Friday Papers: The Most Unhelpful Biography Ever

There was much I missed in my two-day absence from blogging (although I greatly enjoyed the time off), only some of which I will recap here.

First, for those of you who missed Brian's not so live blogging of the Senate hearing on Yemen, I would recommend you read it. It is brilliant - even if I think my posture is to die for. I was at the hearing and I still found it illuminating to read his comments: like attending a game live and then getting home to listen to Bob Costas do the play-by-play. Anyway, I'm looking forward to reading the full testimonies of all the participants.

Apparently the length of mine (45 double-spaced pages) has frustrated and deterred some would-be readers (although no one on the committee has complained) but what can I say avoiding talking about Yemen in platitudes takes time and space and I cut out 20 pages on the Huthis and the entire section on the south as well as a great deal of detail on AQAP. For those brave enough or just plain bored all the testimonies, along with the video of the hearing, is available here.

I would also add that I came away from the hearing quite impressed with Senator Kerry's grasp of the situation - whoever briefed him did an excellent job.

I also took part in a panel at Brookings on al-Qaeda and Yemen - the full audio and select video is available here.

And finally the Wall Street Journal has an article on al-Qaeda's attempts to link up with different tribes in Yemen - I am quoted in the article, where I have apparently fallen in love with different variations of the word "root."

I would quibble with a couple of details in the article - I don't think Muhammad al-'Umda is a leader and I don't think al-Shihri joined AQAP in 2007 but rather in December 2008 or January 2009. Still there were some excellent points, and Charles Levinson and Margaret Coker bring up a number of points and even cite the anecdote that I often mention about the village in Shabwa and teachers and AQ, which I wrote about here.

I will say I am a bit surprised by some of Nasir al-Bahri's quotes. It would be very interesting and, possibly, quite frightening to see how much al-Qaeda is attempting to make itself over into a positive organization, or if this is even something the group is capable of doing or whether this is more along the lines of the group easing its presence by handing out money to people.

If it is just money then I am less concerned but if it is doing something more substantial then I think this is a more serious problem than most are realizing.

While I was away, Mareb Press had one of the least illuminating biographies of 'Aidh al-Shabwani that I have ever seen. Mareb Press has very good sources in, not surprisingly, Marib. But this article told us nothing that we didn't already know.

Al-Shabwani's house was attacked on Wednesday by Yemeni planes and the tribes responded with anti-aircraft fire. No word on casualties yet, but initial reports seem to indicate that there were none. There were, however, a couple of separate security incidents in Marib over the past couple of days.

In other news, one of the "pioneers of women's rights in Yemen," Fatima Abu Bakr al-'Awlaqi passed away.

Meanwhile, 'Abd al-Malik al-Huthi appears
in a video to show that he is not A.) dead and B.) did not have a leg amputated as the Yemeni government claimed. These claims and allegations, he says, are slander and untrue. The video is here. The whole things is 38 seconds.

Big Think Edge
  • The meaning of the word 'confidence' seems obvious. But it's not the same as self-esteem.
  • Confidence isn't just a feeling on your inside. It comes from taking action in the world.
  • Join Big Think Edge today and learn how to achieve more confidence when and where it really matters.

To boost your self-esteem, write about chapters of your life

If you're lacking confidence and feel like you could benefit from an ego boost, try writing your life story.

Personal Growth

In truth, so much of what happens to us in life is random – we are pawns at the mercy of Lady Luck. To take ownership of our experiences and exert a feeling of control over our future, we tell stories about ourselves that weave meaning and continuity into our personal identity.

Keep reading Show less

Yale scientists restore brain function to 32 clinically dead pigs

Researchers hope the technology will further our understanding of the brain, but lawmakers may not be ready for the ethical challenges.

Still from John Stephenson's 1999 rendition of Animal Farm.
Surprising Science
  • Researchers at the Yale School of Medicine successfully restored some functions to pig brains that had been dead for hours.
  • They hope the technology will advance our understanding of the brain, potentially developing new treatments for debilitating diseases and disorders.
  • The research raises many ethical questions and puts to the test our current understanding of death.

The image of an undead brain coming back to live again is the stuff of science fiction. Not just any science fiction, specifically B-grade sci fi. What instantly springs to mind is the black-and-white horrors of films like Fiend Without a Face. Bad acting. Plastic monstrosities. Visible strings. And a spinal cord that, for some reason, is also a tentacle?

But like any good science fiction, it's only a matter of time before some manner of it seeps into our reality. This week's Nature published the findings of researchers who managed to restore function to pigs' brains that were clinically dead. At least, what we once thought of as dead.

What's dead may never die, it seems

The researchers did not hail from House Greyjoy — "What is dead may never die" — but came largely from the Yale School of Medicine. They connected 32 pig brains to a system called BrainEx. BrainEx is an artificial perfusion system — that is, a system that takes over the functions normally regulated by the organ. The pigs had been killed four hours earlier at a U.S. Department of Agriculture slaughterhouse; their brains completely removed from the skulls.

BrainEx pumped an experiment solution into the brain that essentially mimic blood flow. It brought oxygen and nutrients to the tissues, giving brain cells the resources to begin many normal functions. The cells began consuming and metabolizing sugars. The brains' immune systems kicked in. Neuron samples could carry an electrical signal. Some brain cells even responded to drugs.

The researchers have managed to keep some brains alive for up to 36 hours, and currently do not know if BrainEx can have sustained the brains longer. "It is conceivable we are just preventing the inevitable, and the brain won't be able to recover," said Nenad Sestan, Yale neuroscientist and the lead researcher.

As a control, other brains received either a fake solution or no solution at all. None revived brain activity and deteriorated as normal.

The researchers hope the technology can enhance our ability to study the brain and its cellular functions. One of the main avenues of such studies would be brain disorders and diseases. This could point the way to developing new of treatments for the likes of brain injuries, Alzheimer's, Huntington's, and neurodegenerative conditions.

"This is an extraordinary and very promising breakthrough for neuroscience. It immediately offers a much better model for studying the human brain, which is extraordinarily important, given the vast amount of human suffering from diseases of the mind [and] brain," Nita Farahany, the bioethicists at the Duke University School of Law who wrote the study's commentary, told National Geographic.

An ethical gray matter

Before anyone gets an Island of Dr. Moreau vibe, it's worth noting that the brains did not approach neural activity anywhere near consciousness.

The BrainEx solution contained chemicals that prevented neurons from firing. To be extra cautious, the researchers also monitored the brains for any such activity and were prepared to administer an anesthetic should they have seen signs of consciousness.

Even so, the research signals a massive debate to come regarding medical ethics and our definition of death.

Most countries define death, clinically speaking, as the irreversible loss of brain or circulatory function. This definition was already at odds with some folk- and value-centric understandings, but where do we go if it becomes possible to reverse clinical death with artificial perfusion?

"This is wild," Jonathan Moreno, a bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania, told the New York Times. "If ever there was an issue that merited big public deliberation on the ethics of science and medicine, this is one."

One possible consequence involves organ donations. Some European countries require emergency responders to use a process that preserves organs when they cannot resuscitate a person. They continue to pump blood throughout the body, but use a "thoracic aortic occlusion balloon" to prevent that blood from reaching the brain.

The system is already controversial because it raises concerns about what caused the patient's death. But what happens when brain death becomes readily reversible? Stuart Younger, a bioethicist at Case Western Reserve University, told Nature that if BrainEx were to become widely available, it could shrink the pool of eligible donors.

"There's a potential conflict here between the interests of potential donors — who might not even be donors — and people who are waiting for organs," he said.

It will be a while before such experiments go anywhere near human subjects. A more immediate ethical question relates to how such experiments harm animal subjects.

Ethical review boards evaluate research protocols and can reject any that causes undue pain, suffering, or distress. Since dead animals feel no pain, suffer no trauma, they are typically approved as subjects. But how do such boards make a judgement regarding the suffering of a "cellularly active" brain? The distress of a partially alive brain?

The dilemma is unprecedented.

Setting new boundaries

Another science fiction story that comes to mind when discussing this story is, of course, Frankenstein. As Farahany told National Geographic: "It is definitely has [sic] a good science-fiction element to it, and it is restoring cellular function where we previously thought impossible. But to have Frankenstein, you need some degree of consciousness, some 'there' there. [The researchers] did not recover any form of consciousness in this study, and it is still unclear if we ever could. But we are one step closer to that possibility."

She's right. The researchers undertook their research for the betterment of humanity, and we may one day reap some unimaginable medical benefits from it. The ethical questions, however, remain as unsettling as the stories they remind us of.

Ashes of cat named Pikachu to be launched into space

A space memorial company plans to launch the ashes of "Pikachu," a well-loved Tabby, into space.

GoFundMe/Steve Munt
Culture & Religion
  • Steve Munt, Pikachu's owner, created a GoFundMe page to raise money for the mission.
  • If all goes according to plan, Pikachu will be the second cat to enter space, the first being a French feline named Felicette.
  • It might seem frivolous, but the cat-lovers commenting on Munt's GoFundMe page would likely disagree.
Keep reading Show less