How we define death changes with technology, research suggests
Neuroscientist Chrisof Koch has found the concept of death has changed in a century. Where next?
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.If you're reading this, you know what living looks like - movement, neurological activity, thought, action.
The answer is complicated, suggests neuroscientist Christof Koch. In “Is Death Reversible?” a feature article in the most recent issue of Scientific American, Koch grapples with a death definition that is much more nuanced than you might think.
“Death, this looming presence just over the horizon, is quite ill defined from both a scientific as well as a medical point of view,” he writes.
Koch tracks a shifting concept of death, from the cessation of breathing to the end of brain activity. And, he suggests, the modern medical definition is being shaken by new scientific developments.
“What at the beginning of the 20th century was irreversible - cessation of breathing - became reversible by the end of the century. Is it too difficult to contemplate that the same may be true for brain death? A recent experiment suggests this idea is not just a wild imagining.”
Koch is referring to a series of surprising experiments in which scientists managed to restore some function in the brains of pigs that had been dead for hours. The research, which was published this April in the journal Nature, sparked intense ethical and scientific debate. It seems to point to death as a process, not an event, and raises the possibility that one day, scientists will be able to completely revive a dead brain.
If you think the research sounds Frankenstein-like, you're not alone. Even the scientists who conducted the experiments grappled with the ethical conundrum it presented, and had a plan B in which they'd stop the experiment immediately if the brains presented evidence of consciousness. Luckily for them, they didn't - but that could change one day as research progresses.
The Washington Post
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments