Throughout the years, brain research has revolutionized the neuroscience industry, with discovery after discovery having vastly improved the quality of life for millions. But these advancements come with undeniable ethical considerations that must be acknowledged, as brain research can easily be weaponized and used on the battlefield or for political advantages in the vast scheme of things. This subfield of study within biology is called Neuroethics, providing guidelines and advice to researchers and the entirety of our community on how to navigate these intricate ethical implications. In this article we will be exploring the ethical implications that are placed in brain research and why exactly they are by exploring the possible consequences if they weren’t.
What is brain research?
Brain research combines multiple subfields of biology to develop a better understanding of how the brain functions. With over 25 different major subfields covering more than a thousand nervous system and brain disorders, this type of research greatly improves our understanding of fundamental biology and contributes to prevention and treatments for billions of people.
Why do ethical implications need to be put in place?
Before we delve into what ethical constraints are enforced, we must first understand why they are necessary. These rapid advancements in the industry raise critical ethical considerations due to the possibility of abuse, such as cognitive enhancement, weaponization, and deep brain stimulation, threatening our evolution as a whole.
What are some ethical implications in the industry?
Around the world, the most common ethical practices and implications that are used as guidelines are “respect for persons”, “concern for welfare”, and “justice”. In accordance with the first principle, researchers are responsible for ensuring that participants of the study are well aware of the objectives of the project, the procedures for data gathering, along with the potential risks and benefits that may arise before, during, or after the study, then to retrieve informed consent from the participant before the start of the study.
In accordance with the second principle, researchers must keep the welfare of the participants in mind, ensuring that no excessive harm or damage is done during the study, particularly with children under the age of 13, who are most likely unable to voice their concerns or their best interests.
Finally, in accordance with the last principle, certain groups, such as minority groups, cannot be purposely excluded or targeted from research studies.
To maintain the guidelines set worldwide, research studies are usually sent to a board of specialists that ensure that no ethical guidelines are violated in a study.
Reference List
Brady, S. (2022). History of Brain Disease Research | American Brain Foundation. [online] American Brain Foundation. Available at: https://www.americanbrainfoundation.org/history-of-brain-disease-research/.
CORDIS (1998). Ethical, Legal and Social aspects of Brain Research. [online] CORDIS | European Commission. Available at: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/BIO4972264.
Frontiers for Young Minds. (2015). The Brain and Ethics: An Introduction to Research in Neuroethics. [online] Available at: https://kids.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frym.2015.00002.
Nationaldefensemagazine.org. (2017). Weaponizing the Brain: Neuroscience Advancements Spark Debate. [online] Available at: https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2017/5/11/weaponizing-the-brain-neuroscience-advancements-spark-debate.
NIH.gov. (2017). Neuroethics | BRAIN Initiative. [online] Available at: https://braininitiative.nih.gov/research/neuroethics.
Tomorrow.bio. (2023). Neuroethics: Navigating the Moral Landscape of Brain Science. [online] Available at: https://www.tomorrow.bio/post/neuroethics-navigating-the-moral-landscape-of-brain-science-2023-06-4727746877-neuroscience.
Tran, D. (2024). Brain Research. [online] EMOTIV. Available at: https://www.emotiv.com/blogs/glossary/brain-research.
Comentarios