SlideShare a Scribd company logo
By Greg O’Keefe
 Introduction to Neuroethics
 InvolvedTechnology
 Ethical Considerations
 Law, Discrimination/Stigma, Incidental Findings,
Neuromarketing
 Summary and Conclusion
 Emerging field
 Advanced understanding and monitoring of
human thought and behavior
 Brings new ethical, social and legal issues
forward
 Enabled by modern neurotechnologies
 Can now quantify personal behaviors
 Social attitude, value and moral agency
 Akin to modern genetics
 Prediction of disease, privacy, identity
 Must carefully and properly interpret
relationship between brain findings and
concept of self
 Must tackle practical questions in
neuroimaging
 Interpretation is fundamental
 Ethics of genetics are not a sufficient guide
 Not apart of traditional bioethical analysis
 A ScaryTrend
 The Good, the Bad and the AnteriorCingulate
(2002)
 Morals and the Human Brain: AWorking
Model (2003)
 Strategizing the Human Brain (2003)
 The Medial Frontal Cortex and the Rapid
Processing of Monetary Gains and Losses
(2002)
 The Neural Basis of Economic Decision-
Making in the Ultimatum Game (2003)
 How the Mind Reads other Minds (2003)
 Tapping the Mind (2003)
 WhyWe’re So Nice:We’reWired to Cooperate
(2002)
 There’s a Sucker Born in Every Medial
Prefrontal Cortex (2003)
 “Thought maps”
 Quantitative profiles of brain function
 “Thought maps”
 Not restricted to medical research and clinical
neuropsychiatry
 Natural relevance in our daily life
 Introduces many possibilities/desires
 Assessing truth of statements and memory in law
 Profiling prospective employees for professional
and interpersonal skills
 Evaluating students for learning potential
 Selecting investment managers to handle
financial portfolios
 Choosing life partners based on compatible brain
profiles
 Raises a number of epistemological issues
 The study of knowledge
 What is knowledge, how can it be accessed, how can
it be used?
 Proper interpretation
 Scientific level
 Complexity of neuroscience research – integration
and interpretation of neuroimaging data
 Social and cultural level
 Social interpretations, bound by cultural and
anthropological frameworks
 Most prominent tools:
 Electroencephalography (EEG)
 Magnetoencephalography (MEG)
 Positron emission tomography (PET)
 Single photon emission computed tomography
(SPECT)
 Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)
 1929, Hans Berger
 Invented electroencephalogram
 Relative signal strength and position of electrical
activity generated at level of cerebral cortex
 Measured using electrodes placed on scalp
 Evoked EEG response, “event related potential”
 First tool used to reveal fundamental knowledge
behind the operation of the human brain in real
time
 Other imaging methods took advantage of
brain signals
 Extracranial electromagnetic activity (MEG)
 Metabolic activity and blood flow (PET SPECT)
 Regional blood oxygenation (fMRI)
 All imaging methods use
comparison/subtraction between two
controlled conditions
 All imaging methods use heavy statistical
processing and computer intensive data
reconstruction
 Ultimately produce the familiar and colorful
maps
 Used for diagnosis/intervention
of trauma, dementia, stroke, etc.
 fMRIs will have greatest impact
 Widespread availability of MR scanners
 Imaging approach is non-invasive
 Model for neuroethical discussions
 Relative difference between experimental and
control (baseline) task
 Surplus of oxygenated blood recruited to
relatively active brain regions produces effects
measured by MR
 fMRI used alone or in combo with previously
mentioned techniques in studies
 Lying and deception
 Human cooperation and competition
 Brain differences in violent people
 Genetic influences
 Variability in patterns of brain development
 Investigation of unio mysticia using EEG, fMRI,
and PET
 “Spiritual neuroscience”
 Personal neuroprofiles ripe for bioethical
consideration
 Neuroscience and philosophical questions
 Existence limits
 Meaning of free will
 Distinguishing truth from lies, false memories
from real ones
 Prediction of behavior
 1985 –Ake v. Oklahoma
 Glen Burton Ake murdered a couple, wounded
their two children
 Acted bizarrely in court, prompted judge to order
psychiatric competency evaluation
 Report resulted in identifying Ake as delusional
▪ Claimed to be ‘Sword ofVengeance’ and will sit at the
left hand of God in heaven
 Diagnosed as probable paranoid schizophrenic
▪ Is he competent to stand trial?
 Ake’s attorney requested the court appoint a
psychiatrist to evaluate him for purpose of
insanity defense
 Criminal defendants argue this should include
scans like PET and MRI
 What do you guys think? DoesAke get
evaluated?
 The court says, nope!
 Upheld that he had no such right to assistance
 Ake was then tried
 Convicted of 2 counts of murder
 Sentenced to death
 Conviction overturned!
 Ake was not provided a psychiatrist
 Deemed unfair trial
 Found guilty again, this time just life in prison
 Should neuroimaging be used regardless of
offences?
 Do they ‘deserve’ it?
 Burden of the state?
 Unfair advantage?
 Keep in mind: PET previously has shown poor
functioning in prefrontal cortex of criminals
 Locus of impulse control
 PET images have been used to argue that
defendant was biologically predisposed to
committing a crime
 Further argued they should be spared
conviction or death sentence
 1994 – People v. Jones
 Homicide conviction overturned
 State failed to provide brain scans
 1992 – People v.Weinstein
 Accused of strangling his wife to death, throwing
her body from 12th floor
 PET, MRI showed arachnoid cyst, used for insanity
defense
 1992 – People v.Weinstein
 PET scan showed juxtaposition between black
cyst and red/green colored “normal” areas
 Juxtaposition was apparently “profound”,
apparent his brain was not functioning normally
 Convicted of manslaughter
 Thoughts?
 2001 – Langleben et al.
 fMRI study
 Approach to truth verification, “brain fingerprinting”
 Participants with/without playing cards
 Boils down to “lying takes more energy”
 Results consistent with studies done in 1997 and 2003
 Can also determine if deception is premeditated
 Thoughts? Is brain fingerprinting legitimate?
Should it be used in court?
 Brain fingerprinting
 Terry Harrington, convicted of murder of retired
police officer in 1977
▪ Underwent brain fingerprinting in 2000
▪ EEG patterns suggested he was innocent
▪ Original prosecution witness recanted statement when
presented with this evidence
 Health information is not entirely private
 This can lead to denial of
 Health insurance
 Employment
 Education
 Financial loans
 Neuroimaging provides insights into range of
higher cognitive functions
 Many do not have good animal models
 Studies touch on areas of profound societal
importance and controversy
 Race relations, economic justice, perceived
trustworthiness, moral reasoning, economic
cooperation, social rejection, consumer
brand attachment
 Ability to predict behavior raises many
concerns
 Mind-reading
 Social control
 Novelty and extent of neuroimaging data
gives info on human health, behavior and
cognitive fitness
 Raises concern
 How much of this info will be used to benefit
mankind?
 Can the info be used for harm or purposes
with ill-intent?
 How will neuroimaging affect our daily life?
 Work, education, financial, social interactions
 Prediction of future behavior/pathology
 Screening for team players and weak
decision-makers in the workplace?
 Post-Columbine era
 Screening students for predisposition to unruly or
violent behavior?
 Post 9/11 era
 Screening for terrorists?
 Perhaps a brain scan at the airport?
 Detention of individuals who have not yet
committed a crime
 DSPD – Dangerous Severe Personality Disorder
 Type I and II errors – statistical threshold
 Cost vs. detaining past sentence (which can be legal)
 Pedophiles
 January 22nd, 2002 – US Supreme Court states:
▪ Can confine violent sexual offenders beyond their prison term
▪ Only if shown they have mental/personality disorder making
it difficult to control behavior
 Very likely future imaging studies will be used to
determine felon’s ability to control behavior
 More effective than behavioral test
 So, back to pedophiles!
 Megan’s Law
 Information on sex offenders available to public
 What if brain scans can be used to identify
potential pedophiles among non-criminal
persons
 Who should scan? How should the data be used?
Should identified persons be registered? Should it be
made available to employers?
 Incidental findings
 “Observations of potential clinical significance
and unexpectedly discovered and unrelated to the
purpose of variables of the study”
 Found in up to 10% of neuroimaging research
 How should they be handled? In what way?
What should be done?
 Abide by legal and ethical principles in
research/medicine
 Risks
 Emotional burden, possible unnecessary
procedures
 Benefits
 Early detection of something that can be
treated/prevented
 How about opportunity to waive right to
receive info on incidental findings?
 Case Study!
 FE is 65 yo female fMRI volunteer
 Study is for osteoarthritic knee pain
 Found to have ischemic changes in left temporal
lobe during brain scan
 She had no neurological deficit, did not complain
of discomfort
 What would you do?
 What actually happened
 PI was clinician, decided to disclose findings
 With her permission contacted physician for follow
up
 FE developed neurological deficits 24 hours
later, underwent repeat neuroimaging and
treatment
 Diagnosis of ischemic temporal lobe
 Survived after treatment
 Afterwards, PI and team felt distressed and
unequipped in dealing with incidental
findings
 Wished for clear documentation of whether
patient wanted to be informed
 Addressed lack of standard guidelines, protocol,
training, knowledge regarding legal and ethical
principles
 Canada – all known foreseeable risks (even rare
and remote) must be disclosed to research
participants or surrogate decision-maker
 Guided by Halushka v. University of Saskatchewan and
Weiss v. Solomon
 No mention of whether foreseeable incidental
findings should be regarded as potential risks/harms
 No clear guidelines as to when and what to disclose in
best interests of the patient
 Thoughts?
 Goal of marketing is to match products with
people
 Guide design and presentation of products to
increase compatibility with consumers
 Facilitating choice process of customer
 Neuroeconomics – incorporating
neuroimaging into decision-making sciences
 Hope among marketers neuroimaging will
streamline marketing processes while saving
money
 Obtain customer information that cannot be
acquired using conventional methods
 Some companies market neuromarketing
itself
 More accurately indicate underlying
preferences than standard market data
 Remains insensitive to biases
 Efficiently allocate resources
 Product concepts tested rapidly
 Unpromising concepts eliminated early
 Can now focus on promising products
 Banned in France
 Eye-tracking, galvanic skin response still legal
 Misinterpretation and over-interpretation an
issue
 Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajg0ypD
D7i0
 Unsettling?Creepy?
 Is it ethical?
 Need to respect autonomy, confidentiality,
privacy
 Informed consent? Full disclosure of risk or harm
▪ How invasive are the procedures?
 What exactly can the data be used for?
 Protecting the vulnerable
 Children, psychiatric patients, prisoners
 Can be easily influenced
▪ Easily deceived and/or experience negative affected
 Commercial use of data from these groups
 Is it justified? Can it be defended?
 Baylor College of Medicine
 Pepsi vs. Coca-Cola
 fMRI showed consumers prefer Pepsi
▪ 5x the response in ventral putamen
 When repeated unblind…
▪ Nearly all participants prefer Coca-Cola
▪ Medial prefrontal cortex was activated – linked to sense
of self
▪ Brand is so attractive its overriding our taste buds?
 Are you comfortable with neuromarketing?
 Should lines be drawn?Where?
 What can the information be used for?
 Do the risks outweigh the benefits?
 Do we care that much about finding products that
suit us?
 Neuroethics is still young
 Many unaddressed situations
 Neuroscience “boomed” in early 21st century
 Utilizes neuroimaging
 EEG, MEG, PET, SPECT, fMRI
 Massive impact on bioethics
 Law, Discrimination/Stigma, Incidental findings,
Neureconomics/Neuromarketing, etc.
 However, brain imaging is extremely useful
 Understanding how our brain functions, diagnosis
of disease, detecting abnormalities
 Interpretation is the key issue
 Scientific and social level
 Should lines be drawn?Where do we draw
the line?
 Illes, J., & Racine, E. (2005). Imaging or Imagining?A Neuroethics
Challenge Informed by Genetics. The AmericanJournal of Bioethics :
AJOB, 5(2), 5–18. doi:10.1080/15265160590923358
 Illes, J., & Bird, S. (2006, July 21). Neuroethics:A modern context for
ethics in neuroscience. Retrieved February 12, 2015, from
http://neuroethics.stanford.edu/documents/TINSarticle.pdf
 Scanning the social brain. (n.d.). Retrieved February 12, 2015, from
http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v6/n12/full/nn1203-1239.html
 Canli,T., & Amin, Z. (2002, December 3). Neuroimaging of emotion and
personality: Scientific evidence and ethical considerations. Retrieved
February 12, 2015, from
http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezpxy.fanshawec.ca/science/article/pii/S0
278262602005171
 Lawrence Leung, “Incidental Findings in Neuroimaging: Ethical and
MedicolegalConsiderations,”Neuroscience Journal, vol. 2013, Article ID
439145, 7 pages, 2013. doi:10.1155/2013/439145
 Ariely, D., & Berns, G. S. (2010). Neuromarketing: the hope and hype of
neuroimaging in business. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 11(4), 284–292.
doi:10.1038/nrn2795
 Yesim Isil Ulman,Tuna Cakar & GokcenYildiz, Ethical Issues in
Neuromarketing: “I Consume,Therefore I am!”, Science and Engineering
Ethics, ISSN 1353-3452, Sci Eng Ethics, DOI 10.1007/s11948-014-9581-5

More Related Content

What's hot

Physiological and psychophysical methods
Physiological and psychophysical methodsPhysiological and psychophysical methods
Physiological and psychophysical methodsJasmine John
 
Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprintingBrain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting
pgrr
 
Forensic Palynology
Forensic PalynologyForensic Palynology
Forensic Palynology
vlee86
 
Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprintingBrain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting
Vivek Jha
 
Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting
ManiKalwani
 
Forensic audio
Forensic audioForensic audio
Forensic audio
Tejasvi Bhatia
 
Narco analysis Technique
Narco analysis TechniqueNarco analysis Technique
Narco analysis Technique
JeevanKumawat2
 
Effects of judges, juries, jurors and defenders.
Effects of judges, juries, jurors and defenders.Effects of judges, juries, jurors and defenders.
Effects of judges, juries, jurors and defenders.
Nilufar Kausar
 
Narcoanalysis
Narcoanalysis Narcoanalysis
Narcoanalysis
Aashish Kumar
 
Neurobiology of Memory
Neurobiology of MemoryNeurobiology of Memory
Neurobiology of Memory
Parth Goyal
 
Polygraph test
Polygraph testPolygraph test
Brain Finger Printing
Brain Finger PrintingBrain Finger Printing
Brain Finger PrintingGarima Singh
 
Introduction to Forensic Science
Introduction to Forensic ScienceIntroduction to Forensic Science
Introduction to Forensic Science
Sangeetha Balakrishnan
 
Craniometric points
Craniometric pointsCraniometric points
Craniometric points
Usman Haqqani
 
The polygraph test
The polygraph testThe polygraph test
The polygraph test
Deepika Dubey
 
Brain imaging techniques
Brain imaging techniquesBrain imaging techniques
Brain imaging techniques
jagan _jaggi
 
Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprintingBrain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting
Sandeep Singh
 

What's hot (20)

Physiological and psychophysical methods
Physiological and psychophysical methodsPhysiological and psychophysical methods
Physiological and psychophysical methods
 
Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprintingBrain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting
 
Forensic Palynology
Forensic PalynologyForensic Palynology
Forensic Palynology
 
Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprintingBrain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting
 
Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting
 
Forensic audio
Forensic audioForensic audio
Forensic audio
 
Narco analysis Technique
Narco analysis TechniqueNarco analysis Technique
Narco analysis Technique
 
Effects of judges, juries, jurors and defenders.
Effects of judges, juries, jurors and defenders.Effects of judges, juries, jurors and defenders.
Effects of judges, juries, jurors and defenders.
 
Narcoanalysis
Narcoanalysis Narcoanalysis
Narcoanalysis
 
Neurobiology of Memory
Neurobiology of MemoryNeurobiology of Memory
Neurobiology of Memory
 
Polygraph test
Polygraph testPolygraph test
Polygraph test
 
Brain Finger Printing
Brain Finger PrintingBrain Finger Printing
Brain Finger Printing
 
Introduction to Forensic Science
Introduction to Forensic ScienceIntroduction to Forensic Science
Introduction to Forensic Science
 
Craniometric points
Craniometric pointsCraniometric points
Craniometric points
 
Narco analysis
Narco analysisNarco analysis
Narco analysis
 
The polygraph test
The polygraph testThe polygraph test
The polygraph test
 
Brain imaging techniques
Brain imaging techniquesBrain imaging techniques
Brain imaging techniques
 
Narco & beos
Narco & beosNarco & beos
Narco & beos
 
Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprintingBrain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting
 
Mt DNA
Mt DNAMt DNA
Mt DNA
 

Similar to Neuroethics presentation

Crime and science
Crime and scienceCrime and science
Crime and science
Edmund Yorke LLB (Hons)
 
Overview of Neuroeconomics
Overview of NeuroeconomicsOverview of Neuroeconomics
Overview of Neuroeconomicsdpirouz
 
fMRI in popular science magazines: Neuroscience Communication
fMRI in popular science magazines: Neuroscience CommunicationfMRI in popular science magazines: Neuroscience Communication
fMRI in popular science magazines: Neuroscience Communication
evalems
 
Brain finger printing
Brain finger printingBrain finger printing
Brain finger printing
Mohit Arora
 
Imaging of the Brain - A Window into the Depressed, Anxious, and Addicted Mind
Imaging of the Brain - A Window into the Depressed, Anxious, and Addicted MindImaging of the Brain - A Window into the Depressed, Anxious, and Addicted Mind
Imaging of the Brain - A Window into the Depressed, Anxious, and Addicted MindKristy Koster
 
A Call to Action: Improv­ing brain & men­tal health via dig­i­tal plat­forms,...
A Call to Action: Improv­ing brain & men­tal health via dig­i­tal plat­forms,...A Call to Action: Improv­ing brain & men­tal health via dig­i­tal plat­forms,...
A Call to Action: Improv­ing brain & men­tal health via dig­i­tal plat­forms,...
SharpBrains
 
How to address privacy, ethical and regulatory issues: Examples in cognitive ...
How to address privacy, ethical and regulatory issues: Examples in cognitive ...How to address privacy, ethical and regulatory issues: Examples in cognitive ...
How to address privacy, ethical and regulatory issues: Examples in cognitive ...
SharpBrains
 
REVIEW: Previous Deception detection methods and New proposed method using in...
REVIEW: Previous Deception detection methods and New proposed method using in...REVIEW: Previous Deception detection methods and New proposed method using in...
REVIEW: Previous Deception detection methods and New proposed method using in...
IJERA Editor
 
Brain fingerprinting detail report
Brain fingerprinting detail reportBrain fingerprinting detail report
Brain fingerprinting detail report
Vivek Jha
 
Brain fingerprinting detail report
Brain fingerprinting detail reportBrain fingerprinting detail report
Brain fingerprinting detail report
Vivek Jha
 
Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprintingBrain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprintingsameer535
 
Personality and the brain; Can brain damage change personality?
Personality and the brain; Can brain damage change personality?Personality and the brain; Can brain damage change personality?
Personality and the brain; Can brain damage change personality?
Ivona Vukotic
 
Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in MedicineEthics of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
Andrew Doyle
 
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_l
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_lAu psy492 m7_a2_mead_l
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_lLisamead
 
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_l
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_lAu psy492 m7_a2_mead_l
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_lLisamead
 
Security Is Like An Onion, That's Why It Makes You Cry
Security Is Like An Onion, That's Why It Makes You CrySecurity Is Like An Onion, That's Why It Makes You Cry
Security Is Like An Onion, That's Why It Makes You Cry
Michele Chubirka
 

Similar to Neuroethics presentation (19)

Crime and science
Crime and scienceCrime and science
Crime and science
 
Overview of Neuroeconomics
Overview of NeuroeconomicsOverview of Neuroeconomics
Overview of Neuroeconomics
 
Brain In A Box McGill
Brain In A Box McGillBrain In A Box McGill
Brain In A Box McGill
 
Ecc2012 13 4
Ecc2012 13 4Ecc2012 13 4
Ecc2012 13 4
 
fMRI in popular science magazines: Neuroscience Communication
fMRI in popular science magazines: Neuroscience CommunicationfMRI in popular science magazines: Neuroscience Communication
fMRI in popular science magazines: Neuroscience Communication
 
Brain finger printing
Brain finger printingBrain finger printing
Brain finger printing
 
Persuasive speech!
Persuasive speech!Persuasive speech!
Persuasive speech!
 
Imaging of the Brain - A Window into the Depressed, Anxious, and Addicted Mind
Imaging of the Brain - A Window into the Depressed, Anxious, and Addicted MindImaging of the Brain - A Window into the Depressed, Anxious, and Addicted Mind
Imaging of the Brain - A Window into the Depressed, Anxious, and Addicted Mind
 
A Call to Action: Improv­ing brain & men­tal health via dig­i­tal plat­forms,...
A Call to Action: Improv­ing brain & men­tal health via dig­i­tal plat­forms,...A Call to Action: Improv­ing brain & men­tal health via dig­i­tal plat­forms,...
A Call to Action: Improv­ing brain & men­tal health via dig­i­tal plat­forms,...
 
How to address privacy, ethical and regulatory issues: Examples in cognitive ...
How to address privacy, ethical and regulatory issues: Examples in cognitive ...How to address privacy, ethical and regulatory issues: Examples in cognitive ...
How to address privacy, ethical and regulatory issues: Examples in cognitive ...
 
REVIEW: Previous Deception detection methods and New proposed method using in...
REVIEW: Previous Deception detection methods and New proposed method using in...REVIEW: Previous Deception detection methods and New proposed method using in...
REVIEW: Previous Deception detection methods and New proposed method using in...
 
Brain fingerprinting detail report
Brain fingerprinting detail reportBrain fingerprinting detail report
Brain fingerprinting detail report
 
Brain fingerprinting detail report
Brain fingerprinting detail reportBrain fingerprinting detail report
Brain fingerprinting detail report
 
Brain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprintingBrain fingerprinting
Brain fingerprinting
 
Personality and the brain; Can brain damage change personality?
Personality and the brain; Can brain damage change personality?Personality and the brain; Can brain damage change personality?
Personality and the brain; Can brain damage change personality?
 
Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in MedicineEthics of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
 
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_l
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_lAu psy492 m7_a2_mead_l
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_l
 
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_l
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_lAu psy492 m7_a2_mead_l
Au psy492 m7_a2_mead_l
 
Security Is Like An Onion, That's Why It Makes You Cry
Security Is Like An Onion, That's Why It Makes You CrySecurity Is Like An Onion, That's Why It Makes You Cry
Security Is Like An Onion, That's Why It Makes You Cry
 

Neuroethics presentation

  • 2.  Introduction to Neuroethics  InvolvedTechnology  Ethical Considerations  Law, Discrimination/Stigma, Incidental Findings, Neuromarketing  Summary and Conclusion
  • 4.  Advanced understanding and monitoring of human thought and behavior  Brings new ethical, social and legal issues forward  Enabled by modern neurotechnologies
  • 5.  Can now quantify personal behaviors  Social attitude, value and moral agency  Akin to modern genetics  Prediction of disease, privacy, identity  Must carefully and properly interpret relationship between brain findings and concept of self
  • 6.  Must tackle practical questions in neuroimaging  Interpretation is fundamental  Ethics of genetics are not a sufficient guide  Not apart of traditional bioethical analysis
  • 8.  The Good, the Bad and the AnteriorCingulate (2002)  Morals and the Human Brain: AWorking Model (2003)  Strategizing the Human Brain (2003)  The Medial Frontal Cortex and the Rapid Processing of Monetary Gains and Losses (2002)  The Neural Basis of Economic Decision- Making in the Ultimatum Game (2003)
  • 9.  How the Mind Reads other Minds (2003)  Tapping the Mind (2003)  WhyWe’re So Nice:We’reWired to Cooperate (2002)  There’s a Sucker Born in Every Medial Prefrontal Cortex (2003)
  • 10.  “Thought maps”  Quantitative profiles of brain function  “Thought maps”  Not restricted to medical research and clinical neuropsychiatry  Natural relevance in our daily life
  • 11.  Introduces many possibilities/desires  Assessing truth of statements and memory in law  Profiling prospective employees for professional and interpersonal skills  Evaluating students for learning potential  Selecting investment managers to handle financial portfolios  Choosing life partners based on compatible brain profiles
  • 12.  Raises a number of epistemological issues  The study of knowledge  What is knowledge, how can it be accessed, how can it be used?  Proper interpretation  Scientific level  Complexity of neuroscience research – integration and interpretation of neuroimaging data  Social and cultural level  Social interpretations, bound by cultural and anthropological frameworks
  • 13.  Most prominent tools:  Electroencephalography (EEG)  Magnetoencephalography (MEG)  Positron emission tomography (PET)  Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)  Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)
  • 14.  1929, Hans Berger  Invented electroencephalogram  Relative signal strength and position of electrical activity generated at level of cerebral cortex  Measured using electrodes placed on scalp  Evoked EEG response, “event related potential”  First tool used to reveal fundamental knowledge behind the operation of the human brain in real time
  • 15.  Other imaging methods took advantage of brain signals  Extracranial electromagnetic activity (MEG)  Metabolic activity and blood flow (PET SPECT)  Regional blood oxygenation (fMRI)  All imaging methods use comparison/subtraction between two controlled conditions
  • 16.  All imaging methods use heavy statistical processing and computer intensive data reconstruction  Ultimately produce the familiar and colorful maps  Used for diagnosis/intervention of trauma, dementia, stroke, etc.
  • 17.  fMRIs will have greatest impact  Widespread availability of MR scanners  Imaging approach is non-invasive  Model for neuroethical discussions  Relative difference between experimental and control (baseline) task  Surplus of oxygenated blood recruited to relatively active brain regions produces effects measured by MR
  • 18.  fMRI used alone or in combo with previously mentioned techniques in studies  Lying and deception  Human cooperation and competition  Brain differences in violent people  Genetic influences  Variability in patterns of brain development  Investigation of unio mysticia using EEG, fMRI, and PET  “Spiritual neuroscience”
  • 19.  Personal neuroprofiles ripe for bioethical consideration  Neuroscience and philosophical questions  Existence limits  Meaning of free will  Distinguishing truth from lies, false memories from real ones  Prediction of behavior
  • 20.
  • 21.  1985 –Ake v. Oklahoma  Glen Burton Ake murdered a couple, wounded their two children  Acted bizarrely in court, prompted judge to order psychiatric competency evaluation  Report resulted in identifying Ake as delusional ▪ Claimed to be ‘Sword ofVengeance’ and will sit at the left hand of God in heaven  Diagnosed as probable paranoid schizophrenic ▪ Is he competent to stand trial?
  • 22.  Ake’s attorney requested the court appoint a psychiatrist to evaluate him for purpose of insanity defense  Criminal defendants argue this should include scans like PET and MRI  What do you guys think? DoesAke get evaluated?
  • 23.  The court says, nope!  Upheld that he had no such right to assistance  Ake was then tried  Convicted of 2 counts of murder  Sentenced to death
  • 24.  Conviction overturned!  Ake was not provided a psychiatrist  Deemed unfair trial  Found guilty again, this time just life in prison
  • 25.  Should neuroimaging be used regardless of offences?  Do they ‘deserve’ it?  Burden of the state?  Unfair advantage?  Keep in mind: PET previously has shown poor functioning in prefrontal cortex of criminals  Locus of impulse control
  • 26.  PET images have been used to argue that defendant was biologically predisposed to committing a crime  Further argued they should be spared conviction or death sentence
  • 27.  1994 – People v. Jones  Homicide conviction overturned  State failed to provide brain scans  1992 – People v.Weinstein  Accused of strangling his wife to death, throwing her body from 12th floor  PET, MRI showed arachnoid cyst, used for insanity defense
  • 28.  1992 – People v.Weinstein  PET scan showed juxtaposition between black cyst and red/green colored “normal” areas  Juxtaposition was apparently “profound”, apparent his brain was not functioning normally  Convicted of manslaughter  Thoughts?
  • 29.  2001 – Langleben et al.  fMRI study  Approach to truth verification, “brain fingerprinting”  Participants with/without playing cards  Boils down to “lying takes more energy”  Results consistent with studies done in 1997 and 2003  Can also determine if deception is premeditated  Thoughts? Is brain fingerprinting legitimate? Should it be used in court?
  • 30.  Brain fingerprinting  Terry Harrington, convicted of murder of retired police officer in 1977 ▪ Underwent brain fingerprinting in 2000 ▪ EEG patterns suggested he was innocent ▪ Original prosecution witness recanted statement when presented with this evidence
  • 31.
  • 32.  Health information is not entirely private  This can lead to denial of  Health insurance  Employment  Education  Financial loans
  • 33.  Neuroimaging provides insights into range of higher cognitive functions  Many do not have good animal models  Studies touch on areas of profound societal importance and controversy  Race relations, economic justice, perceived trustworthiness, moral reasoning, economic cooperation, social rejection, consumer brand attachment
  • 34.  Ability to predict behavior raises many concerns  Mind-reading  Social control  Novelty and extent of neuroimaging data gives info on human health, behavior and cognitive fitness  Raises concern
  • 35.  How much of this info will be used to benefit mankind?  Can the info be used for harm or purposes with ill-intent?  How will neuroimaging affect our daily life?  Work, education, financial, social interactions
  • 36.  Prediction of future behavior/pathology  Screening for team players and weak decision-makers in the workplace?  Post-Columbine era  Screening students for predisposition to unruly or violent behavior?
  • 37.  Post 9/11 era  Screening for terrorists?  Perhaps a brain scan at the airport?  Detention of individuals who have not yet committed a crime  DSPD – Dangerous Severe Personality Disorder  Type I and II errors – statistical threshold  Cost vs. detaining past sentence (which can be legal)
  • 38.  Pedophiles  January 22nd, 2002 – US Supreme Court states: ▪ Can confine violent sexual offenders beyond their prison term ▪ Only if shown they have mental/personality disorder making it difficult to control behavior  Very likely future imaging studies will be used to determine felon’s ability to control behavior  More effective than behavioral test
  • 39.  So, back to pedophiles!  Megan’s Law  Information on sex offenders available to public  What if brain scans can be used to identify potential pedophiles among non-criminal persons  Who should scan? How should the data be used? Should identified persons be registered? Should it be made available to employers?
  • 40.
  • 41.  Incidental findings  “Observations of potential clinical significance and unexpectedly discovered and unrelated to the purpose of variables of the study”  Found in up to 10% of neuroimaging research  How should they be handled? In what way? What should be done?  Abide by legal and ethical principles in research/medicine
  • 42.  Risks  Emotional burden, possible unnecessary procedures  Benefits  Early detection of something that can be treated/prevented  How about opportunity to waive right to receive info on incidental findings?
  • 43.  Case Study!  FE is 65 yo female fMRI volunteer  Study is for osteoarthritic knee pain  Found to have ischemic changes in left temporal lobe during brain scan  She had no neurological deficit, did not complain of discomfort  What would you do?
  • 44.  What actually happened  PI was clinician, decided to disclose findings  With her permission contacted physician for follow up  FE developed neurological deficits 24 hours later, underwent repeat neuroimaging and treatment  Diagnosis of ischemic temporal lobe  Survived after treatment
  • 45.  Afterwards, PI and team felt distressed and unequipped in dealing with incidental findings  Wished for clear documentation of whether patient wanted to be informed  Addressed lack of standard guidelines, protocol, training, knowledge regarding legal and ethical principles
  • 46.  Canada – all known foreseeable risks (even rare and remote) must be disclosed to research participants or surrogate decision-maker  Guided by Halushka v. University of Saskatchewan and Weiss v. Solomon  No mention of whether foreseeable incidental findings should be regarded as potential risks/harms  No clear guidelines as to when and what to disclose in best interests of the patient  Thoughts?
  • 47.
  • 48.  Goal of marketing is to match products with people  Guide design and presentation of products to increase compatibility with consumers  Facilitating choice process of customer  Neuroeconomics – incorporating neuroimaging into decision-making sciences
  • 49.  Hope among marketers neuroimaging will streamline marketing processes while saving money  Obtain customer information that cannot be acquired using conventional methods  Some companies market neuromarketing itself
  • 50.  More accurately indicate underlying preferences than standard market data  Remains insensitive to biases  Efficiently allocate resources  Product concepts tested rapidly  Unpromising concepts eliminated early  Can now focus on promising products
  • 51.  Banned in France  Eye-tracking, galvanic skin response still legal  Misinterpretation and over-interpretation an issue  Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajg0ypD D7i0
  • 52.  Unsettling?Creepy?  Is it ethical?  Need to respect autonomy, confidentiality, privacy  Informed consent? Full disclosure of risk or harm ▪ How invasive are the procedures?  What exactly can the data be used for?
  • 53.  Protecting the vulnerable  Children, psychiatric patients, prisoners  Can be easily influenced ▪ Easily deceived and/or experience negative affected  Commercial use of data from these groups  Is it justified? Can it be defended?
  • 54.  Baylor College of Medicine  Pepsi vs. Coca-Cola  fMRI showed consumers prefer Pepsi ▪ 5x the response in ventral putamen  When repeated unblind… ▪ Nearly all participants prefer Coca-Cola ▪ Medial prefrontal cortex was activated – linked to sense of self ▪ Brand is so attractive its overriding our taste buds?
  • 55.  Are you comfortable with neuromarketing?  Should lines be drawn?Where?  What can the information be used for?  Do the risks outweigh the benefits?  Do we care that much about finding products that suit us?
  • 56.  Neuroethics is still young  Many unaddressed situations  Neuroscience “boomed” in early 21st century  Utilizes neuroimaging  EEG, MEG, PET, SPECT, fMRI  Massive impact on bioethics  Law, Discrimination/Stigma, Incidental findings, Neureconomics/Neuromarketing, etc.
  • 57.  However, brain imaging is extremely useful  Understanding how our brain functions, diagnosis of disease, detecting abnormalities  Interpretation is the key issue  Scientific and social level  Should lines be drawn?Where do we draw the line?
  • 58.  Illes, J., & Racine, E. (2005). Imaging or Imagining?A Neuroethics Challenge Informed by Genetics. The AmericanJournal of Bioethics : AJOB, 5(2), 5–18. doi:10.1080/15265160590923358  Illes, J., & Bird, S. (2006, July 21). Neuroethics:A modern context for ethics in neuroscience. Retrieved February 12, 2015, from http://neuroethics.stanford.edu/documents/TINSarticle.pdf  Scanning the social brain. (n.d.). Retrieved February 12, 2015, from http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v6/n12/full/nn1203-1239.html  Canli,T., & Amin, Z. (2002, December 3). Neuroimaging of emotion and personality: Scientific evidence and ethical considerations. Retrieved February 12, 2015, from http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezpxy.fanshawec.ca/science/article/pii/S0 278262602005171
  • 59.  Lawrence Leung, “Incidental Findings in Neuroimaging: Ethical and MedicolegalConsiderations,”Neuroscience Journal, vol. 2013, Article ID 439145, 7 pages, 2013. doi:10.1155/2013/439145  Ariely, D., & Berns, G. S. (2010). Neuromarketing: the hope and hype of neuroimaging in business. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 11(4), 284–292. doi:10.1038/nrn2795  Yesim Isil Ulman,Tuna Cakar & GokcenYildiz, Ethical Issues in Neuromarketing: “I Consume,Therefore I am!”, Science and Engineering Ethics, ISSN 1353-3452, Sci Eng Ethics, DOI 10.1007/s11948-014-9581-5