Connect with us

Published

on

Elon Musk’s Neuralink, a medical device company, is under federal investigation for potential animal-welfare violations amid internal staff complaints that its animal testing is being rushed, causing needless suffering and deaths, according to documents reviewed by Reuters and sources familiar with the investigation and company operations.

Neuralink is developing a brain implant it hopes will help paralysed people walk again and cure other neurological ailments. The federal probe, which has not been previously reported, was opened in recent months by the US Department of Agriculture’s Inspector General at the request of a federal prosecutor, according to two sources with knowledge of the investigation. The probe, one of the sources said, focuses on violations of the Animal Welfare Act, which governs how researchers treat and test some animals.

The investigation has come at a time of growing employee dissent about Neuralink’s animal testing, including complaints that pressure from CEO Musk to accelerate development has resulted in botched experiments, according to a Reuters review of dozens of Neuralink documents and interviews with more than 20 current and former employees. Such failed tests have had to be repeated, increasing the number of animals being tested and killed, the employees say. The company documents include previously unreported messages, audio recordings, emails, presentations and reports.

Musk and other Neuralink executives did not respond to requests for comment.

Reuters could not determine the full scope of the federal investigation or whether it involved the same alleged problems with animal testing identified by employees in Reuters interviews. A spokesperson for the USDA inspector general declined to comment. US regulations don’t specify how many animals companies can use for research, and they give significant leeway to scientists to determine when and how to use animals in experiments. Neuralink has passed all USDA inspections of its facilities, regulatory filings show.

In all, the company has killed about 1,500 animals, including more than 280 sheep, pigs and monkeys, following experiments since 2018, according to records reviewed by Reuters and sources with direct knowledge of the company’s animal-testing operations. The sources characterised that figure as a rough estimate because the company does not keep precise records on the number of animals tested and killed. Neuralink has also conducted research using rats and mice.

The total number of animal deaths does not necessarily indicate that Neuralink is violating regulations or standard research practices. Many companies routinely use animals in experiments to advance human health care, and they face financial pressure to quickly bring products to market. The animals are typically killed when experiments are completed, often so they can be examined post-mortem for research purposes.

But current and former Neuralink employees say the number of animal deaths is higher than it needs to be for reasons related to Musk’s demands to speed research. Through company discussions and documents spanning several years, along with employee interviews, Reuters identified four experiments involving 86 pigs and two monkeys that were marred in recent years by human errors. The mistakes weakened the experiments’ research value and required the tests to be repeated, leading to more animals being killed, three of the current and former staffers said. The three people attributed the mistakes to a lack of preparation by a testing staff working in a pressure-cooker environment.

One employee, in a message seen by Reuters, wrote an angry missive earlier this year to colleagues about the need to overhaul how the company organises animal surgeries to prevent “hack jobs.” The rushed schedule, the employee wrote, resulted in under-prepared and over-stressed staffers scrambling to meet deadlines and making last-minute changes before surgeries, raising risks to the animals.

Musk has pushed hard to accelerate Neuralink’s progress, which depends heavily on animal testing, current and former employees said. Earlier this year, the chief executive sent staffers a news article about Swiss researchers who developed an electrical implant that helped a paralyzed man to walk again. “We could enable people to use their hands and walk again in daily life!” he wrote to staff at 6:37 a.m. Pacific Time on Feb. 8. Ten minutes later, he followed up: “In general, we are simply not moving fast enough. It is driving me nuts!”

On several occasions over the years, Musk has told employees to imagine they had a bomb strapped to their heads in an effort to get them to move faster, according to three sources who repeatedly heard the comment. On one occasion a few years ago, Musk told employees he would trigger a “market failure” at Neuralink unless they made more progress, a comment perceived by some employees as a threat to shut down operations, according to a former staffer who heard his comment.

Five people who’ve worked on Neuralink’s animal experiments told Reuters they had raised concerns internally. They said they had advocated for a more traditional testing approach, in which researchers would test one element at a time in an animal study and draw relevant conclusions before moving on to more animal tests. Instead, these people said, Neuralink launches tests in quick succession before fixing issues in earlier tests or drawing complete conclusions. The result: More animals overall are tested and killed, in part because the approach leads to repeated tests.

One former employee who asked management several years ago for more deliberate testing was told by a senior executive it wasn’t possible given Musk’s demands for speed, the employee said. Two people told Reuters they left the company over concerns about animal research.

The problems with Neuralink’s testing have raised questions internally about the quality of the resulting data, three current or former employees said. Such problems could potentially delay the company’s bid to start human trials, which Musk has said the company wants to do within the next six months. They also add to a growing list of headaches for Musk, who is facing criticism of his management of Twitter, which he recently acquired for $44 billion. Musk also continues to run electric carmaker Tesla Inc and rocket company SpaceX.

The US Food and Drug Administration is in charge of reviewing the company’s applications for approval of its medical device and associated trials. The company’s treatment of animals during research, however, is regulated by the USDA under the Animal Welfare Act. The FDA didn’t immediately comment.

Missed deadlines, botched experiments

Musk’s impatience with Neuralink has grown as the company, which launched in 2016, has missed his deadlines on several occasions to win regulatory approval to start clinical trials in humans, according to company documents and interviews with eight current and former employees.

Some Neuralink rivals are having more success. Synchron, which was launched in 2016 and is developing a different implant with less ambitious goals for medical advances, received FDA approval to start human trials in 2021. The company’s device has allowed paralyzed people to text and type by thinking alone. Synchron has also conducted tests on animals, but it has killed only about 80 sheep as part of its research, according to studies of the Synchron implant reviewed by Reuters. Musk approached Synchron about a potential investment, Reuters reported in August.

Synchron declined to comment.

In some ways, Neuralink treats animals quite well compared to other research facilities, employees said in interviews, echoing public statements by Musk and other executives. Company leaders have boasted internally of building a “Monkey Disneyland” in the company’s Austin, Texas facility where lab animals can roam, a former employee said. In the company’s early years, Musk told employees he wanted the monkeys at his San Francisco Bay Area operation to live in a “monkey Taj Mahal,” said a former employee who heard the comment. Another former employee recalled Musk saying he disliked using animals for research but wanted to make sure they were “the happiest animals” while alive.

The animals have fared less well, however, when used in the company’s research, current and former employees say.

The first complaints about the company’s testing involved its initial partnership with University of California, Davis, to conduct the experiments. In February, an animal rights group, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, filed a complaint with the USDA accusing the Neuralink-UC Davis project of botching surgeries that killed monkeys and publicly released its findings. The group alleged that surgeons used the wrong surgical glue twice, which led to two monkeys suffering and ultimately dying, while other monkeys had different complications from the implants.

The company has acknowledged it killed six monkeys, on the advice of USC Davis veterinary staff, because of health problems caused by experiments. It called the issue with the glue a “complication” from the use of an “FDA-approved product.” In response to a Reuters inquiry, a USC Davis spokesperson shared a previous public statement defending its research with Neuralink and saying it followed all laws and regulations.

A federal prosecutor in the Northern District of California referred the animal rights group’s complaint to the USDA Inspector General, which has since launched a formal probe, according to a source with direct knowledge of the investigation. USDA investigators then inquired about the allegations involving the UC Davis monkey research, according to two sources familiar with the matter and emails and messages reviewed by Reuters.

The probe is concerned with the testing and treatment of animals in Neuralink’s own facilities, one of the sources said, without elaborating. In 2020, Neuralink brought the program in-house, and has since built its extensive facilities in California and Texas.

A spokesperson for the US attorney’s office for the Northern District of California declined to comment.

Delcianna Winders, director of the Animal Law and Policy Institute at the Vermont Law and Graduate School, said it is “very unusual” for the USDA inspector general to investigate animal research facilities. Winders, an animal-testing opponent who has criticised Neuralink, said the inspector general has primarily focused in recent years on dog fighting and cockfighting actions when applying the Animal Welfare Act.

It’s hard on the little piggies

The mistakes leading to unnecessary animal deaths included one instance in 2021, when 25 out of 60 pigs in a study had devices that were the wrong size implanted in their heads, an error that could have been avoided with more preparation, according to a person with knowledge of the situation and company documents and communications reviewed by Reuters.

The mistake raised alarms among Neuralink’s researchers. In May 2021, Viktor Kharazia, a scientist, wrote to colleagues that the mistake could be a “red flag” to FDA reviewers of the study, which the company planned to submit as part of its application to begin human trials. His colleagues agreed, and the experiment was repeated with 36 sheep, according to the person with knowledge of the situation. All the animals, both the pigs and the sheep, were killed after the procedures, the person said.

Kharazia did not comment in response to requests.

On another occasion, staff accidentally implanted Neuralink’s device on the wrong vertebra of two different pigs during two separate surgeries, according to two sources with knowledge of the matter and documents reviewed by Reuters. The incident frustrated several employees who said the mistakes – on two separate occasions – could have easily been avoided by carefully counting the vertebrae before inserting the device.

Company veterinarian Sam Baker advised his colleagues to immediately kill one of the pigs to end her suffering.

“Based on low chance of full recovery … and her current poor psychological well-being, it was decided that euthanasia was the only appropriate course of action,” Baker wrote colleagues about one of the pigs a day after the surgery, adding a broken heart emoji.

Baker did not comment on the incident.

Employees have sometimes pushed back on Musk’s demands to move fast. In a company discussion several months ago, some Neuralink employees protested after a manager said that Musk had encouraged them to do a complex surgery on pigs soon. The employees resisted on the grounds that the surgery’s complexity would lengthen the amount of time the pigs would be under anesthesia, risking their health and recovery. They argued they should first figure out how to cut down the time it would take to do the surgery.

“It’s hard on the little piggies,” one of the employees said, referring to the lengthy period under anesthesia.

In September, the company responded to employee concerns about its animal testing by holding a town hall to explain its processes. It soon after opened up the meetings to staff of its federally-mandated board that reviews the animal experiments.

Neuralink executives have said publicly that the company tests animals only when it has exhausted other research options, but documents and company messages suggest otherwise. During a November 30 presentation the company broadcast on YouTube, for example, Musk said surgeries were used at a later stage of the process to confirm that the device works rather than to test early hypotheses. “We’re extremely careful,” he said, to make sure that testing is “confirmatory, not exploratory,” using animal testing as a last resort after trying other methods.

In October, a month before Musk’s comments, Autumn Sorrells, the head of animal care, ordered employees to scrub “exploration” from study titles retroactively and stop using it in the future.

Sorrells did not comment in response to requests.

Neuralink records reviewed by Reuters contained numerous references over several years to exploratory surgeries, and three people with knowledge of the company’s research strongly rejected the assertion that Neuralink avoids exploratory tests on animals. Company discussions reviewed by Reuters showed several employees expressing concerns about Sorrells’ request to change exploratory study descriptions, saying it would be inaccurate and misleading.

One noted that the request seemed designed to provide “better optics” for Neuralink.

© Thomson Reuters 2022


Affiliate links may be automatically generated – see our ethics statement for details.

Continue Reading

Science

Scientists Recreate Cosmic Ray Physics Using Cold Atom in New Laboratory Study

Published

on

By

Scientists Recreate Cosmic Ray Physics Using Cold Atom in New Laboratory Study

For the first time, researchers have managed to simulate a fundamental process of cosmic particle acceleration in a laboratory: the first series of discoveries that will transform our understanding of cosmic rays. Now, scientists from the Universities of Birmingham and Chicago have created a tiny, 100-micrometre Fermi accelerator, in which mobile optical potential barriers collide with trapped atoms, in a partial replica of how cosmic particles pick up energy in space. The technique not only replicates cosmic ray behaviour but also sets a new benchmark in quantum acceleration technology.

Lab-Built Fermi Accelerator Using Cold Atoms Validates Cosmic Ray Theory and Advances Quantum Tech

As per findings published in Physical Review Letters, this fully controllable setup demonstrated particle acceleration through the Fermi mechanism first proposed by physicist Enrico Fermi in 1949. Long theorised to underlie cosmic ray generation, the process had never been reliably replicated in a lab. By combining energy gains with particle losses, researchers created energy spectra similar to those observed in space, offering the first direct validation of Bell’s result, a cornerstone of cosmic ray physics.

In Fermi acceleration, ultracold atoms are accelerated to more than 0.5 metres per second using laser-controlled barriers. Dr Amita Deb, a coauthor and researcher at the University of Birmingham, mentioned, ‘Our chimney is more powerful than conventional quantum nano-measurements, which are the best acceleration tools in the world so far, and while its simplicity and small size can be compelling, its lack of a theoretical speed limit is the most attractive feature.’ The ultracold atomic jets could be readily controlled with high precision in the subsequent experiments.

This progress means that, for the first time, complicated astrophysical events like shocks and turbulence can be studied in a laboratory, lead author Dr Vera Guarrera stated. This opens new avenues for high-energy astrophysics and also for applications in quantum wavepacket control and quantum chemistry.

Researchers plan to find out how different behaviour affects energy cutoffs and acceleration rates. A compact Fermi accelerator of this type could be a cornerstone for studies of fundamental physics and also connect to emerging technologies such as atomtronics.

For the latest tech news and reviews, follow Gadgets 360 on X, Facebook, WhatsApp, Threads and Google News. For the latest videos on gadgets and tech, subscribe to our YouTube channel. If you want to know everything about top influencers, follow our in-house Who’sThat360 on Instagram and YouTube.


Amazon Introduces Rewards Gold Cashback Program Ahead of Prime Day 2025 Sale



Elon Musk Says Grok Chatbot Is Coming to Tesla Vehicles by Next Week

Continue Reading

Science

Scientists Say Dark Matter Could Turn Failed Stars Into ‘Dark Dwarfs’

Published

on

By

Scientists Say Dark Matter Could Turn Failed Stars Into ‘Dark Dwarfs’

Astronomers now propose that “failed stars” known as brown dwarfs could be powered by dark matter. Dark matter makes up about 85 percent of the universe’s matter but does not shine; it interacts only via gravity. Brown dwarfs form like stars but lack enough mass to ignite fusion. The theory suggests brown dwarfs in galaxy centers might trap dark matter in their interiors. When that dark matter annihilates, it releases energy that heats the star, turning the dwarf into a brighter “dark dwarf.” If such objects exist, finding them would give scientists a new clue to the nature of dark matter.

Dark Matter in Failed Stars

According to the new model, dense brown dwarfs at the centers of galaxies act like gravity wells that accumulate dark matter. Because dark matter interacts only via gravity, it naturally drifts to galactic cores, where it can be captured by star. As University of Hawai‘i physicist Jeremy Sakstein explains, once inside a star dark matter can annihilate with itself, releasing energy that heats the dwarf. The more dark matter a brown dwarf collects, the more energy it outputs. Crucially, this effect only works if dark matter particles self-annihilate (as with heavy WIMPs); lighter or non-interacting candidates like axions would not create dark dwarfs.

They propose using a chemical signature: a dark dwarf should hold on to lithium-7 that normal brown dwarfs burn away. The researchers say powerful telescopes like NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope might already be sensitive enough to spot cool, dim dark dwarfs near the Milky Way’s center. Detecting even one would strongly suggest that dark matter is made of heavy, self-interacting particles (like WIMPs).

In related work, Colgate astrophysicist Jillian Paulin coauthored studies of ancient “dark stars” fueled by dark matter, while SLAC physicist Rebecca Leane and collaborators have shown that dark matter capture could heat brown dwarfs and exoplanets – a process called “dark kinetic heating”. Together, these ideas highlight how even dim, unusual stars could illuminate the nature of dark matter.

For the latest tech news and reviews, follow Gadgets 360 on X, Facebook, WhatsApp, Threads and Google News. For the latest videos on gadgets and tech, subscribe to our YouTube channel. If you want to know everything about top influencers, follow our in-house Who’sThat360 on Instagram and YouTube.


Apple Takes Fight Against $587 Million EU Antitrust Fine to Court



Apple Loses Top AI Models Executive to Meta’s Hiring Spree

Continue Reading

Science

New Gel-Based Robotic Skin Feels Touch, Heat, and Damage Like Human Flesh

Published

on

By

New Gel-Based Robotic Skin Feels Touch, Heat, and Damage Like Human Flesh

Researchers have created a novel electronic “skin” that could let robots experience a sense of touch. This low-cost, gelatin-based material is highly flexible and durable and can be molded over a robot hand. Equipped with electrodes, the skin detects pressure, temperature changes, and even sharp damage. In tests it responded to pokes, burns and cuts. Unlike conventional designs that use separate sensors for each stimulus, this single “multi-modal” material simplifies the hardware while providing rich tactile data. The findings, published in Science Robotics, suggest it could be used on humanoid robots or prosthetic limbs to give them a more human-like touch.

Multi-Modal Touch and Heat Sensing

According to the paper, unlike typical robotic skins, which require multiple specialized sensors, the new gel acts as a single multi-modal sensor. Its uniform conductive layer responds differently to a light touch, a temperature change or even a scratch by altering tiny electrical pathways. This design makes the skin simpler and more robust: researchers note it’s easier to fabricate and far less costly than conventional multi-sensor skins. In effect, one stretchy sheet of this material can replace many parts, cutting complexity while maintaining rich sensory feedback.

Testing the Skin and Future Applications

The research team tested the skin by casting the gel into a human-hand shape and outfitting it with electrodes. They put it through a gauntlet of trials: blasting it with a heat gun, pressing it with fingers and a robotic arm, and even slicing it open with a scalpel. Those harsh tests generated over 1.7 million data points from 860,000 tiny conductive channels, which fed into a machine-learning model so the skin could learn to distinguish different types of touch.

UCL’s Dr. Thomas George Thuruthel, a co-author of the study, said the robotic skin isn’t yet as sensitive as human skin but “may be better than anything else out there at the moment.” He noted that the material’s flexibility and ease of manufacture as key advantages. Moreover, the team believes this technology could ultimately help make robots and prosthetic devices with a more lifelike sense of touch.

Continue Reading

Trending