Friday, April 18, 2014
Text Size

Cognitive Enhancement

ritalin_imageMany neuropsychiatric illnesses occur on a spectrum that includes normal levels of functioning. This raises the question: if medications can improve cognition in people with cognitive impairment, what can they do for normal healthy people?

Two main cognitive systems have been targeted for pharmacological enhancement: attention and memory. Stimulant drugs such as methyphenidate (Ritalin) and amphetamine (Adderall) improve the attention of people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and can also enhance attention in healthy people. Although these medications are ostensibly prescribed mainly for the treatment of ADD, sales figures suggest that they are not uncommonly used for enhancement. Campus surveys agree with this inference. Prescription stimulants are currently widely used by college students, many of whom obtain it from friends or campus dealers as a recreational drug and study aid.

A huge research effort is now being directed to the development of memory-boosting drugs. The candidate drugs target various stages in the molecular cascade that underlies memory formation, including the initial induction of long-term potentiation and the later stages of memory consolidation. Although this research is aimed at finding treatments for dementia, there is reason to believe that some of the products under development would enhance normal memory as well, particularly in middle and old age when a degree of increased forgetfulness is normal.

The weaking of unwanted memories is another type of memory treatment, under development for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder that may cross over to enhancement of healthy individuals. It could conceivably be used psychologically say, for example, soldiers going into battle or rescue workers in a disaster situation.

The ethical issues surrounding cognitive enhancement can be grouped into 3 general categories. The first is safety. Side effects and unintended consequences are a concern with all medications and procedures, but in comparison to other comparably elective treatments such as cosmetic surgery, neuroscience-based enhancement involves intervening in a far more complex system. We are therefore at greater risk of unanticipated problems when we tinker. In addition, drug safety testing does not routinely address long-term use, and relatively little evidence is available on long-term use by healthy subjects.

The second category of ethical issue is social: how will the lives of all individuals, including those who chose not to enhance, be influenced by living in a society with widespread enhancement? In competitive situations such as SAT testing, we may end up needing the equivalent of the regulations surrounding performance enhancing drugs at sports events. Even in everyday work and school contexts, enhancement is likely to touch all of us. The freedom not to enhance may be difficult to maintain in a society where one's competition is using enhancement to improve attention, memory, or the ability to withstand unsettling experiences. Conversely, barriers such as cost will prevent some people who would like to enhance from doing so. This could exacerbate the disadvantages already faced by people of low socioeconomic status in education and employment.

The third category of ethical issue could be called philosophical, in that it concerns our values and our sense of self. We generally view self-improvement as a laudable goal. At the same time, improving our natural endowments for traits such as attention span runs the risk of commodifying those traits. We generally encourage innovations that save time and effort, because they enable us to be more productive and to direct our efforts toward potentially more worthy goals. However, when we improve our productivity by taking a pill, there is the concern that we may be undermining the value and dignity of hard work, medicalizing human effort, and pathologizing a normal attention span.

Martha J. Farah

British Medical Association. (2007). Ethics department: Boosting your brainpower: ethical aspects of cognitive enhancements.

Buchanan A. (2008) Enhancement and the ethics of development. Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 18(1):1-34

Chatterjee, A. (2004). Cosmetic neurology: the controversy over enhancing movement, mentation, and mood. Neurology, 63 (6): 968-974.

* Chamberlain, S.R., Muller, U., Robbins, T.W. & Sahakian, B.J. (2006). Neuropharmacological modulation of cognition. Current Opinion in Neurology, 19: 607-612.

Diller, L.H. (1996). The run on Ritalin. Attention deficit disorder and stimulant treatment in the 1990s. Hastings Center Report, 26: 12-18.

Farah, M. J., Illes, J., Cook-Deegan, R., Gardner, H., Kandel, E., King, P., Parens, E., Sahakian, B. J., and Wolpe, P. R. (2004). Neurocognitive enhancement: What can we do? What should we do? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5: 421-425.

Farah, M.J. and Wolpe, P.R. (2004). Monitoring and manipulating brain function: New neuroscience technologies and their ethical implications. Hastings Center Report, 34(3): 35-45.

Fields, D. (2005). Erasing Memories. Scientific American: December 2005.

Flower, R. (2004). Lifestyle drugs: pharmacology and the social agenda. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, 25:182-185.

Fukuyama, F. (2002). Our Posthuman Future. Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.

Glannon, W. (2006). Psychopharmacology and memory. Journal of Medical Ethics, (32): 74-78.

Greely H, Sahakian B, Harris J, Kessler RC, Gazzaniga M, et al.(2008). Towards responsible use of cognitive-enhancing drugs by the healthy. Nature. 2008;456:702–705.

Hall, S.S. (2003). The quest for a smart pill. Scientific American, September: 54-65.

Kass, L. (2003). Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness. Harper Collins.

Kolber, A.J. (2006). Therapeutic forgetting: the legal and ethical implications of memory dampening. Vanderbilt Law Review, 59 (5): 1559-1615.

Larriviere, D., Williams, M., Rizzo, M., (2009). Responding to requests from adult patients for neuroenhancements. Neurology 2009:73:1406-1412.

Madrigal, A. (2008). Reader's Brain-Enhancing Drug Regimens. 24 April 2008.

McCabe, S.E. et al. (2005). Non-medical use of prescription stimulants among US college students: prevalence and correlates from a national survey. Addiction, 99: 96-106.

Mehlman, M.J. (2004). Cognition-enhancing drugs. The Milbank Quarterly, 82: 483-506.

* O'Leary JC. (1993). An analysis of the legal issue surrounding the forced use of Ritalin: protecting a child's right to "just say no. New England Law Review, 27: 1173-209.

Parens, E. (Ed.) (2000). Enhancing Human Traits: Social and Ethical Implications. Georgetown University Press.

Sahakian, B. & Morein-Zamir, S. (2007). Professor's little helper. Nature, 450: 1157-1159.

Singer, E. (2009) Manipulating Memory. Technology Review: MIT. May/June 2009.

Singh, I. (2005). Will the "Real Boy" Please Behave: Dosing Dilemmas for Parents of Boys with ADHD. The American Journal of Bioethics, 5(3): 34-47.

Talbot, M. (2009). "Brain Gain: The underground world of 'neuroenhancing' drugs" in New Yorker Online.

Turner, D. and Sahakian, B. (2006). The cognition enhanced classroom. In P. Miller & J. Wilsdon Better Humans? The politics of human enhancement and life extension. London: Demos, p. 79-85.

Wheelis, M. and Dando, M. (2005). Neurobiology: a case study of the imminent militarization of biology. International Review of the Red Cross, 87(859): 553-571.

Wilson, J.S. (2004). Mediums and Messages: an Argument AGainst Biotechnical Enhancements of Soldiers in the Armies of Liberal Democracies. Ethical Perspectives, 11(2-3): 189-197.

Stay Connected  facebooklinkedinTwitter

The Latest News

  • 1
  • 2