Re: [Openeeg-list] AN OPEN TMS PROJECT WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY RESULT IN SERIOUS INJURY

[Jeffrey B. <jef...@fi...>]

On Sat, 2005-01-29 at 13:59 -0800, JAMIE MORKEN wrote: 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Brendan Allison <bal...@ci...>
> Date: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 10:24 am
> Subject: [Openeeg-list] AN OPEN TMS PROJECT WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY RESULT IN SERIOUS INJURY
> 
> > Though the health risks should be caution enough, a system using
> 
> professionals probably gave the same healthrisk warnings before
> the open-EEG was built and now it seems to have been accepted as
> safe. :)  The unknown is always feared I guess.

allow me to rewrite the warning in terms you may understand better...

an EEG device open()s your /dev/brain O_RDONLY, and takes extra steps in
hardware to ensure that this restriction is enforced.

a TMS device open()s your brain O_WRONLY, using protocols not yet
understood.

the health risk warnings on the EEG relate to making very sure that it
is in fact a read-only device, and have nothing to do with the unknown.
the risk is very precisely known; that of electricity going into
electrodes attached to your head and killing or injuring you. the reason
that the open EEG is safe if set up and used properly is because it uses
the same protection methods as the commercial devices, to ensure that it
only monitors, and does not affect, your body.

the health risk warnings for a TMS relate to the fact that its primary
purpose is to modify the functioning of your brain. and just because you
don't have electrodes hooked up to your skull doesn't mean that it
cannot harm you.

one could reasonably compare the distinction to that between taking a
piss test versus cooking up unknown drugs in a chem lab and ingesting
them... without anyone around to supervise.

> The patent argument is irrelevant for opensource designs that aren't being sold for profit.
> 
> cheers,
> Jamie

jeff