Body Augmentation: How Far Can We Push Our Physical Human Boundaries?
One of the Marvel superhero, Spiderman’s, most infamous arch nemesis is a mad scientist named Doctor Octopus. The fictional villain got his powers when the doctor’s invention- four tentacle-like mechanical arms- fused to his body during a radiation leak, allowing him the ability to control the arms with merely his thoughts. When the character of Doc Ock was created back in 1963, such a wild concept could only have been entertained in the context of fiction. Today, however, the idea that one could attach themselves with additional limbs is a reality, and not just a fantastical idea relegated to the pages of comic books.
How different would your life be if you had an additional limb? How would it alter your everyday existence? You could- quite literally- have a helping hand while doing chores such as cleaning, washing dishes, and doing the laundry. A third hand could turn up the volume of your radio while your other hands remain on the steering wheel. Perhaps typing that assignment on your laptop would be faster with a few additional fingers!
While all this seems brilliant on paper, there are some things that we must understand before we paint a rosy picture of such an existence. We must ask the question- at what cost? How far can we push the motor abilities of our body with the aid of technology? How will the addition of a new limb affect our brain?
Where will our biological bodies draw the line?
Our brains are surprisingly very plastic. Plasticity of the brain- neuroplasticity- refers to the ability of the brain to alter itself as a result of experience. It is what allows humans to learn from their experiences and adapt to their environments. This characteristic of the brain is also what makes augmentations to the human body possible. Neuroplasticity endows the brain with the potential to rewire itself in order to accommodate the addition of a new limb to the body.
The field of augmentation grows every day and yet, little attention has been paid to the neurocognitive consequences of such technology on the users. Before augmentation enters the mainstream and becomes a norm, it is integral to understand its effects on our bodies and ensure that such additions do not impair us in any lasting way. To make sure that scientific knowledge keeps up with technological advancements, researchers at the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, conducted an experiment, seeking to understand how augmentations can affect the human brain.
Thirty-six able-bodied participants were trained to use a robotic finger called the Third Thumb (designed by Dani Clode) which was attached to the palms of their right hands, opposite their biological thumb. The movement of the Thumb was controlled using pressure from the big toes of the user’s feet. Participants were trained to use the Thumb for a period of five days, for two to six hours per day. Owing to the wireless design of the technology, the participants used the Thumb not only in a lab, but also outside, in the real world setting. Training involved performing a range of tasks- that usually require the use of both hands- using only the augmented hand. The tasks involved complex hand-robot interactions including reaching, grasping and in-hand manipulation. The study also had a control group in which participants wore static versions of the Third Thumb and underwent the same training as the experimental group.
Figure 1
The Third Thumb
Researchers found that the participants learnt to use the Thumb fairly quickly. By the end of the training period, the participants had successfully integrated motor control of the Thumb with movements of their natural hand. There was significant improvement in all the tasks, signifying an improvement in hand-Thumb coordination. This effect was evident even when participants were blindfolded, indicating that they were aware of this supernumerary limb as if it were part of their own body. Furthermore, the participants were able to multitask without the new task affecting their motor performance.
Altered finger coordination patterns were observed within the experimental group, but the changes did not end there. When the participants were subjected to fMRI scans, mild yet significant changes were noticed in hand representation within the brain’s sensorimotor cortex; the neural representation of the hand was found to have shrunk. Additionally, the brain activity pattern representative of individual fingers appeared to have become less distinct after the training. This effect, however, was found to have disappeared when participants were tested again after nearly a week of their training with the Thumb.
Another significant finding was with regards to embodiment. Embodiment refers to one’s ability to process information through external objects in the same way as information from one’s own body. The experimental group displayed an increased sense of embodiment of the device as compared to the control group. Embodiment is considered to be a good indicator that the augmentation will be successful. When a device is perceived as being a continuation of the body, it is assumed that the user is less likely to reject the device; it makes learning and usage easy (Makin et al., 2017).
The UCL study is a significant one, especially in the field of augmentation. Yet, this study opens up more questions than it answers. While the findings point to a significant change in the neural representation of the hand, it is not possible to determine at present whether this change is adaptive or maladaptive. One fear is perhaps that the change is indicative of some degree of loss of control over the motor activities of the finger. Another assumption is that the alteration is simply the brain’s attempt at establishing some stability in the face of new input. Some hypothesise that the shrinkage in neural representation is to allow the representation of the new Thumb alongside the other fingers, potentially a result of new patterns of neural activity. Further, the focus of the current study is narrow, only considering the impact of a small thumb augmentation. Thus, while this study may be pioneering work in the field of body augmentation, we still have a long way to go.
Body augmentation has the potential to enhance our lives; it may lead to a significant increase in human productivity without hampering health and well-being. Companies such as Ekso Bionics have already started building devices that focus on human augmentation in rehabilitation, industry and other wakes of life. Augmentation technology can have widespread use in job sectors that are labour-intensive and require strength and precision. Soon, the use of such technology may become normal, just as devices like pacemakers and cochlear implants are today.
Once we attain a deeper and more holistic understanding of the impact of body augmentation on our biological selves, we can perhaps develop into a society inhabited by cybernetically-enhanced humans who have, after fully understanding and being aware of its consequences on their brains and bodies, can exceed their biological limitations at little to no risk to their physical being. Hopefully, in the process, we can also avoid Doc Ock’s fate of becoming a brain-damaged, tentacled, evil megalomaniac.
References
Crowe, S. (2019, August 15). Ekso Bionics introduces eksonr exoskeleton for neurorehabilitation. The Robot Report. Retrieved December 1, 2021, from https://www.therobotreport.com/ekso-bionics-eksonr-exoskeleton-neurorehabilitation/.
Kieliba, P., Clode, D., Maimon-Mor, R. O., & Makin, T. R. (2021). Robotic hand augmentation drives changes in neural body representation. Science Robotics, 6(54). https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.abd7935
Makin, T. R., de Vignemont, F., & Faisal, A. A. (2017). Neurocognitive barriers to the embodiment of Technology. Nature Biomedical Engineering, 1(14). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-016-0014
