The ethics of brain-computer interfaces is a huge concern to ensure that companies and governments are responsibly using neurotech.
Brain-computer interfaces are divided into those that 'read' brain activity and decode its meaning and those that 'write' to the brain to manipulate the activity of a specific brain region that could affect their function.
Companies, such as Kernel in Los Angeles California, and Elon Musk's Neuralink in San Francisco, California are using the neurotech to pursue the brain-computer interfaces (BCI) and predict a bidirectional coupling of computers responding to brain activity and insert information into their neural circuitry.
But their work on neurotech is closely monitored by researchers in neuroethics to ensure that technologies that directly affect the brain and its functions are ethical.
Neurotech Explained: Invasive and Non-Invasive Types
Neurotech has helped many people for the past few years. This technology can either be invasive or non-invasive. For invasive brain-computer interfaces, it involves putting microelectrodes directly onto the brain and embed them into the neural tissue.
Invasive BCI has already improved the quality of life of those people with illnesses or impairments, like those with epilepsy, Parkinson's Disease, and chronic pain. In 2017, a paraplegic named Rodrigo Hübner Mendes was able to drive a racecar with his mind because of BCI. Also, an invasive neurotech device accurately decoded imagined handwriting at a speed of normal typing.
In the future, invasive neurotech might allow paralyzed patients to easily control phones, computers, and their prosthetic limbs with just their thoughts alone.
On the other hand, non-invasive neurotech can also be used in similar functions. Researchers can make wearables to enable a patient with language or movement difficulties to communicate easier and more effectively.
Moreover, it can also be used in pain management just as what the IBM researchers and Boston Scientific are developing to improve chronic pain neurotherapy.
Overall, the BCI or neurotech is quite impressive. It can both sense or read neurodata and also modulate it through invasive or non-invasive procedures.
In one example, Columbia University neurobiologist Rafael Yuste has recorded a neuron activity of a mouse licking for a reward. Later on, the researchers reactivated these same neurons and were able to make the mouse do the same action even if the mouse does not intend to do it at the moment.
The Ethics of BCI
Although remarkable, neurotech can also become unethical if it is improperly used. Ethics will help regulate companies and governments who plan to use it in the future.
Neurotech applications should consider any potential consequences of its development on the person's autonomy, privacy, responsibility, consent, integrity, and dignity.
According to an article by Scientific American, the ethical concerns of using neurotech increases when the nuerodata is not just monitored but also interpreting, and decoding a person's thoughts. Since most thoughts are unconscious, the brain could unconsciously provide neurodata that they are not willing to share knowingly.
It is important to enforce guardrails so that innovation could lead to long-term benefits.
The ethics of brain-computer interfaces will help ensure that researchers and manufacturers of neurotech, and also policymakers and consumers will use the technology based on ethics.
Check out more news and information about Brain-Computer Interfaces in Science Times.
