The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
if you can bypass the damaged area of the spinal cord and have an implant in the spinal cord itself connected to an implant in the brain and have them talking to each other you can take the perfectly intact motor signals out of the the motor cortex and send them to the spinal cord which most of the wiring should be intact in the spinal cord below the level of say the the injury
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.