So what is the story with 5G? I had assumed it was a conspiracy story but it really seems like there is a dearth of studies. Because of the overlap in the people talking about the issues I cannot help but compare it to the the amount of work that went into proving the covid vaccine was safe. I am not sure what the numbers are os I shall guess. If we are paying $20 - $25 for them, and half of that is manufacturing cost and quarter of the development costs is safety trails effectively we are paying 1/8th of the cost in working out that it is safe.

There is a 2016 review paper on the 107 english language papers on the subject. They were generally of poor quality, with only one being the highest level. In summary they say:

Given the low-quality methods of the majority of the experimental studies we infer that a systematic review of different bioeffects is not possible at present.

If that represents the safety work then that does not represent any substantial fraction of the money we are spending on 5 G. I wonder why it is so different?

There is also another issue that according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration it will put our weather forecasting back to the eighties.

Paper on 107 studies
Paper on effect on weather forecast
About the biggest work going on, by the UN?

Spoiler Youtube on the background science :
Spoiler Youtube on lack of evidence and effect on weather forecasts :
 
So what is the story with 5G? I had assumed it was a conspiracy story but it really seems like there is a dearth of studies. Because of the overlap in the people talking about the issues I cannot help but compare it to the the amount of work that went into proving the covid vaccine was safe. I am not sure what the numbers are os I shall guess. If we are paying $20 - $25 for them, and half of that is manufacturing cost and quarter of the development costs is safety trails effectively we are paying 1/8th of the cost in working out that it is safe.

There is a 2016 review paper on the 107 english language papers on the subject. They were generally of poor quality, with only one being the highest level. In summary they say:

Given the low-quality methods of the majority of the experimental studies we infer that a systematic review of different bioeffects is not possible at present.

If that represents the safety work then that does not represent any substantial fraction of the money we are spending on 5 G. I wonder why it is so different?

There is also another issue that according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration it will put our weather forecasting back to the eighties.

Paper on 107 studies
Paper on effect on weather forecast
About the biggest work going on, by the UN?

Spoiler Youtube on the background science :
Spoiler Youtube on lack of evidence and effect on weather forecasts :

What do you mean with 5G? 5G is a collection of different things, which have different implications. For example, part of the 5G standard changes the protocol your mobile phone is using to communicate with the mobile core services. Obviously that is not going to have an impact on your health (well, maybe via your stress level, if it doesn't work).

Getting back to the radio specifications, which may have an impact on health or weather: There is a low-band, mid-band and high-band specification. Most of the money goes into low- and mid-band applications. And those are, from a radio point of view, not much different than 4G. So it does not make sense to repeat all the studies that have been done since the age of 2G and never found anything definitive.

The high-band applications are very different, because they use a much higher frequency. And there might be health and weather forecasting effects. However, those are very specific applications which are deployed very sparingly. I am not aware of any commercial deployments in Europe, yet. I think there are some very localized deployments in the US. I don't think there will be wide-scale deployment of it in the near future, because there is no business case for it. So if you wanted to make a study on this, how would you get your data if no one is really exposed to this? Same with the weather forecast. A few deployments with a range of 100m is not going to kill the forecast.
 
So if you wanted to make a study on this, how would you get your data if no one is really exposed to this?
The results section of that paper is 6 tables of the studies into different areas. Almost all are in bottles, "Bacteria & Yeast", "Cells in culture" and "Neural activity" [1]. There are a handful of in vivo with mice, but most of them are labelled "Low animal numbers (6 exposed)" (which makes me think they are all really one study).

If you give me a million dollars and ask me to design a study I reckon I would fit phased array transmitters to half the sowing sheds and dairy cattle housing in as many farms as I could. I would only turn it on at night when the humans are away. I would then do some broad high throughput phenotyping on the herd over their lifetime. Things like automated behaviour monitoring, regular blood analysis and some level of post mortem examination. I bet I could do loads for a million dollars.

Spoiler [1] Neural activity? :
In for example table 4 it has things like "Change in the duration of the inter-spike intervals", "Reduction in the effect of high rate stimulus causing a decrease in the test CAP" and "Reduced neuron firing rate and a decrease in input resistance". I reckon that is neurons in a patch clamp.
 
Last edited:
So, considering how we might protect ourselves.

Tin-foil helmet ?
I reckon underpants may be more important, but may be less comfortable.
Spoiler FAoD :
This is a joke. There is no reason to believe millimeter wave radiation could effect that area in particular, or anywhere.
 
I doubt that Kate Brown's underpants would fit me !

 
I reckon underpants may be more important, but may be less comfortable.
Spoiler FAoD :
This is a joke. There is no reason to believe millimeter wave radiation could effect that area in particular, or anywhere.

Actually, this is not as far from the truth as it might sound. Microwave radiation certainly does have thermal effects and heating that area in particular has an effect on fertility. So, for males planning to have kids very soon, protective underwear is not such a bad idea...if you are working in a high energy microwave lab, that is.

Edit: ...or when you have to visit your cows at night
 
I reckon underpants may be more important, but may be less comfortable.
Spoiler FAoD :
This is a joke. There is no reason to believe millimeter wave radiation could effect that area in particular, or anywhere.
Cell phones not good for ones sperm, best to keep phone away from ones lap
 
At my age, I am not concerned with that.

It must be the 5G radiation interfering with neural signalling that made
me write 1916 instead of 2016, and Sampson allude to a 91 Peugeot 307.
 

Brutality now becomes my appetite
Violence is now a way of life
The sledge my tool to torture
As it pounds down on your forehead


Shakespeare it’s not. Those lyrics, from “Hammer Smashed Face” by the band Cannibal Corpse, are typical of death metal—a subgenre of heavy metal music that features images of extreme violence and the sonic equivalent of, well, a sledgehammer to the forehead.

The appeal of this marginal musical form, which clearly seems bent on assaulting the senses and violating even the lowest standards of taste, is mystifying to non-fans—which is one reason music psychologist William Forde Thompson was drawn to it. Thompson and his colleagues have published three papers about death metal and its fans this year, and several more are in the works.

“It’s the paradox of enjoying a negative emotion that I was interested in,” says Thompson, a professor at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia. “Why are people interested in music that seems to induce a negative emotion, when in everyday life we tend to avoid situations that will induce a negative emotion?” A number of studies have explored the emotional appeal of sad music, Thompson notes. But relatively little research has examined the emotional effects of listening to music that is downright violent.

Thompson’s work has produced some intriguing insights. The biggest surprise? “The ubiquitous stereotype of death metal fans—fans of music that contains violent themes and explicitly violent lyrics—[is] that they are angry people with violent tendencies,” Thompson says. “What we are finding is that they are not angry people. They’re not enjoying anger when they listen to the music, but they are in fact experiencing a range of positive emotions.”



Those positive emotions, as reported by death metal fans in an online survey that Thompson and his team conducted, include feelings of empowerment, joy, peace and transcendence. So far, almost all of the anger and tension Thompson has documented in his death metal studies has been expressed by non-fans after listening to samples of the music.

In a paper titled “ Who enjoys listening to violent music and why?,” published in 2018 in Psychology of Popular Media Culture , Thompson and colleagues sought to identify specific personality traits that distinguished death metal fans from non-fans. In the study, which involved 48 self-described death metal fans and 97 non-fans (all in their 20s), he deployed an arsenal of established psychological tools and measures. These included the Big Five Inventory (BFI) of personality—which assesses openness to experience, conscientiousness, agreeableness and neuroticism—as well as the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), a 28-item measure of empathy.

Notably, on measures of conscientiousness and agreeableness, the scores of death metal fans were subtly but reliably lower than those of non-fans. One possible explanation for this finding, the authors write, “is that long-term, persistent exposure to violent media may lead to subtle changes in one’s personality, desensitizing fans to violence and reinforcing negative social attitudes.” But Thompson emphasizes that we just don’t know. It is also possible that people with these personality traits are more likely to gravitate to death metal.

Results from the IRI showed the fan group and non-fan group with similar scores on the four dimensions of empathy that the index measures. When listening to death metal, however, study participants with lower empathy scores were more likely to experience higher levels of power and joy than those with greater empathic concern. That was true as well, Thompson found, for people whose personality assessment showed them to be more open to experience and less neurotic.

In the study, each participant listened to four out of eight 60-second samples of popular death metal songs (selected by the researchers from multiple online lists) and answered questions about the feelings the music evoked. The songs included “Slowly We Rot,” by Obituary and “Waiting for the Screams,” by Autopsy, as well as “Hammer Smashed Face.”

The fact that the study relies on self-reporting by the subjects is a red flag for Craig Anderson, a psychology professor at Iowa State University who has spent his career researching the links between media violence and aggression, and who was not involved in Thompson’s study. Self-reporting “may or may not reflect reality,” Anderson says. “People may be lying to you, or, more likely, people don’t have direct access to many of the kinds of effects that media have on them. They can construct an idea or hypothesis, and self-reports are essentially that kind of data. People may report that ‘Oh yeah, this makes me feel this way,’ without recognizing whether that’s really true.”

The paper acknowledges the limitations of self-reporting. But the researchers add that “the convergence of evidence” from the personality assessments and other measures, along with the fans’ enthusiastic embrace of death metal, “suggest that the dramatic differences in emotional and aesthetic responses between fans and non-fans are genuine.

Chris Pervelis, a founding member and guitarist of the band Internal Bleeding (whose songs include Gutted Human Sacrifice and The Pageantry of Savagery ), is confident that the positive emotions he experiences when he plays and listens to Death Metal are the real thing. “When I’m locked into it, it’s like there’s electricity flowing through me,” says the 50-year-old, who runs his own graphic design business. “I feel really alive, like hyper-alive. And the people I know in Death Metal are smart, creative and generally good-hearted souls.”

In an essay published in August 2018 in Physics of Life Reviews , Thompson and his co-author Kirk Olsen considered the possible role of brain chemistry in the response to violence and aggression in music. The high amplitude, fast tempo and other discordant traits of death metal, they write, may elicit the release of neurochemicals such as epinephrine—which “may underpin feelings of positive energy and power reported by fans, and tension, fear and anger reported by non-fans.”

As for the central riddle of death metal—how explicitly violent music might trigger positive emotions in some people—Thompson cites a 2017 paper on the enjoyment of negative emotions in art reception, published in Behavioral and Brain Sciences . The paper, from the Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics, suggests a mental process that combines “psychological distancing” and “psychological embracing.” In other words, a lack of real-world consequences—it’s just a song!—may provide the distance necessary for fans to appreciate the music as an art form and embrace it.

A large body of research, by Anderson and others, has established a clear link between aggression and multiple types of media violence including video games, film, television and music with violent images and themes. “But no one is saying that a normal, well-adjusted person—who has almost no other risk factors for violent behavior—is going to become a violent criminal offender simply because of their media habits,” says Anderson, whose research includes a 2003 study of the effect of songs with violent lyrics. “That never happens with just one risk factor, and we know of dozens of common risk factors. Media violence happens to be one.”

One finding from Thompson’s research—that many death metal fans say they listen to the music as a catharsis, a way to release negative emotions and focus on something that they enjoy—is also familiar to Pervelis. “I call it the garbage can,” he says of the music he’s been involved with for decades, “because it’s where I can dump all my bad, emotional baggage. I put it into writing riffs and letting it all out on stage, and it keeps me level and completely sane.”

In his ongoing study of violent and aggressive music, which includes a June 2018 paper in the journal Music Perception about the intelligibility of death metal lyrics (forget about it, non-fans), Thompson has found that the limited appeal of the form may be one its key features for fans—one at least as old as rock itself. He cites a 2006 paper by the late Karen Bettez Halnon, who found that fans of heavy metal (as has certainly been the case with many other genres and sub-genres over the decades) view the music as an alternative to the “impersonal, conformist, superficial and numbing realities of commercialism.”

In that vein, one possible function of the gruesome lyrics that are the hallmark of death metal, says Thompson, may be to “sharpen the boundary” between fans and everybody else. Pervelis, who compares the violent imagery to the “over-the-top, schlock horror films of the 70s,” says feeling like an outsider and an insider at the same time is at the core of the death metal experience. “This music is so extreme and so on the fringe of the mainstream that people who listen to it and people who play in death metal bands belong to an elite club. It’s like we’ve got a little secret, and I think that’s what binds it all. It’s a badge of honor.”

David Noonan is a freelance writer specializing in science and medicine.
 
^^^ The power of music, any music with a primed audience.
 
Someone's on course for an IgNobel Prize :lol:
 
I have not quite got my head round what this means, except human evolution is complex. I THINK it is that the web of proto humans interacting across africa is less likely (archaic introgression?), and instead Homo sapiens emerged, diverged and then interbred lots.

A weakly structured stem for human origins in Africa

Despite broad agreement that Homo sapiens originated in Africa, considerable uncertainty surrounds specific models of divergence and migration across the continent. Progress is hampered by a shortage of fossil and genomic data, as well as variability in previous estimates of divergence times. Here we seek to discriminate among such models by considering linkage disequilibrium and diversity-based statistics, optimized for rapid, complex demographic inference. We infer detailed demographic models for populations across Africa, including eastern and western representatives, and newly sequenced whole genomes from 44 Nama (Khoe-San) individuals from southern Africa. We infer a reticulated African population history in which present-day population structure dates back to Marine Isotope Stage 5. The earliest population divergence among contemporary populations occurred 120,000 to 135,000 years ago and was preceded by links between two or more weakly differentiated ancestral Homo populations connected by gene flow over hundreds of thousands of years. Such weakly structured stem models explain patterns of polymorphism that had previously been attributed to contributions from archaic hominins in Africa. In contrast to models with archaic introgression, we predict that fossil remains from coexisting ancestral populations should be genetically and morphologically similar, and that only an inferred 1–4% of genetic differentiation among contemporary human populations can be attributed to genetic drift between stem populations. We show that model misspecification explains the variation in previous estimates of divergence times, and argue that studying a range of models is key to making robust inferences about deep history.


Spoiler Legend :
a,b, In the two best-fitting parameterizations of early population structure, continuous migration (a) and multiple mergers (b), models that include ongoing migration between stem populations outperform those in which stem populations are isolated. Most of the recent populations are also connected by continuous, reciprocal migration that is indicated by double-headed arrows (labels matched to migration rates and divergence times in Table 1). These migrations last for the duration of the coexistence of contemporaneous populations with constant migration rates over those intervals. The merger-with-stem-migration model (b, with LL = −101,600) outperformed the continuous-migration model (a, with LL = −115,300). Colours are used to distinguish overlapping branches. The letters a–i represent continuous migration between pairs of populations, as described in Table 1.


Spoiler Genetic diversity across Africa :

Spoiler Legend :
a, Selected populations from the 1000 Genomes Project and the African Diversity Reference Panel illustrate diversity from western, eastern and southern Africa. We chose representative ethnic groups from each region (bold labels) to build parameterized models, including the newly genetically sequenced Nama populations from South Africa, Mende from Sierra Leone, Gumuz, Oromo and Amhara from Ethiopia, British individuals and a Neanderthal from Vindija Cave, Croatia. b,c, Principal component analysis highlights the range of genetic divergence anchored by western African, Nama, Gumuz and British individuals between principal components (PC) 1 and 2 (b), and 1 and 3 (c). Percentages show variance explained by each principal component. Colours represent the groups shown in bold in a. d, ADMIXTURE analysis using K = 4 principal components reveals signatures of recent gene flow in Africa that reflect colonial-period migration into the Nama, back-to-Africa gene flow among some Ethiopians, and Khoe-San admixture in the Zulu population.

 
Last edited:
I have not quite got my head round what this means, except human evolution is complex. I THINK it is that the web of proto humans interacting across africa is less likely (archaic introgression?), and instead Homo sapiens emerged, diverged and then interbred lots.

A weakly structured stem for human origins in Africa

Despite broad agreement that Homo sapiens originated in Africa, considerable uncertainty surrounds specific models of divergence and migration across the continent. Progress is hampered by a shortage of fossil and genomic data, as well as variability in previous estimates of divergence times. Here we seek to discriminate among such models by considering linkage disequilibrium and diversity-based statistics, optimized for rapid, complex demographic inference. We infer detailed demographic models for populations across Africa, including eastern and western representatives, and newly sequenced whole genomes from 44 Nama (Khoe-San) individuals from southern Africa. We infer a reticulated African population history in which present-day population structure dates back to Marine Isotope Stage 5. The earliest population divergence among contemporary populations occurred 120,000 to 135,000 years ago and was preceded by links between two or more weakly differentiated ancestral Homo populations connected by gene flow over hundreds of thousands of years. Such weakly structured stem models explain patterns of polymorphism that had previously been attributed to contributions from archaic hominins in Africa. In contrast to models with archaic introgression, we predict that fossil remains from coexisting ancestral populations should be genetically and morphologically similar, and that only an inferred 1–4% of genetic differentiation among contemporary human populations can be attributed to genetic drift between stem populations. We show that model misspecification explains the variation in previous estimates of divergence times, and argue that studying a range of models is key to making robust inferences about deep history.


Spoiler Legend :
a,b, In the two best-fitting parameterizations of early population structure, continuous migration (a) and multiple mergers (b), models that include ongoing migration between stem populations outperform those in which stem populations are isolated. Most of the recent populations are also connected by continuous, reciprocal migration that is indicated by double-headed arrows (labels matched to migration rates and divergence times in Table 1). These migrations last for the duration of the coexistence of contemporaneous populations with constant migration rates over those intervals. The merger-with-stem-migration model (b, with LL = −101,600) outperformed the continuous-migration model (a, with LL = −115,300). Colours are used to distinguish overlapping branches. The letters a–i represent continuous migration between pairs of populations, as described in Table 1.


Spoiler Genetic diversity across Africa :

Spoiler Legend :
a, Selected populations from the 1000 Genomes Project and the African Diversity Reference Panel illustrate diversity from western, eastern and southern Africa. We chose representative ethnic groups from each region (bold labels) to build parameterized models, including the newly genetically sequenced Nama populations from South Africa, Mende from Sierra Leone, Gumuz, Oromo and Amhara from Ethiopia, British individuals and a Neanderthal from Vindija Cave, Croatia. b,c, Principal component analysis highlights the range of genetic divergence anchored by western African, Nama, Gumuz and British individuals between principal components (PC) 1 and 2 (b), and 1 and 3 (c). Percentages show variance explained by each principal component. Colours represent the groups shown in bold in a. d, ADMIXTURE analysis using K = 4 principal components reveals signatures of recent gene flow in Africa that reflect colonial-period migration into the Nama, back-to-Africa gene flow among some Ethiopians, and Khoe-San admixture in the Zulu population.

This is an explanation. I think it is much the same as mine, but with an additional alternative hypothesis:

The widely held idea that modern-day humans originated from a single region of Africa is being challenged. Models using a vast amount of genomic data suggest that humans arose from multiple ancestral populations around the continent. These ancient populations — which lived more than one million years ago — would have all been the same hominin species but genetically slightly different.

The models supporting this theory rely on new software and genomic-sequencing data from current African and Eurasian populations, as well as Neanderthal remains. Researchers published the results on 17 May in Nature.

The study contributes more evidence to the idea that there is “no single birthplace in Africa, and that human evolution is a process with very deep African roots”, says Eleanor Scerri, an evolutionary archaeologist at the Max Planck Institute of Geoanthropology in Jena, Germany.

The single-origin theory has been popular for decades, partly on the basis of fossil records. But the theory doesn’t fit the data well, says Scerri. All of the tools and physical traits attributed to Homo sapiens cropped up throughout Africa around a similar time, 300,000 to 100,000 years ago. If humans had radiated from a single location, archaeologists would expect to see more recent fossils farther away from a central point, and older ones closer to it.

The ancient hominin species, or ‘ancestral stem’, had localized populations which are thought to have interbred with each other over millennia, sharing any genetic differences that they had evolved. They also moved around Africa over time. “Our roots lie in a very diverse overall population made up of fragmented local populations,” says Scerri. The intertwining of these stems, separated only weakly by their genetic differences, gave rise to a concept of human evolution that the researchers described as a “weakly structured stem” — more like a tangled vine than a ‘tree of life’.

One previously proposed explanation for today’s human diversity is that H. sapiens mixed with other archaic human species that had branched off and become isolated. But Henn and her colleagues found that the weakly structured stem model was the better fit, giving a clearer explanation for the variation seen in humans today.

Ultimately, questions still abound about humans’ origins. Henn wants to add more DNA from other African regions to the models to see if that changes their results. She also hopes to use the data to make predictions about the fossil record, such as what features would be found in human fossils from a particular area.

This one is paywalled (£$%&):

One species, many roots?

A new genetic study provides strong support for the view that our species evolved from exchanges between several ancestral populations in different African regions.

Independent lines of evidence suggests that humans evolved within a structured metapopulation living across much of the African continent at different points in time. However, we do not know whether all regions and ecozones had some role in the process, whether some had a greater role than others, how many ancestral populations may have been involved and whether some ancestral contributions came from other hominin species. This is the case for several reasons. Currently available fossils represent a time–space palimpsest of a few individuals from around 10% of Africa, which makes interpretative models prone to overfitting. The time depth of human habitation in Africa’s regions and diverse ecozones remains unknown. We also lack ancient DNA from Africa that spans the timeframe of the emergence of Homo sapiens. Other issues involve the lack of comprehensive genetic sampling across current African populations — although this gap is starting to close — and the dominant use of problematic tree-like models as representations of human ancestry. The degree of coexistence and possible genetic exchanges between early members of our own lineage and more-divergent hominins that may represent different species is therefore highly contested. Indeed, little can be said with any degree of certainty, except that a single ‘birthplace’ in Africa for our species seems unlikely.
 
Peggy Whitson, at 62 years old, has docked with the ISS, as mission commander of the private Axiom-2.

A former NASA astronaut, she currently has 665 days in space, the most of any American and the most of any woman (the record-holder is former Russian cosmonaut Gennady Pedalka, who had 878 days in space). A biochemist, she's due to spend 8 days aboard the ISS conducting experiments. She has 10 career EVAs, totaling 60 hours and 21 minutes, the most by a woman (retired cosmonaut Anatoly Solovyev had 16 EVAs totaling 82 hours, 21 minutes). She's also flown aboard 3 different spacecraft: NASA space shuttles, a Soyuz, and the SpaceX Dragon.
 
Brain–spine interface allows paralysed man to walk using his thoughts

Twelve years ago, a cycling accident left Gert-Jan Oskam, now 40, with paralysed legs and partially paralysed arms, after his spinal cord was damaged in his neck. But these days, Oskam is back on his feet and walking thanks to a device that creates a ‘digital bridge’ between his brain and the nerves below his injury.

The implant has been life changing, says Oskam. “Last week, there was something that needed to be painted and there was nobody to help me. So I took the walker and the paint, and I did it myself while I was standing,” he says.

The device — called a brain–spine interface — builds on previous work by Grégoire Courtine, a neuroscientist at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne and his colleagues. In 2018, they demonstrated that, when combined with intensive training, technology that stimulates the lower spine with electrical pulses can help people with spinal-cord injuries to walk again.

Oskam was one of the participants in that trial, but after three years, his improvements had plateaued. The new system makes use of the spinal implant that Oskam already has, and pairs it with two disc-shaped implants inserted into his skull so that two 64-electrode grids rest against the membrane covering the brain.

When Oskam thinks about walking, the skull implants detect electrical activity in the cortex, the outer layer of the brain. This signal is wirelessly transmitted and decoded by a computer that Oskam wears in a backpack, which then transmits the information to the spinal pulse generator.

The previous device, “was more of a pre-programmed stimulation” that generated robotic stepping movements, says Courtine. “Now, it’s completely different, because Gert-Jan has full control over the parameter of stimulation, which means that he can stop, he can walk, he can climb up staircases.”

“The stimulation before was controlling me and now I am controlling stimulation by my thought,” says Oskam. “When I decide to make a step, the simulation will kick in, as soon as I think about it.”

After around 40 rehabilitation sessions using the brain–spine interface, Oskam had regained the ability to voluntarily move his legs and feet. That type of voluntary movement was not possible after spinal stimulation alone, and suggests that the training sessions with the new device prompted further recovery in nerve cells that were not completely severed during his injury. Oskam can also walk short distances without the device if he uses crutches.

Bruce Harland, a neuroscientist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand says that this continued improvement in spinal function is great news for anyone with a spinal-cord injury, “because even if it’s a longer-term chronic injury, there’s still a few different ways that healing could happen”.

“It’s certainly a huge jump” towards improved function for people with spinal-cord injuries, says neuroscientist Anna Leonard at the University of Adelaide in Australia. And she says there is still room for other interventions — such as stem cells — to improve outcomes further. She adds that although the brain–spine interface restores walking, other functions such as bladder and bowel control are not targeted by the device. “So, there’s certainly still room for other areas of research that could help progress improvements in outcomes for these other sort of realms,” she says.

Antonio Lauto, a biomedical engineer at Western Sydney University, Australia, says less invasive devices would be ideal. One of Oskam’s skull implants was removed after about five months because of an infection. Nevertheless, Jocelyne Bloch, the neurosurgeon at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology who implanted the device says that the risks involved are small compared with the benefits. “There is always a bit of risk of infections or risk of haemorrhage, but they are so small that it’s worth the risk,” she says.

Courtine’s team is currently recruiting three people to see whether a similar device can restore arm movements.

 
That is amazing.
 
Think you are living in a surveillance state now? They have worked out we can sequence people by taking samples of the environment

The field of environmental DNA (eDNA) is advancing rapidly, yet human eDNA applications remain underutilized and underconsidered. Broader adoption of eDNA analysis will produce many well-recognized benefits for pathogen surveillance, biodiversity monitoring, endangered and invasive species detection, and population genetics. Here we show that deep-sequencing-based eDNA approaches capture genomic information from humans (Homo sapiens) just as readily as that from the intended target species. We term this phenomenon human genetic bycatch (HGB). Additionally, high-quality human eDNA could be intentionally recovered from environmental substrates (water, sand and air), holding promise for beneficial medical, forensic and environmental applications. However, this also raises ethical dilemmas, from consent, privacy and surveillance to data ownership, requiring further consideration and potentially novel regulation. We present evidence that human eDNA is readily detectable from ‘wildlife’ environmental samples as human genetic bycatch, demonstrate that identifiable human DNA can be intentionally recovered from human-focused environmental sampling and discuss the translational and ethical implications of such findings.

Potential problematic implications of the capture of human genomic eDNA data

Unintended consequences:

  • Requirement of human-study-related ethical approvals for wildlife studies
  • Lack of human subject consent/breach of privacy
  • Public deposition of eDNA data including human genomic data
  • Inadvertent location tracking
  • Inadvertent genome harvesting
Potential malicious applications:
  • Genome harvesting—the ability to illegally/unethically harvest human genomic data from local populations/ethnic groups without their knowledge or consent
  • Covert accumulation of human genetic data for malicious or commercial purposes (for example, genomic surveillance or big-data-fuelled discovery)
  • Genetic surveillance—individual tracking (similar to forensics/wildlife applications)
  • Genetic surveillance—unethical tracking/locating of ethnic groups/populations
  • Genetic surveillance—potential for involuntarily genetic surveillance from investigative applications, including the recovery of bystander shed genetic information or intentional overreach
  • Bio-piracy of human genetic data from populations and countries (akin to flora/fauna genetic bio-piracy)

Even with no targeting or enrichment, our MinION shotgun sequencing was able to identify the genetic ancestry within pooled human populations and to identify variants associated with disease susceptibility. The long eDNA reads sequenced here suggest that with targeted enrichment of informative genomic locations, one could achieve individual-level identification even from pooled samples.

While benefits of human eDNA analysis may exist, there could conceivably be more worrying applications of such technology. The accumulation of population-level genomic databases is currently highly desirable, being a valuable research and commercial commodity. While some projects maintain the genomic data and subsequent findings in public ownership, the lucrative economic potential of such databases means that a host of private companies have also been rapidly accumulating them (for example, DNA ancestry companies and genomic medicine companies) and selling access.

Countries and corporate entities are racing to create ever-larger pan-genomic patient/population datasets. Examples include the 100,000 Genomes Project and the new Genome UK Strategy (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/genome-uk-the-future-of-healthcare); the Biobank project, which aims to sequence half a million genomes (https://www.sanger.ac.uk/collaboration/uk-biobank-whole-genome-sequencing-project/); and the National Institutes of Health All of Us Research Program (https://allofus.nih.gov/), a project to sequence the genomes of one million US citizens. Such pan-genomic activities have the potential for great public good, including advanced medical and pharmaceutical applications, but they have been an ethical minefield regarding ownership, data protection, insurance coverage and privacy issues. Examples from digital databases also clearly show that wherever valuable databases exist, there is an ever-present temptation to exploit the data for financial gain, whether legally or otherwise. The Cambridge Analytica scandal, which involved complex harvesting of data from Facebook profiles, is one such example, and Google’s harvesting of medical records with individual identifying information still intact is another.

Human eDNA applications present similar concerns: they could be employed for the surveillance of individuals, minority groups (genetic ancestry) or genetically driven disabilities, or to obtain genomic information from local populations without their knowledge or consent, including from ‘valuable’ genetically diverse indigenous populations (uncontacted tribes, particular ethnic groups and so on). Such scenarios expand the current issues regarding the commodification of genomic information, which is already a particularly acute concern in relation to indigenous peoples. These novel human eDNA applications may also enable unscrupulous (though possibly not technically illegal) entities to perform covert mass capture of genomic data from populations, to further expand population-level genomic databases. Furthermore, such resources can then be utilized for enhanced monitoring of individuals for less savoury purposes. Genetic/genomic surveillance is a serious ethical concern, with documented human rights abuses having already occurred whereby national DNA databases were used with other surveillance data to monitor minority populations. The application of human eDNA approaches could further undermine genetic consent, limiting the ability of threatened minorities to withhold their genetic information. In the future, human eDNA could also be utilized to determine whether members of a genetically distinct group were present in a given population—for example, through wastewater monitoring or air filtering at checkpoints, in urban areas or in private dwellings. Such potential is particularly chilling given the propensity of humans to carry out ethnic persecution and genocide throughout our history.


Spoiler Legend :
a, Schematic overview of how human DNA can enter the environment and be inadvertently sequenced as HGB from pathogen- and wildlife-focused eDNA studies. Schematic created with BioRender. b, Whole human genome aligning reads from a wildlife eDNA shotgun Illumina sequencing study. c, qPCR-based species-specific quantification of human eDNA from Avoca River water sampling. The absolute quantity (0.1 ng per μl per reaction) of human eDNA per sample is shown. Each qPCR reaction is a 10 μl reaction containing 1 μl of extracted eDNA template. The samples were quantified with LILRB2 human-specific assays. For filtered water volumes and elution volumes, see Supplementary Table 2. For matching samples quantified with ZNF285 human-specific assays, see Extended Data Fig. 1c. Tukey whiskers (extend to data points that are less than 1.5 × interquartile range (IQR) away from 1st/3rd quartile) were utilized for each boxplot. The median for each sample is shown as a horizontal line within each box, and box edges are the upper and lower quartiles. One box is graphed per single sample, consisting of all qPCR technical replicate wells for that sample. Biological replicates are not pooled on any boxplots, with each sample being denoted by its own box.
 
Top Bottom