We Thought Neurotech Would Create Cyborgs. It Might Restore Our Humanity.

When Neuralink captured the world’s attention, it cemented a powerful idea: that the future of neurotechnology would turn us into something closer to cyborgs—humans who think, and machines that act. The narrative was clear and compelling: bypass the body, decode the brain, and plug directly into the digital world. But that vision, as exciting (and terrifying) as it is, has led us slightly off course.

Because the most important shift happening in neurotech isn’t about controlling machines with your mind—it’s about reclaiming control of your own body. Not escaping biology, but restoring it. Using machines to become more human.

The current paradigm in the neurotech industry is one of decoding brain signals to control external systems (a cursor on a laptop, a robot, etc). This paradigm exists for several reasons. Controlling machines restores autonomy to individuals who are unable to control their own bodies. In neurotech (and most medically oriented fields), it is easier to start with fixing and then move to enhancing. Technology like this starts with the most acute use cases (paralysis, severe neurological disorders) because that’s where the need is highest and the risk tolerance is justified. This line of thinking is what influenced Neuralink’s approach — one of the most visible companies, which is why many companies followed suit with the same line of thinking. 

Here lie two implicit flaws. 

In the dominant model, the loop looks like this: Thought is decoded by a computer → the computer translates that signal into external action → that action is carried out by a machine.

But what if it could be this: Thought arises naturally → technology repairs or restores disrupted neural pathways → the body itself executes the intended action.

Not replacing body with machine, but rather reactivating body with machine. Would this not then be a truer restoration of autonomy? 

I argue that yes, it would. 

And that is the exact approach behind Onward Medical, a neurotech company headquartered in the Netherlands. Instead of decoding the brain's electrical signals and sending them to an external system, Onward Medical is ‘re-awakening’ the dormant pathways on which those electrical signals rely on to control the body. A beautifully human approach; by delivering precise signals to the spinal cord, they effectively amplify or reroute (in some cases) the brain’s existing commands—allowing patients to regain voluntary movement as opposed to operating a robotic proxy. 

This is not theoretical. Early Onward Medical patients have seen clinically significant success. Their clinical trials saw: 

You can read their publication here. 

Patients who were previously paralyzed have been able to stand, take steps, and regain control of their limbs—in many cases decades after their injury. 

This is not just a medical breakthrough in paralysis treatment. It is, at its core, a challenge to the dominant philosophy. For the past decade, the primary narrative in neurotech has been shaped by companies like Neuralink, Synchron, Blackrock Neurotech and others: read the brain, decode intention, and connect it to the digital world. Build faster interfaces. Higher bandwidth. Thought → software. And that path will continue. It’s inevitable. 

But this transition from assistive software to reprogrammable biology offers a second axis. We no longer just read from the brain, but write to it as well, which of course changes the ceiling exponentially, because once we can reliably stimulate neural circuits, we can repair, enhance, or even modulate certain functions. 

Technology like this has traditionally experienced a trickle-down effect. As mentioned before, the path goes from risk-worthy medical use cases to prove the tech for optimization use cases down the line. 

Take botox, a classic example of a high‑risk medical therapy that became everyday. Originally, doctors used tiny doses of this extremely potent neurotoxin to treat serious problems like eye muscle disorders and painful neck spasms, where the potential benefit justified the danger. Over time, studies showed that when precisely injected in small amounts, it was both effective and acceptably safe in those settings. Clinicians then noticed a side effect, smoother skin and fewer wrinkles, leading to cosmetic trials, regulatory approvals, and eventually routine use in dermatology and med‑spas for wrinkle reduction and other elective treatments. Today, you could go get botox during your lunch break. 

Apply that same trajectory to non‑invasive neural stimulation. What now exists as a specialised intervention to restore autonomy for people with paralysis will, over time, likely diffuse into everyday life as a tool to fine‑tune health, performance, and overall function. 

The most exciting part is that we are seeing glimpses of this future today. As you may know by now, I work at Somnee, a company already selling this technology to everyday consumers with the use case of sleep. And the reality is that, despite the billions of dollars investors pour into invasive products, a vast majority of the world’s first experience with neurotech will be through a non-invasive product. And it won’t be moving a cursor or controlling a robot with their brain. It will be falling asleep faster, focusing harder, or learning quicker. 

We are beginning to outgrow the idea that technology’s role is to sit between us and the world. For decades, progress meant better middlemen—faster screens, smarter software, more responsive machines. But neurotech points to something far more fundamental: a shift away from proxies, and back into the body itself. The real breakthrough is not that we can move a cursor with our thoughts. It’s that we are learning to restore, modulate, and eventually upgrade the biological systems that generate those thoughts in the first place.

Companies like Neuralink showed the world what it looks like to read the brain. Companies like Onward Medical are proving we can write to it—reactivating dormant pathways, turning intention back into movement, and restoring a level of autonomy that no external device could fully replicate. And on the consumer edge, companies like Somnee are quietly introducing this paradigm to everyday people, not as a medical necessity, but as a lifestyle upgrade.

This is the great convergence: read + write, brain + body, therapy + enhancement.

And when that loop fully closes, the definition of a “product” changes entirely. The interface is no longer a screen. The output is no longer something you look at. The product is you—your focus, your sleep, your mood, your ability to act.

History suggests exactly where this goes next. Glasses were once a medical device; now they’re ubiquitous. Caffeine was once a plant compound; now it’s infrastructure for productivity. Neurotech will follow the same path—first restoring what is broken, then optimizing what is normal, and eventually redefining what is possible.

The implication is difficult to overstate. We are not just building tools that humans use. We are building tools that change what a human is capable of being. And the question I have for you, dear reader, is if true autonomy does not mean controlling a machine, but reclaiming control over your own mind and body—how much ‘true autonomy’ do you actually have today? 

Until next time, 

–Daniel Kim