1
|
Salles A, Farisco M. Neuroethics and AI ethics: a proposal for collaboration. BMC Neurosci 2024; 25:41. [PMID: 39210267 PMCID: PMC11360855 DOI: 10.1186/s12868-024-00888-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2024] [Accepted: 08/14/2024] [Indexed: 09/04/2024] Open
Abstract
The scientific relationship between neuroscience and artificial intelligence is generally acknowledged, and the role that their long history of collaboration has played in advancing both fields is often emphasized. Beyond the important scientific insights provided by their collaborative development, both neuroscience and AI raise a number of ethical issues that are generally explored by neuroethics and AI ethics. Neuroethics and AI ethics have been gaining prominence in the last few decades, and they are typically carried out by different research communities. However, considering the evolving landscape of AI-assisted neurotechnologies and the various conceptual and practical intersections between AI and neuroscience-such as the increasing application of AI in neuroscientific research, the healthcare of neurological and mental diseases, and the use of neuroscientific knowledge as inspiration for AI-some scholars are now calling for a collaborative relationship between these two domains. This article seeks to explore how a collaborative relationship between neuroethics and AI ethics can stimulate theoretical and, ideally, governance efforts. First, we offer some reasons for calling for the collaboration of the ethical reflection on neuroscientific innovations and AI. Next, we explore some dimensions that we think could be enhanced by the cross-fertilization between these two subfields of ethics. We believe that considering the pace and increasing fusion of neuroscience and AI in the development of innovations, broad and underspecified calls for responsibility that do not consider insights from different ethics subfields will only be partially successful in promoting meaningful changes in both research and applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Michele Farisco
- Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
- Biogem, Biology and Molecular Genetics Research Institute, Bioethics Unit, Ariano Irpino, AV, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Della Croce Y. Neuroethics, Pluralism, and Reviews. AJOB Neurosci 2024; 15:155-157. [PMID: 39018225 DOI: 10.1080/21507740.2024.2365135] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/19/2024]
|
3
|
Okun MS, Marjenin T, Ekanayake J, Gilbert F, Doherty SP, Pilkington J, French J, Kubu C, Lázaro-Muñoz G, Denison T, Giordano J. Definition of Implanted Neurological Device Abandonment: A Systematic Review and Consensus Statement. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7:e248654. [PMID: 38687486 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.8654] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/02/2024] Open
Abstract
Importance Establishing a formal definition for neurological device abandonment has the potential to reduce or to prevent the occurrence of this abandonment. Objective To perform a systematic review of the literature and develop an expert consensus definition for neurological device abandonment. Evidence Review After a Royal Society Summit on Neural Interfaces (September 13-14, 2023), a systematic English language review using PubMed was undertaken to investigate extant definitions of neurological device abandonment. Articles were reviewed for relevance to neurological device abandonment in the setting of deep brain, vagal nerve, and spinal cord stimulation. This review was followed by the convening of an expert consensus group of physicians, scientists, ethicists, and stakeholders. The group summarized findings, added subject matter experience, and applied relevant ethics concepts to propose a current operational definition of neurological device abandonment. Data collection, study, and consensus development were done between September 13, 2023, and February 1, 2024. Findings The PubMed search revealed 734 total articles, and after review, 7 articles were found to address neurological device abandonment. The expert consensus group addressed findings as germane to neurological device abandonment and added personal experience and additional relevant peer-reviewed articles, addressed stakeholders' respective responsibilities, and operationally defined abandonment in the context of implantable neurotechnological devices. The group further addressed whether clinical trial failure or shelving of devices would constitute or be associated with abandonment as defined. Referential to these domains and dimensions, the group proposed a standardized definition for abandonment of active implantable neurotechnological devices. Conclusions and Relevance This study's consensus statement suggests that the definition for neurological device abandonment should entail failure to provide fundamental aspects of patient consent; fulfill reasonable responsibility for medical, technical, or financial support prior to the end of the device's labeled lifetime; and address any or all immediate needs that may result in safety concerns or device ineffectiveness and that the definition of abandonment associated with the failure of a research trial should be contingent on specific circumstances.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael S Okun
- Department of Neurology, Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, Gainesville, Florida
- Department of Neurosurgery, Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, Gainesville, Florida
| | - Timothy Marjenin
- Musculoskeletal Clinical Regulatory Advisers, Washington, District of Columbia
| | - Jinendra Ekanayake
- Department of Neurosurgery, National Guard Hospital, Riyadh, Saudia Arabia
- Department of Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, United Kingdom
- Quetz Ltd, Chelmsford, England
| | | | - Sean P Doherty
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, England
- Amber Therapeutics Limited, London, England
| | | | | | - Cynthia Kubu
- Center for Neuro-Restoration, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz
- Center for Bioethics, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston
- Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston
| | - Timothy Denison
- Amber Therapeutics Limited, London, England
- Medical Research Council Brain Network Dynamics Unit, Departments of Engineering Sciences and Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England
| | - James Giordano
- Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia
- Department of Biochemistry, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia
- Defense Medical Ethics Center, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland
- Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
DiEuliis D, Giordano JJ. Safely balancing a double-edged blade: identifying and mitigating emerging biosecurity risks in precision medicine. Front Med (Lausanne) 2024; 11:1364703. [PMID: 38572161 PMCID: PMC10987748 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1364703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2024] [Accepted: 02/14/2024] [Indexed: 04/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Tools and methods of precision medicine are developing rapidly, through both iterative discoveries enabled by innovations in biomedical research (e.g., genome editing, synthetic biology, bioengineered devices). These are strengthened by advancements in information technology and the increasing body of data-as assimilated, analyzed, and made accessible-and affectable-through current and emerging cyber-and systems- technologies. Taken together, these approaches afford ever greater volume and availability of individual and collective human data. Machine learning and/or artificial intelligence approaches are broadening this dual use risk; and in the aftermath of COVID-19, there is growing incentive and impetus to gather more biological data from individuals and their environments on a routine basis. By engaging these data-and the interventions that are based upon them, precision medicine offer promise of highly individualized treatments for disease and injury, optimization of structure and function, and concomitantly, the potential for (mis) using data to incur harm. This double-edged blade of benefit and risk obligates the need to safeguard human data from purloinment, through systems, guidelines and policies of a novel discipline, cyberbiosecurity, which, as coupled to ethical precepts, aims to protect human privacy, agency, and safety in ways that remain apace with scientific and technological advances in biomedicine. Herein, current capabilities and trajectories precision medicine are described as relevant to their dual use potential, and approaches to biodata security (viz.- cyberbiosecurity) are proposed and discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Diane DiEuliis
- Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction, National Defense University, Washington, DC, United States
| | - James J Giordano
- Departments of Neurology and Biochemistry, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States
- Defense Medical Ethics Center, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, United States
- Simon Center for the Professional Military Ethic, United States Military Academy, West Point, NY, United States
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Shook JR, Giordano J. Designing New Neurorights: Tasking and Translating Them to All Humanity. AJOB Neurosci 2023; 14:372-374. [PMID: 37856356 DOI: 10.1080/21507740.2023.2257175] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2023]
|
6
|
Gilbert F, Ienca M, Cook M. How I became myself after merging with a computer: Does human-machine symbiosis raise human rights issues? Brain Stimul 2023; 16:783-789. [PMID: 37137387 DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2023.04.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2022] [Revised: 04/07/2023] [Accepted: 04/20/2023] [Indexed: 05/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Novel usages of brain stimulation combined with artificially intelligent (AI) systems promise to address a large range of diseases. These new conjoined technologies, such as brain-computer interfaces (BCI), are increasingly used in experimental and clinical settings to predict and alleviate symptoms of various neurological and psychiatric disorders. Due to their reliance on AI algorithms for feature extraction and classification, these BCI systems enable a novel, unprecedented, and direct connection between human cognition and artificial information processing. In this paper, we present the results of a study that investigates the phenomenology of human-machine symbiosis during a first-in-human experimental BCI trial designed to predict epileptic seizures. We employed qualitative semi-structured interviews to collect user experience data from a participant over a six-years period. We report on a clinical case where a specific embodied phenomenology emerged: namely, after BCI implantation, the patient reported experiences of increased agential capacity and continuity; and after device explantation, the patient reported persistent traumatic harms linked to agential discontinuity. To our knowledge, this is the first reported clinical case of a patient experiencing persistent agential discontinuity due to BCI explantation and potential evidence of an infringement on patient right, where the implanted person was robbed of her de novo agential capacities when the device was removed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frederic Gilbert
- EthicsLab, Philosophy & Gender Studies, School of Humanities, College of Arts, Law and Education, University of Tasmania, Australia.
| | - Marcello Ienca
- Institute for Ethics and History of Medicine, School of Medicine - Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Germany; Intelligent Systems Ethics Group, College of Humanities (CDH), Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland
| | - Mark Cook
- Division Engineering and IT - Biomedical Engineering, University of Melbourne, Australia; The Sir John Eccles Chair of Medicine, Director of Clinical Neurosciences, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Asher R, Hyun I, Head M, Cosgrove GR, Silbersweig D. Neuroethical implications of focused ultrasound for neuropsychiatric illness. Brain Stimul 2023; 16:806-814. [PMID: 37150289 DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2023.04.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2022] [Revised: 04/17/2023] [Accepted: 04/23/2023] [Indexed: 05/09/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND MR-guided focused ultrasound is a promising intervention for treatment-resistant mental illness, and merits contextualized ethical exploration in relation to more extensive ethical literature regarding other psychosurgical and neuromodulation treatment options for this patient population. To our knowledge, this topic has not yet been explored in the published literature. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this paper is to review and discuss in detail the neuroethical implications of MR-guided focused ultrasound for neuropsychiatric illness as an emerging treatment modality. METHODS Due to the lack of published literature on the topic, the approach involved a detailed survey and review of technical and medical literature relevant to focused ultrasound and established ethical issues related to alternative treatment options for patients with treatment-resistant, severe and persistent mental illness. The manuscript is structured according to thematic and topical findings. RESULTS This technology has potential benefits for patients suffering with severe mental illness, compared with established alternatives. The balance of technical, neuroscientific and clinical considerations should inform ethical deliberations. The nascent literature base, nuances in legal classification and permissibility depending upon jurisdiction, influences of past ethical issues associated with alternative treatments, tone and framing in media articles, and complexity of clinical trials all influence ethical assessment and evaluations of multiple stakeholders. Recommendations for future research are provided based on these factors. CONCLUSION Salient ethical inquiry should be further explored by researchers, clinicians, and ethicists in a nuanced manner methodologically, one which is informed by past and present ethical issues related to alternative treatment options, broader psychiatric treatment frameworks, pragmatic implementation challenges, intercultural considerations, and patients' ethical concerns.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel Asher
- Brigham and Women's Hospital/Harvard Medical School, 60 Fenwood Rd, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
| | - Insoo Hyun
- Center for Bioethics at Harvard Medical School, 641 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
| | - Mitchell Head
- Te Kotahi Research Institute/University of Waikato, Gate 4C, 194H Hillcrest Rd, Hillcrest, Hamilton, 3216, Aotearoa, New Zealand.
| | - G Rees Cosgrove
- Brigham and Women's Hospital/Harvard Medical School, 60 Fenwood Rd, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
| | - David Silbersweig
- Brigham and Women's Hospital/Harvard Medical School, 60 Fenwood Rd, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Professional attitudes toward the use of neuromodulatory technologies in Mexico: Insight for neuroethical considerations of cultural diversity. CNS Spectr 2022; 27:255-257. [PMID: 33298232 DOI: 10.1017/s1092852920002151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
|
9
|
Wong JK, Deuschl G, Wolke R, Bergman H, Muthuraman M, Groppa S, Sheth SA, Bronte-Stewart HM, Wilkins KB, Petrucci MN, Lambert E, Kehnemouyi Y, Starr PA, Little S, Anso J, Gilron R, Poree L, Kalamangalam GP, Worrell GA, Miller KJ, Schiff ND, Butson CR, Henderson JM, Judy JW, Ramirez-Zamora A, Foote KD, Silburn PA, Li L, Oyama G, Kamo H, Sekimoto S, Hattori N, Giordano JJ, DiEuliis D, Shook JR, Doughtery DD, Widge AS, Mayberg HS, Cha J, Choi K, Heisig S, Obatusin M, Opri E, Kaufman SB, Shirvalkar P, Rozell CJ, Alagapan S, Raike RS, Bokil H, Green D, Okun MS. Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Deep Brain Stimulation Think Tank: Advances in Cutting Edge Technologies, Artificial Intelligence, Neuromodulation, Neuroethics, Pain, Interventional Psychiatry, Epilepsy, and Traumatic Brain Injury. Front Hum Neurosci 2022; 16:813387. [PMID: 35308605 PMCID: PMC8931265 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.813387] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2021] [Accepted: 01/11/2022] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
DBS Think Tank IX was held on August 25-27, 2021 in Orlando FL with US based participants largely in person and overseas participants joining by video conferencing technology. The DBS Think Tank was founded in 2012 and provides an open platform where clinicians, engineers and researchers (from industry and academia) can freely discuss current and emerging deep brain stimulation (DBS) technologies as well as the logistical and ethical issues facing the field. The consensus among the DBS Think Tank IX speakers was that DBS expanded in its scope and has been applied to multiple brain disorders in an effort to modulate neural circuitry. After collectively sharing our experiences, it was estimated that globally more than 230,000 DBS devices have been implanted for neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders. As such, this year's meeting was focused on advances in the following areas: neuromodulation in Europe, Asia and Australia; cutting-edge technologies, neuroethics, interventional psychiatry, adaptive DBS, neuromodulation for pain, network neuromodulation for epilepsy and neuromodulation for traumatic brain injury.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joshua K. Wong
- Department of Neurology, Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Günther Deuschl
- Department of Neurology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany
| | - Robin Wolke
- Department of Neurology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany
| | - Hagai Bergman
- Department of Medical Neurobiology (Physiology), Institute of Medical Research Israel-Canada, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Muthuraman Muthuraman
- Biomedical Statistics and Multimodal Signal Processing Unit, Section of Movement Disorders and Neurostimulation, Focus Program Translational Neuroscience, Department of Neurology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - Sergiu Groppa
- Biomedical Statistics and Multimodal Signal Processing Unit, Section of Movement Disorders and Neurostimulation, Focus Program Translational Neuroscience, Department of Neurology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - Sameer A. Sheth
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Helen M. Bronte-Stewart
- The Human Motor Control and Neuromodulation Laboratory, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Kevin B. Wilkins
- The Human Motor Control and Neuromodulation Laboratory, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Matthew N. Petrucci
- The Human Motor Control and Neuromodulation Laboratory, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Emilia Lambert
- The Human Motor Control and Neuromodulation Laboratory, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Yasmine Kehnemouyi
- The Human Motor Control and Neuromodulation Laboratory, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Philip A. Starr
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Kavli Institute for Fundamental Neuroscience, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Simon Little
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Kavli Institute for Fundamental Neuroscience, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Juan Anso
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Kavli Institute for Fundamental Neuroscience, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Ro’ee Gilron
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Kavli Institute for Fundamental Neuroscience, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Lawrence Poree
- Department of Anesthesia, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Giridhar P. Kalamangalam
- Department of Neurology, Wilder Center for Epilepsy Research, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | | | - Kai J. Miller
- Department of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Nicholas D. Schiff
- Department of Neurology, Weill Cornell Brain and Spine Institute, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, United States
| | - Christopher R. Butson
- Department of Neurology, Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Jaimie M. Henderson
- Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Jack W. Judy
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Adolfo Ramirez-Zamora
- Department of Neurology, Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Kelly D. Foote
- Department of Neurosurgery, Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Peter A. Silburn
- Queensland Brain Institute, University of Queensland and Saint Andrews War Memorial Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Luming Li
- National Engineering Laboratory for Neuromodulation, School of Aerospace Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
| | - Genko Oyama
- Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Hikaru Kamo
- Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Satoko Sekimoto
- Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Nobutaka Hattori
- Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - James J. Giordano
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Diane DiEuliis
- US Department of Defense Fort Lesley J. McNair, National Defense University, Washington, DC, United States
| | - John R. Shook
- Department of Philosophy and Science Education, University of Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, United States
| | - Darin D. Doughtery
- Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Alik S. Widge
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | - Helen S. Mayberg
- Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | - Jungho Cha
- Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | - Kisueng Choi
- Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | - Stephen Heisig
- Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | - Mosadolu Obatusin
- Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | - Enrico Opri
- Department of Neurology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States
| | - Scott B. Kaufman
- Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Prasad Shirvalkar
- The Human Motor Control and Neuromodulation Laboratory, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
- Department of Anesthesiology (Pain Management) and Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Christopher J. Rozell
- School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, United States
| | - Sankaraleengam Alagapan
- School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, United States
| | - Robert S. Raike
- Restorative Therapies Group Implantables, Research and Core Technology, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | - Hemant Bokil
- Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation, Valencia, CA, United States
| | - David Green
- NeuroPace, Inc., Mountain View, CA, United States
| | - Michael S. Okun
- Department of Neurology, Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Salles A, Farisco M. Of Ethical Frameworks and Neuroethics in Big Neuroscience Projects: A View from the HBP. AJOB Neurosci 2021; 11:167-175. [PMID: 32716744 DOI: 10.1080/21507740.2020.1778116] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
The recently published BRAIN 2.0 Neuroethics Report offers a very helpful overview of the possible ethical, social, philosophical, and legal issues raised by neuroscience in the context of BRAIN's research priorities thus contributing to the attempt to develop ethically sound neuroscience. In this article, we turn to a running theme of the document: the need for an ethical framework for the BRAIN Initiative and for further integration of neuroethics and neuroscience. We assess some of the issues raised and provide an explanation of how we have addressed them in the Human Brain Project. We offer our experience in the HBP as a potential contribution to the international debate about neuroethics in the big brain initiatives. Our hope is that among other things, the type of exchange proposed by this AJOB special issue will prove productive in further identifying and discussing the issues and in inspiring appropriate solutions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arleen Salles
- Uppsala University.,Centro de Investigaciones Filosoficas
| | - Michele Farisco
- Uppsala University.,Biogem, Biology and Molecular Genetics Institute
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Daubner J, Arshaad MI, Henseler C, Hescheler J, Ehninger D, Broich K, Rawashdeh O, Papazoglou A, Weiergräber M. Pharmacological Neuroenhancement: Current Aspects of Categorization, Epidemiology, Pharmacology, Drug Development, Ethics, and Future Perspectives. Neural Plast 2021; 2021:8823383. [PMID: 33519929 PMCID: PMC7817276 DOI: 10.1155/2021/8823383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2020] [Revised: 12/15/2020] [Accepted: 12/30/2020] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Recent pharmacoepidemiologic studies suggest that pharmacological neuroenhancement (pNE) and mood enhancement are globally expanding phenomena with distinctly different regional characteristics. Sociocultural and regulatory aspects, as well as health policies, play a central role in addition to medical care and prescription practices. The users mainly display self-involved motivations related to cognitive enhancement, emotional stability, and adaptivity. Natural stimulants, as well as drugs, represent substance abuse groups. The latter comprise purines, methylxanthines, phenylethylamines, modafinil, nootropics, antidepressants but also benzodiazepines, β-adrenoceptor antagonists, and cannabis. Predominant pharmacodynamic target structures of these substances are the noradrenergic/dopaminergic and cholinergic receptor/transporter systems. Further targets comprise adenosine, serotonin, and glutamate receptors. Meta-analyses of randomized-controlled studies in healthy individuals show no or very limited verifiability of positive effects of pNE on attention, vigilance, learning, and memory. Only some members of the substance abuse groups, i.e., phenylethylamines and modafinil, display positive effects on attention and vigilance that are comparable to caffeinated drinks. However, the development of new antidementia drugs will increase the availability and the potential abuse of pNE. Social education, restrictive regulatory measures, and consistent medical prescription practices are essential to restrict the phenomenon of neuroenhancement with its social, medical, and ethical implications. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the highly dynamic field of pharmacological neuroenhancement and elaborates the dramatic challenges for the medical, sociocultural, and ethical fundaments of society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Johanna Daubner
- Experimental Neuropsychopharmacology, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte, BfArM), Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, 53175 Bonn, Germany
| | - Muhammad Imran Arshaad
- Experimental Neuropsychopharmacology, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte, BfArM), Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, 53175 Bonn, Germany
| | - Christina Henseler
- Experimental Neuropsychopharmacology, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte, BfArM), Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, 53175 Bonn, Germany
| | - Jürgen Hescheler
- Institute of Neurophysiology, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine, Robert-Koch-Str. 39, 50931 Cologne, Germany
| | - Dan Ehninger
- Molecular and Cellular Cognition, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (Deutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen, DZNE), Sigmund-Freud-Str. 27, 53127 Bonn, Germany
| | - Karl Broich
- Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte, BfArM), Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, 53175 Bonn, Germany
| | - Oliver Rawashdeh
- School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Anna Papazoglou
- Experimental Neuropsychopharmacology, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte, BfArM), Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, 53175 Bonn, Germany
| | - Marco Weiergräber
- Experimental Neuropsychopharmacology, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte, BfArM), Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, 53175 Bonn, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
DeFranco J, Rhemann M, Giordano J. The Emerging Neurobioeconomy: Implications for National Security. Health Secur 2020; 18:267-277. [PMID: 32816585 DOI: 10.1089/hs.2020.0009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Neuroscience and neurotechnology (neuroS/T) are techniques and tools used to assess or affect the nervous system. Current and near-future developments are enabling an expanding palette of capabilities to understand and influence brain functions that can foster wellbeing and economic growth. This "neurobioeconomy" is rapidly growing, attributable in large part to the global dissemination of knowledge that fosters and contributes to scientific innovation, invention, and commercialization. As a result, several countries have initiated programs in brain research and innovation. Not all brain sciences engender security concerns, but a predominance in global biomedical, bioengineering, wellness/lifestyle, and defense markets enables considerable power. Such power can be leveraged in nonkinetic or kinetic domains, and several countries have identified neuroS/T as viable and of growing value for use in warfare, intelligence, and national security operations. In addition to the current focus on biotechnology, the United States and its allies must acknowledge the significance of brain science and its projected impact on the economy, national security, and lifestyles. In this article, we examine growth of the neuroS/T market, discuss how the neurobioeconomy poses distinct ethical and security issues for the broader bioeconomy, provide examples of such issues that arise from specific nation-state activity and technological commercialization, and propose a risk assessment and mitigation approach that can be engaged by the economic, scientific, and security communities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph DeFranco
- Joseph DeFranco, MS, is a Graduate Fellow, Program in Biodefense, Schar School of Policy and Government, George Mason University, Arlington, VA. Maureen Rhemann, PhD, is a Visiting Scholar, O'Neill-Pellegrino Program in Brain Science, Global Law and Policy, Georgetown University, Washington, DC. James Giordano, PhD, MPhil, is Professor, Departments of Neurology and Biochemistry, and Chief, Neuroethics Studies Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC; and a Senior Fellow, Project in Biosecurity, Technology, and Ethics, US Naval War College, Newport, RI
| | - Maureen Rhemann
- Joseph DeFranco, MS, is a Graduate Fellow, Program in Biodefense, Schar School of Policy and Government, George Mason University, Arlington, VA. Maureen Rhemann, PhD, is a Visiting Scholar, O'Neill-Pellegrino Program in Brain Science, Global Law and Policy, Georgetown University, Washington, DC. James Giordano, PhD, MPhil, is Professor, Departments of Neurology and Biochemistry, and Chief, Neuroethics Studies Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC; and a Senior Fellow, Project in Biosecurity, Technology, and Ethics, US Naval War College, Newport, RI
| | - James Giordano
- Joseph DeFranco, MS, is a Graduate Fellow, Program in Biodefense, Schar School of Policy and Government, George Mason University, Arlington, VA. Maureen Rhemann, PhD, is a Visiting Scholar, O'Neill-Pellegrino Program in Brain Science, Global Law and Policy, Georgetown University, Washington, DC. James Giordano, PhD, MPhil, is Professor, Departments of Neurology and Biochemistry, and Chief, Neuroethics Studies Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC; and a Senior Fellow, Project in Biosecurity, Technology, and Ethics, US Naval War College, Newport, RI
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
DiEuliis D, Giordano J. The Shield and Sword of Biosecurity: Balancing the Ethics of Public Safety and Global Preparedness. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS : AJOB 2020; 20:142-144. [PMID: 32716802 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2020.1779859] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - James Giordano
- Georgetown University Medical Center, and US Naval War College
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
The body-to-head transplant (BHT) planned to be undertaken later this year at China's Harbin Medical University by neurosurgeons Sergio Canavero and Xiaoping Ren has attracted considerable attention and criticism. The intended operation gives rise to philosophical queries about the body-brain-mind relationship and nature of the subjective self; technical and ethical issues regarding the scientific soundness, safety, and futility of the procedure; the adequacy of prior research; and the relative merit, folly, and/or danger of forging new boundaries of what is biomedically possible. Moreover, that this procedure, which has been prohibited from being undertaken in other countries, has been sanctioned in China brings into stark relief ways that differing social and political values, philosophies, ethics, and laws can affect the scope and conduct of research. Irrespective of whether the BHT actually occurs, the debate it has generated reveals and reflects both the evermore international enterprise of brain science, and the need for neuroethical discourse to include and appreciate multicultural views, values, and voices.
Collapse
|
15
|
|
16
|
Tomažič T, Čelofiga AK. Ethical aspects of the abuse of pharmaceutical enhancements by healthy people in the context of improving cognitive functions. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2019; 14:7. [PMID: 31023334 PMCID: PMC6482530 DOI: 10.1186/s13010-019-0076-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2018] [Accepted: 04/16/2019] [Indexed: 06/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Better memory, greater motivation and concentration lead to greater productivity, efficiency and performance, all of which are features that are highly valued in a modern society focused on productivity. In the effort for better cognitive abilities, otherwise healthy individuals use cognitive enhancers (also known as nootropics), medicines for the treatment of cognitive deficits of patients with various disorders and health problems, such as Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia, stroke, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder or ageing. The use of these is more common in professions with emphasised cognitive abilities, or in occupations that require more attention, focus and alertness. Their use is also associated with the general working population, in that they are supposed to use them to alleviate the effects of sleep deprivation and to cope with increasing workloads.In the paper, we are addressing the ethical issue and the dilemmas of the use of pharmaceutical enhancements by healthy people who have no medical reason for taking such substances, in the context of improving their cognitive functions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tina Tomažič
- Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Institute for Media Communications, Koroška cesta 46, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Shook JR, Giordano J. Consideration of Context and Meanings of Neuro-Cognitive Enhancement: The Importance of a Principled, Internationally Capable Neuroethics. AJOB Neurosci 2019; 10:48-49. [PMID: 31070554 DOI: 10.1080/21507740.2019.1595778] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2019] [Revised: 02/15/2019] [Accepted: 02/22/2019] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
|
18
|
Weinberger AB, Cortes RA, Green AE, Giordano J. Neuroethical and Social Implications of Using Transcranial Electrical Stimulation to Augment Creative Cognition. CREATIVITY RESEARCH JOURNAL 2018. [DOI: 10.1080/10400419.2018.1488199] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
|
19
|
Abstract
Abstract:In this article, we begin by identifying three main neuroethical approaches: neurobioethics, empirical neuroethics, and conceptual neuroethics. Our focus is on conceptual approaches that generally emphasize the need to develop and use a methodological modus operandi for effectively linking scientific (i.e., neuroscience) and philosophical (i.e., ethics) interpretations. We explain and assess the value of conceptual neuroethics approaches and explain and defend one such approach that we propose as being particularly fruitful for addressing the various issues raised by neuroscience: fundamental neuroethics.
Collapse
|
20
|
Suskin ZD, Giordano JJ. Body -to-head transplant; a "caputal" crime? Examining the corpus of ethical and legal issues. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2018; 13:10. [PMID: 30005672 PMCID: PMC6045868 DOI: 10.1186/s13010-018-0063-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2018] [Accepted: 07/05/2018] [Indexed: 06/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Neurosurgeon Sergio Canavero proposed the HEAVEN procedure - i.e. head anastomosis venture - several years ago, and has recently received approval from the relevant regulatory bodies to perform this body-head transplant (BHT) in China. The BHT procedure involves attaching the donor body (D) to the head of the recipient (R), and discarding the body of R and head of D. Canavero's proposed procedure will be incredibly difficult from a medical standpoint. Aside from medical doubt, the BHT has been met with great resistance from many, if not most bio- and neuroethicists.Given both the known challenges and unknown outcomes of HEAVEN, several important neuroethical and legal questions have emerged should Canavero be successful, including: (1) What are the implications for transplantology in the U.S., inclusive of issues of expense, distributive justice, organizational procedures, and the cost(s) of novel insight(s)? (2) How do bioethical and neuroethical principles, and legal regulations of human subject research apply? (3) What are the legal consequences for Canavero (or any other surgeon) performing a BHT? (4) What are the tentative implications for the metaphysical and legal identity of R should they survive post-BHT? These questions are analyzed, issues are identified, and several solutions are proposed in an attempt to re-configure HEAVEN into a safe, clinically effective, and thus (more) realistically viable procedure.Notably, the permissibility of conducting the BHT in China fosters additional, important questions, focal to (1) whether Western ethics and professional norms be used to guide the BHT - or any neuroscientific research and its use - in non-Western countries, such as China; (2) if the models of responsible conduct of research are identical, similar, or applicable to the intent and conduct of research in China; and (3) what economic and political implications (for China and other countries) are fostered if/when such avant garde techniques are successful.These questions are discussed as a further impetus to develop a globally applicable neuroethical framework that would enable both local articulation and cosmopolitan inquiry and oversight of those methods and approaches deemed problematic, if and when rendered in more international settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zaev D. Suskin
- Harvard Medical School Center for Bioethics, 641 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115 USA
- Georgetown University School of Medicine, 3900 Reservoir Road NW, Washington, DC, 20057 USA
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Bldg. D, Rm 238, 4000 Reservoir Road NW, Washington, DC, 20057 USA
| | - James J. Giordano
- Georgetown University School of Medicine, 3900 Reservoir Road NW, Washington, DC, 20057 USA
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Bldg. D, Rm 238, 4000 Reservoir Road NW, Washington, DC, 20057 USA
- Departments of Neurology and Biochemistry, Georgetown University Medical Center, 3900 Reservoir Road NW, Washington, DC, 20057 USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Ramirez-Zamora A, Giordano JJ, Gunduz A, Brown P, Sanchez JC, Foote KD, Almeida L, Starr PA, Bronte-Stewart HM, Hu W, McIntyre C, Goodman W, Kumsa D, Grill WM, Walker HC, Johnson MD, Vitek JL, Greene D, Rizzuto DS, Song D, Berger TW, Hampson RE, Deadwyler SA, Hochberg LR, Schiff ND, Stypulkowski P, Worrell G, Tiruvadi V, Mayberg HS, Jimenez-Shahed J, Nanda P, Sheth SA, Gross RE, Lempka SF, Li L, Deeb W, Okun MS. Evolving Applications, Technological Challenges and Future Opportunities in Neuromodulation: Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Deep Brain Stimulation Think Tank. Front Neurosci 2018; 11:734. [PMID: 29416498 PMCID: PMC5787550 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2017.00734] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2017] [Accepted: 12/15/2017] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
The annual Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) Think Tank provides a focal opportunity for a multidisciplinary ensemble of experts in the field of neuromodulation to discuss advancements and forthcoming opportunities and challenges in the field. The proceedings of the fifth Think Tank summarize progress in neuromodulation neurotechnology and techniques for the treatment of a range of neuropsychiatric conditions including Parkinson's disease, dystonia, essential tremor, Tourette syndrome, obsessive compulsive disorder, epilepsy and cognitive, and motor disorders. Each section of this overview of the meeting provides insight to the critical elements of discussion, current challenges, and identified future directions of scientific and technological development and application. The report addresses key issues in developing, and emphasizes major innovations that have occurred during the past year. Specifically, this year's meeting focused on technical developments in DBS, design considerations for DBS electrodes, improved sensors, neuronal signal processing, advancements in development and uses of responsive DBS (closed-loop systems), updates on National Institutes of Health and DARPA DBS programs of the BRAIN initiative, and neuroethical and policy issues arising in and from DBS research and applications in practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adolfo Ramirez-Zamora
- Department of Neurology, Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States,*Correspondence: Adolfo Ramirez-Zamora
| | - James J. Giordano
- Department of Neurology, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Aysegul Gunduz
- J. Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Peter Brown
- Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Justin C. Sanchez
- Biological Technologies Office, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, VA, United States
| | - Kelly D. Foote
- Department of Neurosurgery, Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Leonardo Almeida
- Department of Neurology, Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Philip A. Starr
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Kavli Institute for Fundamental Neuroscience, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Helen M. Bronte-Stewart
- Departments of Neurology and Neurological Sciences and Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Wei Hu
- Department of Neurology, Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Cameron McIntyre
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, United States
| | - Wayne Goodman
- Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States,Department of Neuroscience, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | - Doe Kumsa
- Division of Biomedical Physics, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food and Drug Administration, White Oak Federal Research Center, Silver Spring, MD, United States
| | - Warren M. Grill
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Harrison C. Walker
- Division of Movement Disorders, Department of Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States,Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States
| | - Matthew D. Johnson
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | - Jerrold L. Vitek
- Department of Neurology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | - David Greene
- NeuroPace, Inc., Mountain View, CA, United States
| | - Daniel S. Rizzuto
- Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Dong Song
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Theodore W. Berger
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Robert E. Hampson
- Physiology and Pharmacology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, United States
| | - Sam A. Deadwyler
- Physiology and Pharmacology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, United States
| | - Leigh R. Hochberg
- Department of Neurology, Center for Neurotechnology and Neurorecovery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, MA, United States,Center for Neurorestoration and Neurotechnology, Rehabilitation R and D Service, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Providence, RI, United States,School of Engineering and Brown Institute for Brain Science, Brown University, Providence, RI, United States
| | - Nicholas D. Schiff
- Laboratory of Cognitive Neuromodulation, Feil Family Brain Mind Research Institute, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, United States
| | | | - Greg Worrell
- Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| | - Vineet Tiruvadi
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States
| | - Helen S. Mayberg
- Departments of Psychiatry, Neurology, and Radiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States
| | - Joohi Jimenez-Shahed
- Parkinson's Disease Center and Movement Disorders Clinic, Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Pranav Nanda
- Department of Neurological Surgery, The Neurological Institute, Columbia University Herbert and Florence Irving Medical Center, Colombia University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Sameer A. Sheth
- Department of Neurological Surgery, The Neurological Institute, Columbia University Herbert and Florence Irving Medical Center, Colombia University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Robert E. Gross
- Department of Neurosurgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States
| | - Scott F. Lempka
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States
| | - Luming Li
- National Engineering Laboratory for Neuromodulation, School of Aerospace Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China,Precision Medicine and Healthcare Research Center, Tsinghua-Berkeley Shenzhen Institute, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China,Center of Epilepsy, Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders, Beijing, China
| | - Wissam Deeb
- Department of Neurology, Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Michael S. Okun
- Department of Neurology, Center for Movement Disorders and Neurorestoration, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Basser DS. A meta-science for a global bioethics and biomedicine. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2017; 12:9. [PMID: 29110730 PMCID: PMC5674752 DOI: 10.1186/s13010-017-0051-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2016] [Accepted: 10/23/2017] [Indexed: 06/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND As suggested by Shook and Giordano, understanding and therefore addressing the urgent international governance issues around globalizing bio-medical/technology research and applications is limited by the perception of the underlying science. METHODS A philosophical methodology is used, based on novel and classical philosophical reflection upon existent literature, clinical wisdoms and narrative theory to discover a meta-science and telos of humankind for the development of a relevant and defendable global biomedical bioethics. RESULTS In this article, through pondering an integrative systems approach, I propose a biomedical model that may provide Western biomedicine with leadership and interesting insight into the unity beyond the artificial boundaries of its traditional divisions and the limit between physiological and pathological situations (health and disease). A unified biomedicine, as scientific foundation, might then provide the basis for dissolution of similar reflected boundaries within bioethics. A principled and communitarian cosmopolitan bioethics may then be synonymous with a recently proposed principled and communitarian cosmopolitan neuroethics based on a novel objective meta-ethics. In an attempt to help facilitate equal and inclusive participation in inter-, multi-, and transdisciplinary intercultural discourse regarding the aforementioned international governance issues, I offer: (1) a meta-science derived through considering the general behaviour of activity, plasticity and balance in biology and; (2) a novel thought framework to encourage and enhance the ability for self-evaluation, self-criticism, and self-revision aimed at broadening perspective, as well as acknowledging and responding to the strengths and limitations of extant knowledge. CONCLUSIONS Through classical philosophical reflection, I evolve a theory of medicine to discover a telos of humankind which in turn provides an 'internal' moral grounding for a proposed global biomedical bioethics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David S Basser
- Philosophy, School of Humanities, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Ghaffari M, Latifi M, Rocheleau CA, Najafizadeh K, Rakhshanderou S, Ramezankhani A. Using the theory of planned behavior framework for designing interventions related to organ donation. Ir J Med Sci 2017; 187:609-613. [PMID: 29064011 DOI: 10.1007/s11845-017-1698-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2017] [Accepted: 10/10/2017] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- M Ghaffari
- Department of Health Education & Promotion, School of Public Health, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (SBMU), P.O. Box 19835-35511, Tabnak Ave.Daneshjou Blvd.Velenjak, Tehran, Iran
| | - M Latifi
- Department of Health Education & Promotion, School of Public Health, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (SBMU), P.O. Box 19835-35511, Tabnak Ave.Daneshjou Blvd.Velenjak, Tehran, Iran.
| | - C A Rocheleau
- Department of Psychology, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA
| | - K Najafizadeh
- National Research Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (NRITLD), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (SBMU), Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
| | - S Rakhshanderou
- Department of Health Education & Promotion, School of Public Health, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (SBMU), P.O. Box 19835-35511, Tabnak Ave.Daneshjou Blvd.Velenjak, Tehran, Iran
| | - A Ramezankhani
- Department of Health Education & Promotion, School of Public Health, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (SBMU), P.O. Box 19835-35511, Tabnak Ave.Daneshjou Blvd.Velenjak, Tehran, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Becker K, Shook JR, Darragh M, Giordano J. A four-part working bibliography of neuroethics: Part 4 - Ethical issues in clinical and social applications of neuroscience. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2017; 12:1. [PMID: 28569221 PMCID: PMC5452349 DOI: 10.1186/s13010-017-0043-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2017] [Accepted: 05/06/2017] [Indexed: 05/24/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND As a discipline, neuroethics addresses a range of questions and issues generated by basic neuroscientific research (inclusive of studies of putative neurobiological processes involved in moral and ethical cognition and behavior), and its use and meanings in the clinical and social spheres. Here, we present Part 4 of a four-part bibliography of the neuroethics literature focusing on clinical and social applications of neuroscience, to include: the treatment-enhancement discourse; issues arising in neurology, psychiatry, and pain care; neuroethics education and training; neuroethics and the law; neuroethics and policy and political issues; international neuroethics; and discourses addressing "trans-" and "post-" humanity. METHODS To complete a systematic survey of the literature, 19 databases and 4 individual open-access journals were employed. Searches were conducted using the indexing language of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM). A Python code was used to eliminate duplications in the final bibliography. RESULTS When taken with Parts 1-3, this bibliography aims to provide a listing of international peerreviewed papers, books, and book chapters published from 2002 through 2016. While seeking to be as comprehensive as possible, it may be that some works were inadvertently and unintentionally not included. We therefore invite commentary from the field to afford completeness and contribute to this bibliography as a participatory work-in-progress.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kira Becker
- Department of Neuroscience, Amherst College, Amherst MA, USA
| | - John R Shook
- Department of Philosophy, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Martina Darragh
- Bioethics Research Library, Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University,, Washington, DC, USA
| | - James Giordano
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, and Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washingotn, DC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Palchik G, Chen C, Giordano J. Monkey Business? Development, Influence, and Ethics of Potentially Dual-Use Brain Science on the World Stage. NEUROETHICS-NETH 2017. [DOI: 10.1007/s12152-017-9308-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
|
26
|
Martin A, Becker K, Darragh M, Giordano J. A four-part working bibliography of neuroethics: part 3 - "second tradition neuroethics" - ethical issues in neuroscience. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2016; 11:7. [PMID: 27646569 PMCID: PMC5028939 DOI: 10.1186/s13010-016-0037-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2016] [Accepted: 07/18/2016] [Indexed: 05/24/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neuroethics describes several interdisciplinary topics exploring the application and implications of engaging neuroscience in societal contexts. To explore this topic, we present Part 3 of a four-part bibliography of neuroethics' literature focusing on the "ethics of neuroscience." METHODS To complete a systematic survey of the neuroethics literature, 19 databases and 4 individual open-access journals were employed. Searches were conducted using the indexing language of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM). A Python code was used to eliminate duplications in the final bibliography. RESULTS This bibliography consists of 1137 papers, 56 books, and 134 book chapters published from 2002 through 2014, covering ethical issues in neuroimaging, neurogenetics, neurobiomarkers, neuro-psychopharmacology, brain stimulation, neural stem cells, neural tissue transplants, pediatric-specific issues, dual-use, and general neuroscience research issues. These works contain explanations of recent research regarding neurotechnology, while exploring ethical issues in future discoveries and use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Martin
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Bldg D, Rm 238, 4000 Reservoir Road, Washington, DC, 20057, USA
| | - Kira Becker
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Bldg D, Rm 238, 4000 Reservoir Road, Washington, DC, 20057, USA
- Department of Neuroscience, Amherst College, Amherst, MA, USA
| | - Martina Darragh
- Bioethics Research Library, Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA
| | - James Giordano
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Bldg D, Rm 238, 4000 Reservoir Road, Washington, DC, 20057, USA.
- Departments of Neurology and Biochemistry, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
|
28
|
Giordano J. Toward an operational neuroethical risk analysis and mitigation paradigm for emerging neuroscience and technology (neuroS/T). Exp Neurol 2016; 287:492-495. [PMID: 27468658 DOI: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2016.07.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2015] [Accepted: 07/21/2016] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Research in neuroscience and neurotechnology (neuroS/T) is progressing at a rapid pace with translational applications both in medicine, and more widely in the social milieu. Current and projected neuroS/T research and its applications evoke a number of neuroethicolegal and social issues (NELSI). This paper defines inherent and derivative NELSI of current and near-term neuroS/T development and engagement, and provides an overview of our group's ongoing work to develop a systematized approach to their address. Our proposed operational neuroethical risk assessment and mitigation paradigm (ONRAMP) is presented, which entails querying, framing, and modeling patterns and trajectories of neuroS/T research and translational uses, and the NELSI generated by such advancements and their applications. Extant ethical methods are addressed, with suggestion toward possible revision or re-formulation to meet the needs and exigencies fostered by neuroS/T and resultant NELSI in multi-cultural contexts. The relevance and importance of multi-disciplinary expertise in focusing upon NELSI is discussed, and the need for neuroethics education toward cultivating such a cadre of expertise is emphasized.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James Giordano
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University Medical Center, 4000 Reservoir Road, Bldg. D, Rm. 238, Washington, DC 20057, USA; Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center, 4000 Reservoir Road, Bldg. D, Rm. 238, Washington, DC 20057, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Jahn Kassim PN, Alias F. Religious, Ethical and Legal Considerations in End-of-Life Issues: Fundamental Requisites for Medical Decision Making. JOURNAL OF RELIGION AND HEALTH 2016; 55:119-134. [PMID: 25576401 DOI: 10.1007/s10943-014-9995-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
Religion and spirituality have always played a major and intervening role in a person's life and health matters. With the influential development of patient autonomy and the right to self-determination, a patient's religious affiliation constitutes a key component in medical decision making. This is particularly pertinent in issues involving end-of-life decisions such as withdrawing and withholding treatment, medical futility, nutritional feeding and do-not-resuscitate orders. These issues affect not only the patient's values and beliefs, but also the family unit and members of the medical profession. The law also plays an intervening role in resolving conflicts between the sanctity of life and quality of life that are very much pronounced in this aspect of healthcare. Thus, the medical profession in dealing with the inherent ethical and legal dilemmas needs to be sensitive not only to patients' varying religious beliefs and cultural values, but also to the developing legal and ethical standards as well. There is a need for the medical profession to be guided on the ethical obligations, legal demands and religious expectations prior to handling difficult end-of-life decisions. The development of comprehensive ethical codes in congruence with developing legal standards may offer clear guidance to the medical profession in making sound medical decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Puteri Nemie Jahn Kassim
- Civil Law Department, Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University Malaysia, 53100, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
| | - Fadhlina Alias
- Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University Malaysia, 53100, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Pascalev A, Pascalev M, Giordano J. Head Transplants, Personal Identity and Neuroethics. NEUROETHICS-NETH 2015. [DOI: 10.1007/s12152-015-9245-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
|
31
|
Shook JR, Giordano J. Principled research ethics in practice? Reflections for neuroethics and bioethics. Cortex 2015; 71:423-6. [PMID: 25935658 DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2015] [Revised: 03/23/2015] [Accepted: 03/23/2015] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- John R Shook
- Philosophy Department and Graduate School of Education, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - James Giordano
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA; Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Global mental health is a relatively new field that has focused on disparities in mental health services across different settings, and on innovative ways to provide feasible, acceptable, and effective services in poorly-resourced settings. Neuroethics, too, is a relatively new field, lying at the intersection of bioethics and neuroscience; it has studied the implications of neuroscientific findings for age-old questions in philosophy, as well as questions about the ethics of novel neuroscientific methods and interventions. DISCUSSION In this essay, we address a number of issues that lie at the intersection of these two fields: an emphasis on a naturalist and empirical position, a concern with both disease and wellness, the importance of human rights in neuropsychiatric care, and the value of social inclusion and patient empowerment. SUMMARY These different disciplines share a number of perspectives, and future dialogue between the two should be encouraged.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dan J Stein
- />Department of Psychiatry & MRC Unit on Anxiety & Stress Disorders, University of Cape Town, Groote Schuur Hospital, Rondebosch, Cape Town, 7700 South Africa
| | - James Giordano
- />Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics and Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC USA
- />Human Science Center, Ludwig-Maximilians Universität, Professor-Huber-Platz 2, 80539 München, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Darragh M, Buniak L, Giordano J. A four-part working bibliography of neuroethics: part 2--Neuroscientific studies of morality and ethics. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2015; 10:2. [PMID: 25890310 PMCID: PMC4334407 DOI: 10.1186/s13010-015-0022-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2015] [Accepted: 01/14/2015] [Indexed: 05/31/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Moral philosophy and psychology have sought to define the nature of right and wrong, and good and evil. The industrial turn of the twentieth century fostered increasingly technological approaches that conjoined philosophy to psychology, and psychology to the natural sciences. Thus, moral philosophy and psychology became ever more vested to investigations of the anatomic structures and physiologic processes involved in cognition, emotion and behavior--ultimately falling under the rubric of the neurosciences. Since 2002, neuroscientific studies of moral thought, emotions and behaviors have become known as--and a part of--the relatively new discipline of neuroethics. Herein we present Part 2 of a bibliography of neuroethics from 2002-2013 addressing the "neuroscience of ethics"--studies of putative neural substrates and mechanisms involved in cognitive, emotional and behavioral processes of morality and ethics. METHODS A systematic survey of the neuroethics literature was undertaken. Bibliographic searches were performed by accessing 11 databases, 8 literature depositories, and 4 individual journal searches, and employed indexing language for National Library of Medicine (NLM) Medical Subject Heading databases. All bibliographic searches were conducted using the RefWorks citation management program. RESULTS This bibliography lists 397 articles, 65 books, and 52 book chapters that present (1) empirical/experimental studies, overviews, and reviews of neural substrates and mechanisms involved in morality and ethics, and/or (2) reflections upon such studies and their implications. These works present resources offering iterative descriptions, definitions and criticisms of neural processes involved in moral cognition and behaviors, and also provide a historical view of this field, and insights to its developing canon.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martina Darragh
- Bioethics Research Library, Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, 20057, USA.
| | - Liana Buniak
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Edmund D. Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, 20057, USA.
| | - James Giordano
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Edmund D. Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, 20057, USA.
- Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, 20057, USA.
- Human Science Center, Ludwig-Maximilians Universität, München, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Shook JR, Galvagni L, Giordano J. Cognitive enhancement kept within contexts: neuroethics and informed public policy. Front Syst Neurosci 2014; 8:228. [PMID: 25538573 PMCID: PMC4256981 DOI: 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2014] [Accepted: 11/12/2014] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Neurothics has far greater responsibilities than merely noting potential human enhancements arriving from novel brain-centered biotechnologies and tracking their implications for ethics and civic life. Neuroethics must utilize the best cognitive and neuroscientific knowledge to shape incisive discussions about what could possibly count as enhancement in the first place, and what should count as genuinely "cognitive" enhancement. Where cognitive processing and the mental life is concerned, the lived context of psychological performance is paramount. Starting with an enhancement to the mental abilities of an individual, only performances on real-world exercises can determine what has actually been cognitively improved. And what can concretely counts as some specific sort of cognitive improvement is largely determined by the classificatory frameworks of cultures, not brain scans or laboratory experiments. Additionally, where the public must ultimately evaluate and judge the worthiness of individual performance enhancements, we mustn't presume that public approval towards enhancers will somehow automatically arrive without due regard to civic ideals such as the common good or social justice. In the absence of any nuanced appreciation for the control which performance contexts and public contexts exert over what "cognitive" enhancements could actually be, enthusiastic promoters of cognitive enhancement can all too easily depict safe and effective brain modifications as surely good for us and for society. These enthusiasts are not unaware of oft-heard observations about serious hurdles for reliable enhancement from neurophysiological modifications. Yet those observations are far more common than penetrating investigations into the implications to those hurdles for a sound public understanding of cognitive enhancement, and a wise policy review over cognitive enhancement. We offer some crucial recommendations for undertaking such investigations, so that cognitive enhancers that truly deserve public approval can be better identified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John R. Shook
- Philosophy Department and Graduate School of Education, University at BuffaloBuffalo, NY, USA
| | | | - James Giordano
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics and Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical CenterWashington, DC, USA
- Human Science Center, Ludwig-Maximilians UniversitätMunich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Giordano J, Kulkarni A, Farwell J. Deliver us from evil? The temptation, realities, and neuroethico-legal issues of employing assessment neurotechnologies in public safety initiatives. THEORETICAL MEDICINE AND BIOETHICS 2014; 35:73-89. [PMID: 24442931 DOI: 10.1007/s11017-014-9278-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Abstract
In light of the recent events of terrorism and publicized cases of mass slayings and serial killings, there have been calls from the public and policy-makers alike for neuroscience and neurotechnology (neuroS/T) to be employed to intervene in ways that define and assess, if not prevent, such wanton acts of aggression and violence. Ongoing advancements in assessment neuroS/T have enabled heretofore unparalleled capabilities to evaluate the structure and function of the brain, yet each and all are constrained by certain technical and practical limitations. In this paper, we present an overview of the capabilities and constraints of current assessment neuroS/T, address neuro-ethical and legal issues fostered by the use and potential misuse of these approaches, and discuss how neuroethics may inform science and the law to guide right and sound applications of neuroS/T to "deliver us from evil" while not being led into temptations of ampliative claims and inapt use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James Giordano
- Neuroethics Studies Program, Edmund D. Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics and Division of Integrative Physiology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA,
| | | | | |
Collapse
|