In October 2018, a UC Davis veterinarian accredited Animal 13 for use in a Neuralink experiment. She was six years outdated when she obtained her Neuralink implants. According to her pre-project bodily examination and echocardiogram, Davis employees didn’t observe any medical abnormalities previous to her surgical procedure, solely noting that she had superficial scratches on her lips and minor lip trauma as a part of a “suspect pair fight.”
Beginning in November 2018, Animal 13 was often sedated with ketamine and hooked as much as scientific devices for “neuro recordings.” After one in all these periods the next month, Davis employees noticed that the pores and skin close to the implants felt heat to the contact, the data present.
Over the following three months, her implants grew to become contaminated. She was euthanized in March 2019. Her post-mortem notes “numerous bacterial cultures” and proof of mind swelling.
A doctoral candidate who performed analysis at Davis’ California National Primate Research Center (CNPRC) instructed WIRED in September that, of their view, “there’s no real indication that these animals were terminal, and in fact, their age suggests that they weren’t.” The doctoral candidate added that, with out extra data, there was “there’s no real way” they may very well be sure.
A “scope of work and budget” doc between Neuralink and UC Davis reviewed by WIRED lends some legitimacy to Musk’s claims that sure animals might have been terminal previous to their surgical procedures. The doc particulars the quantities that Neuralink was to pay for UC Davis labor, tools, and primates at every section of its experimentation on the college. “The first stage of this work will be to test and refine our implantable devices,” the doc reads, describing these checks to be carried out “ideally with culled animals.”
While the doc goes on to explain the six grownup rhesus macaques who have been to endure these “terminal procedures” throughout this section as being “in robust health,” the physician WIRED spoke to factors out that the finances signifies that this group of monkeys was discounted “because they are animals that are considered terminal,” they say.
However, the doctor explains that because animals 11 and 13 were meant to survive their initial implantation surgery, they were likely not part of this phase of Neuralink’s experimentation.
Neuralink did not respond to a request for comment for this article or any of our previous coverage of the experiments at Davis.
This week’s letter from the Physicians Committee marks the second time the organization has written to federal regulators asking for a securities fraud investigation into Musk’s comments about Neuralink’s monkeys. After Musk made similar statements about the Neuralink experiments in a post on his social networking app X (formerly Twitter), the organization wrote to the SEC alleging that the Neuralink CEO was deliberately misleading investors. Four members of the US House of Representatives have also asked the SEC to look into these claims of whether Musk committed securities fraud.
“When dealing with alleged animal welfare violations as egregious as those leveled against Musk, there needs to be greater urgency to hold him accountable,” US consultant Earl Blumenauer instructed WIRED in an announcement final month.
Last week, the SEC instructed Blumenauer that it couldn’t verify or deny whether or not it’s investigating Musk’s feedback.
“Musk has continued to make misleading and false claims about experiments conducted on monkeys by Neuralink,” the Physicians Committee letter alleges. “We urge the SEC to investigate this matter and penalize Neuralink and Musk appropriately.”