How Science Can Build a Better You
By DAVID EWING DUNCAN Published: November 3, 2012
In a future presidential election, would you vote for a candidate who
had neural implants that helped optimize his or her alertness and
functionality during a crisis, or in a candidates’ debate? Would you
vote for a commander in chief who wasn’t equipped with such a device?
If these seem like tinfoil-on-the-head questions, consider the case of
Cathy Hutchinson. Paralyzed by a stroke, she recently drank a canister
of coffee by using a prosthetic arm controlled by thought. She was
helped by a device called Braingate, a tiny bed of electrons surgically implanted on her motor cortex and connected by a wire to a computer.
Working with a team of neuroscientists at Brown University, Ms.
Hutchinson, then 58, was asked to imagine that she was moving her own
arm. As her neurons fired, Braingate interpreted the mental commands and
moved the artificial arm and humanlike hand to deliver the first coffee
Ms. Hutchinson had raised to her own lips in 15 years.
Braingate has barely worked on just a handful of people, and it is years
away from actually being useful. Yet it’s an example of nascent
technologies that in the next two to three decades may transform life
not only for the impaired, but also for the healthy.
Other medical technologies that might break through the enhancement
barrier range from genetic modifications and stem-cell therapies that
might make people cognitively more efficient to nano-bots that could one
day repair and optimize molecular structures in cells.
Many researchers, including the Brown neuroscientist John Donoghue,
leader of the Braingate team, adamantly oppose the use of their
technologies for augmenting the nonimpaired. Yet some healthy Americans
are already availing themselves of medical technologies. For years
millions of college students and professionals have been popping
powerful stimulants like Adderall and Provigil to take exams and to pull
all-nighters. These drugs can be highly addictive and may not work for
everyone. While more research is needed, so far no evidence has emerged
that legions of users have been harmed. The same may be true for a
modest use of steroids for athletes.
Which leads us to the crucial question: How far would you go to modify yourself using the latest medical technology?
Over the last couple of years during talks and lectures, I have asked
thousands of people a hypothetical question that goes like this: “If I
could offer you a pill that allowed your child to increase his or her
memory by 25 percent, would you give it to them?”
The show of hands in this informal poll has been overwhelming, with 80 percent or more voting no.
Then I asked a follow-up question. “What if this pill was safe and
increased your kid’s grades from a B average to an A average?” People
tittered nervously, looked around to see how others were voting as
nearly half said yes. (Many didn’t vote at all.)
“And what if all of the other kids are taking the pill?” I asked. The tittering stopped and nearly everyone voted yes.
No pill now exists that can boost memory by 25 percent. Yet
neuroscientists tell me that
pharmaceutical companies are testing
compounds in early stage human trials that may enable patients with
dementia and other memory-stealing diseases to have better recall. No
one knows if these will work to improve healthy people, but it’s
possible that one will work in the future.
More intriguing is the notion that a supermemory or attention pill might
be used someday by those with critical jobs like pilots, surgeons,
police officers — or the chief executive of the United States. In fact,
we may demand that they use them, said the bioethicist Thomas H. Murray.
“It might actually be immoral for a surgeon not to take a drug that was
safe and steadied his hand,” said Mr. Murray, the former president of
the Hastings Center, a bioethics research group. “That would be like
using a scalpel that wasn’t sterile.”
HERE is a partial checklist of cutting-edge medical-technology therapies
now under way or in an experimental phase that might lead to future
enhancements.
More than 200,000 deaf people have had their hearing partially restored
by a brain implant that receives sound waves and uses a minicomputer to
process and deliver them directly into the brain via the cochlear
(audio) nerve. New and experimental technologies could lead to devices
that allow people with or possibly without hearing loss to hear better,
possibly much better.
The Israel-based company Nano Retina
and others are developing early-stage devices and implants that restore
partial sight to the blind. Nano Retina uses a tiny sensor backed by
electrodes embedded in the back of the eye, on top of the retina. They
replace connections damaged by macular degeneration and other diseases.
So far images are fuzzy and gray-scale and a long way from restoring
functional eyesight. Scientists, however, are currently working on ways
to mimic and improve eyesight in people and in robots that could lead to
far more sophisticated technologies.
Engineers at companies like Ekso Bionics
of Richmond, Calif., are building first-generation exoskeletons that
aim to allow patients with paralyzed legs to walk, though the devices
are still in the baby-step phase. This summer the sprinter Oscar Pistorius
of South Africa proved he could compete at the Olympics using
artificial half-leg blades called Cheetahs that some worried might give
him an advantage over runners with legs made of flesh and blood.
Neuroscientists are developing more advanced prosthetics that may one
day be operated from the brain via fiber optic lines embedded under the
skin.
For years, scientists have been manipulating genes in animals to make
improvements in neural performance, strength and agility, among other
augmentations. Directly altering human DNA using “gene therapy” in
humans remains dangerous and fraught with ethical challenges. But it may
be possible to develop drugs that alter enzymes and other proteins
associated with genes for, say, speed and endurance or dopamine levels
in the brain connected to improved neural performance.
Synthetic biologists contend that re-engineering cells and DNA may one
day allow us to eliminate diseases; a few believe we will be able to
build tailor-made people. Others are convinced that stem cells might one
day be used to grow fresh brain, heart or liver cells to augment or
improve cells in these and other organs.
Not all enhancements are high-tech or invasive. Neuroscientists are
seeing boosts from neuro-feedback and video games designed to teach and
develop cognition and from meditation and improvements in diet, exercise
and sleep. “We may see a convergence of several of these technologies,”
said the neurologist Adam Gazzaley of the University of California at
San Francisco. He is developing brain-boosting games with developers and
engineers who once worked for Lucas Arts, founded by the “Star Wars”
director George Lucas.
Which leads to another question: How far would you go to augment
yourself? Would you replace perfectly good legs with artificial ones if
they made you faster and stronger? What if a United States Agency for
Human Augmentation had approved this and other radical enhancements?
Would that persuade you?
Ethical challenges for the coming Age of Enhancement include, besides
basic safety questions, the issue of who would get the enhancements, how
much they would cost, and who would gain an advantage over others by
using them. In a society that is already seeing a widening gap between
the very rich and the rest of us, the question of a democracy of equals
could face a critical test if the well-off also could afford a physical,
genetic or bionic advantage. It also may challenge what it means to be
human.
Still, the enhancements are coming, and they will be hard to resist. The
real issue is what we do with them once they become irresistible.
Labels: Bioscience, culture, Health, Heritage, Particularities, Technology, Values
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home