Before diving into the story, Vancouver Police Department’s ‘robo cop’ was diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) a few years ago and for anyone unfamiliar with the disease, here’s more from the ALS Wikipedia entry, Note: Links have been removed,

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as motor neuron disease (MND) or Lou Gehrig’s disease, is a rare terminal neurodegenerative disease defined by the progressive loss of both upper and lower motor neurons that normally control voluntary muscle contraction. ALS is the most common of the motor neuron diseases.^[8] ALS often presents with gradual muscle stiffness, twitches, weakness, and wasting. Motor neuron loss typically continues until the ability to eat, speak, move, and breathe without mechanical support is lost. At least 50% of people with ALS experience significant changes in thinking and behavior, with 15% of individuals going on to develop frontotemporal dementia.^[9][10] …

Lee Marten, right, is a Vancouver police sergeant who is one of the first Canadians to be implanted with a Neuralink brain chip in a bid to help him with symptoms of ALS or spinal injuries. His wife, Lisa, is seen in Toronto Western Hospital on May 20 before his procedure. (Submitted by Lisa Marten)

That prognosis makes the decision to go ahead with an experimental brain implant instantly understandable. Lyndsay Duncombe’s July 2, 2026 article for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) news online website details the officer’s and his family’s story,

Sitting in his wheelchair, hands at his side, 48-year-old Lee Marten looks at the computer screen in front of him and imagines moving the cursor across the screen. As quickly as he thinks it, the arrow shifts. 

Marten, who is a sergeant with the Vancouver Police Department (VPD) currently on leave, uses the cursor to type letters on a digital keyboard — as fast as, or faster, than human fingers. Right away, the latest Toronto Blue Jays score pops up. 

“I know it seems like science fiction,” he said. “But here I am and it works.” 

On May 20 [2026], Marten became one of the first Canadian ALS patients to receive a Neuralink brain implant, as part of a clinical trial at University Health Network’s (UHN) Toronto Western Hospital. 

He is just the 26th person in the world to undergo the procedure, which is being tested on people unable to move because of ALS or spinal injuries. At least two other Canadians, both quadriplegics, are also known to have received the implant in Canada, and a dual American-Canadian citizen with ALS has had the procedure done in the U.S.

Neuralink is owned by controversial trillionaire [not now on August 5, 2026] Elon Musk, and the hospital has faced criticism for participating in the trial.

But Marten sees the procedure as a chance to improve his quality of life and advance science in a way that could help others. 

“Getting a terminal diagnosis, you don’t have much to look forward to,” he said. 

“This is going to maybe improve my time that I have left, and allow me to be a kind of trailblazer for anyone else going through this.”

Long road to diagnosis

Marten’s symptoms began in April 2022. He was working on the bike patrol with the Vancouver Police Department when his left foot began to drop. 

At first, he thought it was a cycling injury, but he kept losing his balance. A fall off the steps to his garage led to a broken leg.

Doctors attributed the symptoms to a benign brain tumour and Marten had surgery to remove it in March 2024. 

But the mobility problems continued to worsen, and three years after he first felt unwell, the devastating diagnosis came. ALS was destroying the nerve cells in his brain and spinal cord. It is progressive and there is no cure.

…

The disease’s progression varies from patient to patient, but Marten said the hardest part about knowing he will die from ALS is that he won’t be able to watch his children, Rys, 14, and Carys, 11, grow up.

…

“People joke that I’m going to be RoboCop,” he said, laughing, in an interview shortly before the procedure.

“I’m going to be a cyborg, right?” 

…

The Martens’ biggest hope for the surgery was that it would allow him to communicate with family through a computer after he is no longer able to physically speak.

Lisa said this will be helpful with medical decisions, including those around a potential medically-assisted death. 

“We can get his true feelings on what he wants to do,” she said.

…

·

About the implant

Duncombe’s July 2, 2026 article provides some technical details, Note: Links have been removed,

…

The trial at UHN’s Toronto Western Hospital, CAN-PRIME, is one of a handful of Neuralink studies taking part across the world, including ones in the U.S., U.K. and Abu Dhabi.

The procedure involves implanting more than 1,000 electrodes, each thinner than a human hair, into the brain’s motor cortex. Surgeons open the skull and prepare the site, but the electrodes are inserted by a two-metre-tall robot shipped to Toronto from San Francisco. 

“The robot is crucial because it’s much more accurate and precise than a human neurosurgeon could do,” said Dr. Andres Lozano, who leads the neurosurgery team at UHN’s Toronto Western. 

The hospital has faced criticism for participating in the trial, including from an emergency physician who said that Canadian institutions should not work with companies owned by Musk, who was behind U.S. government cuts to global health. Neuralink has also been criticized for how it shares information. 

Lozano said the trial went through a series of ethical screens, and passed all of them. [emphasis mine]

“We jumped at the opportunity to participate because we think the technology is very advanced and we think it really has an opportunity to help patients,” he said, adding that it may be possible in the future for paralyzed patients to control movement of a wheelchair, or even a specialized exoskeleton, through Neuralink brain implants. 

…

A ‘scary’ change in plans

The day of Marten’s surgery started with stress when they learned his surgery would be different from those of previous Neuralink patients. 

For the first time, surgeons would not peel back the dura, or protective layer around the brain. Instead, the robot would insert the chip through the dura.

Lozano called it a “tremendous advance in technology” that could make the operation simpler, and safer. 

But the new plan made Lisa nervous. 

“They didn’t tell us until just before he went in that he was going to be the first person in the world to have the new procedure done,” she said. “That’s where it got a little scary.” 

Lee, on the other hand, was ready.

“I’m like, let’s get ‘er done.” 

The procedure took six hours and doctors say it was a success.

Marten woke up in the ICU with 27 staples in his scalp and a brutal headache. Painkillers helped, and he says about an hour after waking up, he was working with Neuralink engineers to try out the device.

“They told me I was the first out of all the participants [to] do that so soon after surgery,” he said. “And I’m like, well, Canadians are just built tougher.” 

…

Since returning to Vancouver, he has “homework” that consists of doing exercises every couple of days so the Neuralink engineers can monitor how the device is working. It keeps him busy. 

Marten has plans to make playlists for his kids, and play video games with them, even when he can no longer move or speak. 

…

Duncombe’s July 2, 2026 article offers more including images and an embedded video. There’s also a five minute CBC Radio interview of Lindsay Duncombe by Stephen Quinn on CBC’s The Early Edition. Dunscombe was a bit of an ‘easy, breezy’ interview subject who displays the kind of enthusiasm you’d expect from someone presenting science to children; the sort of thing you might expect at a science centre. (Confession: Sometimes I sound like an enthused science fan too.)

It doesn’t seem enough to say bravo to the Martens; they are facing an extraordinarily difficult time with grace and courage.

Now, onto some of the issues not explored in Duncombe’s article or interview.

Ethics and other issues

What struck me in Duncombe’s account is the UHN’s failure to alert the family to a change in how the surgery would be conducted. Six hours notice? Someone had to know that procedure would be different. Wasn’t the surgical team prepped for this change long before? There seems to no reason to give the family only sic hours notice.

Regarding ethics, there’s this somewhat unclear statement in Duncombe’s July 2, 2026 article “Lozano (Dr. Andres Lozano, who leads the neurosurgery team) said the trial went through a series of ethical screens, and passed all of them.”

• Whose (which institution? Health Canada, University of Toronto, Toronto Western Hospital?) ethical screens?
• Who (which institution? …) conducted these analyses?
• How did giving the family six hours notice of a significant change in the operation pass an ethical test?
• Does the university and/or the hospital have a financial relationship of any kind with Neuralink?
• Does the surgical lead, Dr. Andres Lozano, have any kind of financial relationship with Neuralink?
• Is it a good idea to get brain implants from commercial companies?
• What about Lee Marten’s thoughts? Does he own them?

I have over the years written a number of pieces about brain or neural implants with a focus on some of these questions. This list includes a number of my postings but I’m going to start the list with a CBC article by Sheena Goodyear,

• Why your brain could be the next frontier of data privacy, an October 11, 2024 article by Sheena Goodyear on the CBC Radio’s As It Happens webpage. It includes the As It Happens radio segment along with other embedded materials exploring the issue of neural privacy.
• Going blind when your neural implant company flirts with bankruptcy (long read) is an April 5, 2022 posting exploring what can happen when your implant is a commercial product.
• Neural (brain) implants and hype (long read), a February 23, 2024 posting included a deepish dive into Neuralink.
• Copyright, artificial intelligence, and thoughts about cyborgs, an October 21, 2025 posting explores some potential issues with intellectual property and the dawning, not only of AI, but brain implants integrated with AI.
• Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) and music composition, an April 2, 2026 posting featured a musician who used brain implant when he was composing music.
• Tech companies want your brain (data), an April 23, 2026 takes a look at data derived from consumer products marketed as devices that aid with meditation or relaxation or focus and worn externally can harvest brain date used for research purposes. Did you check that contract you signed?

There appears to be some action by the Canadian federal government to address privacy issues with neural data. First, here’s a February 13, 2026 opinion piece by Kris Klein for the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) about the Canadian federal government’s addition to a list of what constitutes sensitive information, Note: A link has been removed,

Privacy professionals have long lived with a comforting illusion: that “sensitive information” is a relatively stable concept. Health data is sensitive. Financial data is sensitive. Social Insurance Numbers are sensitive. This mental list has served us well for years and fits neatly into training decks and compliance frameworks.

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada [OPC] has gently reminded us that this list is not static.

This week, the OPC updated its Interpretation Bulletin on Sensitive Information under the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, which consolidates court decisions and OPC findings on what counts as sensitive personal information and what that means for consent and safeguards. What’s new? Your brain has now officially entered the chat. The OPC added neural data among the types of personal information that will generally be considered sensitive and require a higher degree of protection.

The bulletin explains a principle privacy professionals know well but sometimes treat as theoretical. While some types of information will almost always be sensitive, any personal information can become sensitive depending on context. Names and addresses are the classic example. Usually harmless, unless the context reveals something deeply personal about the individual.

Under PIPEDA, sensitivity drives two critical compliance outcomes: the form of consent an organization must obtain and the level of security safeguards it must apply. In other words, sensitivity is not an academic label. It determines how hard organizations must work to justify collection, explain purposes and protect the data they hold.

Neural data, now formally on the “sensitive personal information” list broadly refers to information derived from the activity of the nervous system, particularly the brain. This can include data collected through technologies such as electroencephalography, brain computer interfaces, neuroimaging tools or wearable devices designed to measure brain signals. In practice, this can range from clinical brain scans to consumer-facing technologies that claim to monitor our focus, fatigue or emotional states.

In a nutshell, it is data generated by your brain doing brain things.

Used responsibly, neural data has clear benefits. In health care, it can support diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation for neurological conditions. In accessibility contexts, brain computer interfaces have the potential to restore communication or mobility for individuals with severe disabilities. In workplace safety and transportation, fatigue detection technologies are being explored as tools to reduce accidents.

At the same time, the risks are not subtle. Neural data is deeply intimate. It may reveal health conditions, cognitive states or emotional responses that individuals themselves do not fully understand or expect to disclose. Unlike a password, you can’t simply reset your brain. Unlike a credit card number, neural patterns are not easily replaced.

The OPC’s decision to flag neural data as sensitive reflects these realities. It signals that some information is so personal that heightened care is not optional. Organizations collecting or experimenting with neural data should assume that meaningful consent must be robust, safeguards must be proportionate and purposes must be tightly defined.

…

The February 10, 2026 Interpretation Bulletin: Sensitive Information from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) mentioned in Klein’s opinion piece specifically mentions neural data but only once, Note: A link has been removed,

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada has added “neural data” to the list of personal information that will generally be considered sensitive and require a higher degree of protection. See the section: Application by the Courts and the OPC in Different Contexts.

…

However, the PIPEDA could be scrapped for new legislation introduced on June 15, 2026 as described in a federal government backgrounder,

Today [June 16, 2026], the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-36, an Act to enact the Protecting Privacy and Consumer Data Act (PPCDA), to amend the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act [PIPEDA] and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts.

…

In a June 17, 2026 blog posting on his companies website (CloudForce) Anton Kuznetsov outlines changes in the proposed bill C-36 that will affect Canadian businesses, Note: Links have been removed,

…

Why Canada Needed a New Privacy Law

PIPEDA has governed commercial privacy for 25 years. It was built for a world without cloud infrastructure, AI-driven decision-making, or mass data brokerage. Its enforcement model reflects that: the Privacy Commissioner investigates, recommends, and can apply to Federal Court, but cannot impose fines directly. The maximum penalty for a violation is $100,000.

That limitation has consequences. In 2024-25, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner received 686 breach reports from private-sector businesses under PIPEDA — affecting over 20 million Canadians. Complaints to the OPC rose 32% in the same period. (OPC 2024-25 Annual Report) The average cost of a Canadian data breach reached CA$6.98 million in 2025 — a 10.4% increase year-over-year. (IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025 – Canada) The enforcement regime was not designed for this environment.

Bill C-36 is the Carney government’s response — a revised version of Bill C-27, which died on the Order Paper when Parliament prorogued in January 2025. (IAPP, Canada’s Bill C-36 introduces privacy reforms, enforcement changes)

What Changes: PIPEDA to PPCDA

Bill C-36 enacts the Protecting Privacy and Consumer Data Act (PPCDA), which replaces Part 1 of PIPEDA — the commercial privacy section. PIPEDA itself survives in narrowed form, renamed the *Electronic Documents Act*, covering only its electronic documents and signatures provisions.

…

Dr. Michael Geist, law professor at the University of Ottawa holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law and more) offers a rather peppery analysis of the proposed legislation in a June 15, 2026 blog posting and another on June 18, 2026 on his eponymous website.

I have not been able to find a reference to neural data or any other neural implant issues in the discussion about Bill C-36. If someone has located something, please let me know in the Comments.

In the end

Given the same circumstances, if I had been presented with the choice that the Martens were given, I too would have opted for the implant. Desperation will drive you to places you might not visit elsewise.

That six hour notice of a change prior to the operation? It rings alarm bells and brings to mind “move fast and break things” usually accompanied by “it’s easier to ask for forgiveness than to get permission,” both of them favourites in the technology sector. Neuralink, after all, is a company owned by Elon Musk who is not famed for his deliberation or thoughtfulness and his companies are not known for their openness (see: 2025’s “The Tesla Files; a Whistleblower, a Leak, a Fight for Truth : the Inside Story of Musk’s Empire” by Sönke Iwersen for more about Musk’s Tesla operations [focus on European operations] and its level of secrecy).

There are other issues as well, what happens if the company goes out of business or discontinues this particular product?

I don’t imagine the federal government will manage to cover every contingency but it is concerning that Prime Minister Carney’s Liberals are in such a rush to stimulate ‘innovation’ that they appear oblivious to the implications of technology such as computer-brain interfaces (CBI) and more. For many, (see CBC Radio interview of Lindsay Duncombe) it is treated as the stuff of futuristic science fiction. As you can see from this piece and a cornucopia of articles elsewhere in print and online, that belief is deeply erroneous.

Hopefully, I’m wrong and the Canadian federal government is alive to the many possibilities good and ill afforded by these ‘science fiction’ technologies and is examining ways to ensure safe implementation.