not let them? Nobody is harmed if it doesn't work, and we can make quick breakthroughs that might be otherwise impossible due to ethics/etc.
Why not let athletes use steroids? It's unsafe. And people might consider risking their health if they feel it could make/break their career. Better to have a strong stigma against self-experimentation to avoid that.
"Why not let athletes use steroids? It's unsafe."
That's not the reason.
Athletes do unsafe things all the time, with the blessing of their sport. Boxing is unsafe, American football is unsafe, skateboarding is unsafe, skiing is unsafe, extreme sports are unsafe, etc...
The prohibition on steroid use has more to do with fairness and ensuring a level playing field, so no athlete has an unfair advantage over another.
Such considerations are irrelevant when one's goal is not fair competition but advancement of science.
Re: A neurologist who hacked his brain and almost lost his mind (2016)
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, if someone wants to experiment on themselves, why not let them? Nobody is harmed if it doesn't work, and we can make quick breakthroughs that might be otherwise impossible due to ethics/etc.
Why not let athletes use steroids? It's unsafe. And people might consider risking their health if they feel it could make/break their career. Better to have a strong stigma against self-experimentation to avoid that.
Not all steroids are inherently unsafe, especially the more modern ones. In reality the primary argument against steroids is that "its unfair to those who don't"