For those not in the know, oversight boards are required by federal law for organisations experimenting on certain types of animals. They are supposed to ensure proper animal care, high research standards, and the reliability of data that helps regulators decide whether drugs or medical devices are safe for human testing.
Reuters has discovered that the panel membership at Musk’s company, Neuralink is decidedly dodgy as it is stacked with staff members who will make money if the company implants a chip into a human without killing them.
Neuralink is conducting animal experiments as it seeks regulatory approval for human trials of a brain chip intended to help paralysed people type with their minds, among other ambitious goals.
Reuters found that 19 of the board’s 22 members were Neuralink employees. The oversight board’s chair was the Neuralink executive who led the company’s animal-care programme, and at least 11 other members were employees directly involved with animal care or research.
Autumn Sorrells has chaired an oversight board approving animal experiment by Elon Musk’s brain-chip startup, Neuralink, and run the company’s animal care programme. Bioethics experts say Neuralink staffers on the board have potential conflicts of interest.
Details of the panel’s membership and potential conflicts have not been reported. Insight into its makeup comes after two federal investigations, first reported by Reuters, into potential animal-welfare violations by Neuralink and allegations that it improperly transported dangerous pathogens on implants removed from monkey brains.
Reuters reported in December that some employees had grown concerned about the animal experiments being pressured by Musk to speed development, increasing the body count of animals subject to testing.
Neuralink staffers typically are compensated with salary and stock-based incentives. Two of the staffers said some senior-level employees stand to make millions of dollars if the company secures critical regulatory approvals.
Dr. Miguel Nicolelis, a neuroscientist and physician, has conducted brain-implant research at Duke University for nearly three decades. He said the IACUC members overseeing his animal experiments never had any role in the research, including animal tests of the same type Neuralink is conducting now. The independence of such boards, Nicolelis said, is critical to protecting the integrity of animal research that could impact humans in future clinical trials.
He said that what is happening at Neurolink was an obvious conflict of interest.
Neuralink originally partnered with the University of California, Davis, to help conduct and oversee its animal tests. But the company later ditched the university after a dispute, viewing the school’s processes as too slow and bureaucratic.
UC Davis said in a statement that its conflict-of-interest rules prohibit “interested” parties from voting or “influencing decisions” on such panels.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulations forbid IACUC members from participating in the “review or approval of an activity in which that member has a conflicting interest.” But that rule doesn’t clearly define a conflict.
In response to an inquiry from Reuters, the USDA said it had found no conflicts of interest on Neuralink’s board when the department inspected its animal-research operations during 10 inspections since 2020. According to public records and a person with knowledge of the examinations, the company has passed all inspections with no citations.
However, the USDA’s Office of Inspector General, the agency now probing potential animal-welfare violations by Neuralink, is also investigating allegedly slipshod Animal Welfare Act enforcement by the USDA itself, in a joint probe with the U.S. Department of Justice.
