>> GOOD AFTERNOON.

MY NAME IS DEBORAH OLSTER FROM THE NIH

OFFICE OF BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL

SCIENCES RESEARCH HERE AT NIH

AND I'M PLEASED TO HOST AND

INTRODUCE TODAY'S SPEAKER,

DR. MARTHA FARAH WHO IS THE

WALTER H AN ANBURG PROFESSOR IN

NATURAL SCIENCES AT THE

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA.

SHE IS ALSO PROFESSOR IN THE

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY AND THE

DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR

NEUROSCIENCE AND SOCIETY AT

PENN.

SHE RECEIVED HER UNDERGRADUATE

DEGREE, TWO OF THEM, ONE IN

PHILOSOPHY, ONE IN MET LEDGERY

AND MATERIAL SCIENCE FROM THE

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF

TECHNOLOGY SHE MEANT GOT HER

MASTERS AND Ph.D. AT HARVARD

UNIVERSITY AND EXPERIMENTAL

PSYCHOLOGY AND DID ADDITIONAL

TRAINING AT BOSTON UNIVERSITY IN

THE DEPARTMENT OF NEUROLOGY AND

AT THE CENTER FOR COGNITIVE

SCIENCE AT MIT.

MARTHA'S HAS HAD MANY, MANY

AWARDS.

I'LL JUST PICK OUT A FEW OF MY

FAVORITES.

SHE HAS BEEN ELECTED TO THE

AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ARTS AND

SCIENCES AND TO THE DANA

ALLIANCE BRAIN INITIATIVE.

SHE HAS BEEN NAMED THE WILLIAM

JAMES FELLOW, WHICH IS A

LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD BY

THE ASSOCIATION FOR

PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE AND SHE IS

A FELLOW VET ORGANIZATION AS

WELL AS A FELLOW OF AAAS.

DR. FARAH HAS REALLY A STELLAR

TRACK RECORD AS A PSYCHOLOGIST

AND COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENTIST.

HER RESEARCH OVER THE YEARS HAS

BEEN SUPPORTED BY MANY OF THE

NIH INSTITUTES, INCLUDING NIMH,

NICHD, NIDA, NINDS, NATIONAL

INSTITUTE ON AGING AND ALSO BY

THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

AND A NUMBER OF PRIVATE

ORGANIZATIONS.

ONE OF HER CURRENT GRANTS IS A

STUDY ON SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS

CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCE IN NEURAL

BASIS OF LEARNING.

IN ADDITION TO HER RESEARCH

PROGRAM, AND I THINK WHAT

ATTRACTED ME WHEN NOMINATING HER

FOR A WALS LECTURE, WAS THAT

MARTHA IS VERY ACTIVE IN SCIENCE

EDUCATION AND NEUROETHICS AND

WE'LL HEAR A LITTLE BIT ABOUT

THAT TODAY, PARTICULARLY THE

FOCUS ON THE FOCUS OF NEURAL

SCIENCE.

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR OF A NIH

BLUEPRINT FOR NEURAL SCIENCE

EDUCATION AWARD ANDs A

FOUNDING MEMBER OF THE NEURAL

ETHICS SOCIETY.

BEFORE I GIVE HER -- GIRLFRIEND

YOU HER TITLE, IT'S UP

HERE -- FOLLOWING THE LECTURE

THERE WILL BE A RECEPTION IN THE

LIBRARY.

I HOPE YOU CAN ALL JOIN US.

AND WITH THAT, PLEASE JOIN ME IN

WELCOMING D. MARTHA FARAH,

21st CENTURY NEUROSCIENCE

FROM LAB AND CLINIC TO HOME,

SCHOOL AND OFFICE.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DEB.

I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THAT

NICE INTRODUCTION AND ALSO FOR A

WONDERFUL DAY.

I HAVE REALLY ENJOYED MY TIME

HERE, WHICH SINCE 9:00 THIS

MORNING UNTIL TALKING TO SENIOR

RESEARCHERS AND YOUR POSTDOCS

AND HEARING ABOUT SO MANY

DIFFERENT RESEARCH PROGRAMS.

EACH OF WHICH INTERSECTS IN SOME

WAY OR OTHER WITH ISSUES OF

NEURSCIENCE AND SOCIETY.

IT'S BEEN A WAFFLE DAY OKAY.

SO, BECAUSE OF MY TALK HAS A BIT

OF HISTORICAL BENT TO IT, AT

LEAST THE FRAMING WHAT HAVE I

WANT TO TELL YOU ABOUT, CONCERNS

SOMETHING NEW THAT IS HAPPENING

NOW IN THE 21st CENTURY, LET

ME BEGIN WITH A LITTLE LOOK AT

THE HISTORY OF NEUROSCIENCE,

WHICH IF YOU WILL ALLOW ME TO

COUNT AND DESCRIBE THE EFFECTS

OF HEAD INJURY ON PEOPLE'S

BEHAVIOR AS NEUROSCIENCE, IT

GOES BACK THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

BUT NEUROSCIENCE HAS A VERY LONG

HISTORY STRETCHING UP TO THE

PRESENT DAY WHERE WE DO

BEHAVIORAL CORRELATIONS,

MECHANISTIC STUDIES WITH VARIOUS

INTERVENTIONS IN THE BRAIN AND

SO FORTH.

AND THROUGHOUT ALL OF THIS WORK,

THE THOUSANDS OF YEARS THAT

PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SYSTEMATICALLY

STUDYING MIND-BRAIN

RELATIONSHIP, I AM GOING TO

ASSERT TO YOU WE CAN MAKE THE

FOLLOWING GENERALIZATION.

I THINK IT IS PRETTY CLOSE TO

TRUE, WITHOUT EXCEPTION -- I CAN

THINK OF ONE EXCEPTION, BUT

BASICALLY, FOR ALL THIS LONG

PERIOD, ADVANCES IN NEUROSCIENCE

HAS BEEN ONE OF TWO TYPES,

ADVANCES IN BASIC SCIENCE,

PEOPLE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW

DOES THE BRAIN WORK, BECAUSE

IT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION IN

ITS OWN RIGHT, AND APPLIED

SCIENCE, USING OUR UNDERSTANDING

OF BRAIN FUNCTION TO HELP AND

GUIDE US AND TREAT NEUROLOGICAL

AND PSYCHIATRIC DISEASES.

BUT IN THE 21st CENTURY,

THERE IS A NEW CATEGORY OF

ADVANCES IN NEUROSCIENCE.

THAT CATEGORY IS THE APPLICATION

OF NEUROSCIENCE TO NONMEDICAL

PROBLEMS.

SO NOW WE HAVE NEUROSCIENCE

GOING FROM THE BASIC SCIENCE LAB

AND THE CLINIC TO EDUCATIONAL

APPLICATIONS, ECONOMICS AND

BUSINESS APPLICATIONS, MILITARY

APPLICATIONS, AND ARGUABLY MANY

OTHERS.

SO, WHY THIS SUDDEN BURGEONING

OF NEUROSCIENCE APPLICATIONS

OUTSIDE OF MEDICINE?

WELL, I THINK PROBABLY THE

SIMPLEST ANSWER IS THAT TOWARDS

THE END OF THE LAST CENTURY,

FAIRLY SUDDENLY, WE BEGAN TO

UNDERSTAND HOW TO STUDY THE

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MIND AND

BRAIN IN HUMANS.

AND NOT JUST THE RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN YOU KNOW, HUNGER AND

KIND OF SIMPLE MOTIVATIONAL

STATES BUT REALLY PRETTY MUCH

ANY CHAPTER HEADING IN

PSYCHOLOGY TEXTBOOK, BE IT MORAL

REASONING, OR CREATIVITY OR

UNAME IT, THANKS TO DEVELOPMENTS

IN BRAIN IMAGING, THANKS TO

DEVELOPMENTS IN COMPUTATIONAL

MODELING OF COGNITION, THE

SCIENCE OF COGNITIVE

NEUROSCIENCE CAME INTO BEING.

I'M NOT SAYING IT IS SOLVED ALL

THESE PROBLEMS, VERY FAR FROM

IT.

BUT THE POINT IS, IT'S A GROWING

CONCERN, IT'S MAKING PROGRESS,

AND WE HAVE ALREADY SOME RESULTS

THAT SEEM TO BE HOLDING UP AND

ACCUMULATING AND SO FORTH.

IN OTHER WORDS, FOR THE FIRST

TIME, SHIFTING FROM LATE

20th INTO EARLY 21st

CENTURY, WE CAN USE NEUROSCIENCE

TO TELL US ABOUT THE HUMAN MIND

AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR.

SO, JUST TO SORT OF UNDERLINE

THIS POINT, AND SORT OF

PAINFULLY LINK THE DETAIL, I'M

JUST GOING TO PARSE THIS

STATEMENT FOR YOU.

ANY ENDEAVOR THAT BENEFITS FROM

BEING ABLE TO UNDERSTAND, TO

PREDICT, OR TO INFLUENCE, OR

PERHAPS MORE OMINOUSLY TO

CONTROL HUMAN BEHAVIOR CAN, IN

PRINCIPLE, BENEFIT FROM APPLYING

NEUROSCIENCE.

AND NOW I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT

THIS SET OF ENDEAVORS -- THIS

SET OF ENDEAVORS ENCOMPASSES A

LOT.

THERE ISN'T TOO MUCH THAT PEOPLE

GO TO DO IN THEIR EVERYDAY LIFE

THAT DOESN'T, IN SOME SENSE,

BENEFIT FROM UNDERSTANDING,

PREDICTING AND INFLUENCING

PEOPLE.

THAT INCLUDES BUSINESS, THAT

INCLUDES EDUCATION, THAT

INCLUDES WARFARE, THAT INCLUDES

THE WHOLE ENCHILADA.

NOW, I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT

THIS IS NOT JUST TRUE IN

PRINCIPLE.

BUT THAT IT IS INCREASINGLY TRUE

IN PRACTICE.

SO, WITH THAT, AS A PRELUDE, LET

ME TALK ABOUT WHERE WE ARE GOING

TO GO IN THIS TALK TODAY.

I WANT TO GIVE YOU A BICYCLE

TOUR OF THE MANY DIFFERENT WAYS

THAT WE HAVE BEGUN TO ALTER

BRAIN FUNCTION FOR NONMEDICAL

REASONS, AND THAT WE HAVE BEGUN

TO READ PSYCHOLOGICAL STATES AND

TRAITS FROM BRAIN FUNCTION FOR

NONMEDICAL REASONS.

AND THEN I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

ANOTHER WAY IN WHICH

NEUROSCIENCE IS EFFECTING

EVERYDAY LIFE OUTSIDE THE LAB

AND CLINIC AND THAT IS WHAT I'M

GOING TO CALL THE NEUROSCIENCE

WORLD VIEW, THAT IS THE VIEW

THAT WE USE WHEN WE THINK OF

OURSELVES AND EACH OTHER AS

BRAINS AS OPPOSED TO THE MORE

TRADITIONAL VIEW OF EACH OTHER

AS PERSONS OR PEOPLE.

OKAY.

SO STARTING WITH THIS FIRST

AGENDA ITEM, ALTERING BRAIN

FUNCTION FOR NONMEDICAL REASONS.

WELL, BRAIN ENHANCEMENT IS A

BUZZWORD THAT IS CROPPING UP

HERE AND THERE.

IT'S THE IDEA THAT WE CAN USE

METHODS DEVELOPED WITHIN

MEDICINE, TYPICALLY WITHIN

NEUROPSYCHIATRY, NOT TO TREAT

BRAIN THAT IS ARE HAVING

PROBLEMS, TO TRY NORMALIZE THEM,

BUT RATHER TO TAKE A NORMAL

BRAIN AND TRY TO MAKE IT BETTER

THAN NORMAL.

NOW, THE MOST COMMON EXAMPLE OF

THIS IS HAPPENING ON COLLEGE

CAMPUSES ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO A

GROWING EXTENT IN HIGH SCHOOLS

AND TO A GROWING EXTENT AMONG

STUDENTS AND OTHER COUNTRIES AS

WELL.

THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE KIDS IN

COLLEGE, NEXT TIME THEY ARE

HOME, ASK THEM ABOUT THIS.

YOU WILL BE REALLY SURPRISED AT

WHAT THEY SAY.

IT IS EXTREMELY COMMON NOW FOR

COLLEGE STUDENTS, WHO AGAIN

NORMAL HEALTHY INDIVIDUALS, TO

USE TYPICALLY OCCASIONALLY USE

MEDICATIONS INTENDED FOR THE

TREATMENT OF ATTENTION DEFICIT

HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER TO HELP

THEM FOCUS, TO HELP THEM PAY

ATTENTION, WHILE THEY STUDY.

THERE IS NOT A LOT OF GOOD

QUANTITATIVE EVIDENCE ON

PRECISELY

PRECISELY THIS QUESTION.

THERE IS GOOD QUANTITATIVE

EVIDENCE ON HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE

USING STIMULANT MEDICATIONS IN

GENERAL, NOT FOR MEDICAL

REASONS.

BUT THE QUESTION OF HOW MANY

PEOPLE ARE USING THEM AS STUDY

AIDES, PROBABLY THE BEST NUMBERS

WE HAVE COME FROM A DATASET THAT

WAS COLLECTED IN 2001, PUBLISHED

IN 2005.

SO THEY ARE ALREADY KIND OF OLD

AND WE HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE

THE TREND IS GROWING.

BUT THAT STUDY DONE BY SHAWN

McCABE AND COLLEAGUES FOUND

THAT 7%, 6.9% OF AMERICAN

COLLEGE STUDENTS

IN ADDITION TO HELPING PATIENTS

STAY AWAKE AND THINK CLEARLY

DURING THE DAY, THIS WILL

ACTUALLY DO THAT FOR A NORMAL

PERSON WHO IS SLEEP DEPRIVED.

SO PEOPLE CAN ESSENTIALLY CHEAT

THEIR BODIES OF A NIGHT'S SLEEP

AND GO TO WORK THE NEXT DAY,

WORK ALL NIGHT, WORK THE NEXT

DAY, AND FEEL OKAY.

AND FUNCTION OKAY.

A LITTLE ALARMING BECAUSE WHAT

THIS DRUG DOES, SUPRESS THE

FEELINGS OF EXHAUSTION, THE

MENTAL FOGGINESS THAT NORMALLY

ACCOMPANIES SLEEP DEPRIVATION.

NO REASON TO THINK THAT IT

PROTECTS YOU AGAINST THE BAD

SYSTEMIC EFFECTS OF SLEEP

DEPRIVATION ON YOUR IMMUNE

SYSTEM AND ON YOUR BRAIN AND SO

FORTH.

BUT THIS DRUG IS BECOMING, AGAIN

NO TERRIBLY WELL CONSTRUCTED

EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES, BUT

INFORMAL STUDIES, SUGGESTS THAT

THIS IS A LIVELY USED DRUG WITH

A GROWING FAN BASE.

THERE IS A NATURE POLL CONDUCTED

BY NATURE PRACTICINGZINE IN

2008.

SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER THAT

FOUND THAT 20% OF STUDY

RESPONDENTS HAD USED DRUGS LIKE

MODAFINIL OR ADHD STIMULANTS OR

WHATEVER, TO HELP THEM WITH

WORK.

OBVIOUSLY NOT A WELL-DESIGNED

STUDY FOR DRAWING -- IT'S IN

EXISTENCE BUT DOESN'T TELL YOU

WHAT THE TRUE PERCENTAGE OF

SCIENTISTS OR EVEN READERS OF

NATURE OUT THERE USE THIS.

MANY ANECDOTES REPORTS THE

COMPUTER SCIENTISTS, COMPUTER

ENTREPRENEURS ARE FOND OF THIS

DRUG IN SILICON VALLEY.

SUPPOSEDLY THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE

USING IT TO WORK.

BUT THE POINT IS, IN THIS

TIME-CRUNCHED SOCIETY OF OURS,

WHAT A PERFECT TIME MANAGEMENT

TOOL.

MORE TIME, RIGHT?

YOU DON'T HAVE TO SLEEP ALL THE

TIME.

NOW, ANOTHER NONMEDICAL USE OF

THIS AS WELL AS THE CONVENTIONAL

STIMULANTS IS BY THE MILITARY.

OBVIOUSLY WHEN YOU ARE FIGHTING

A WAR, YOU CAN'T JUST KIND OF

SAY, IT'S 11:00, TIME TO GO TO

SLEEP.

I NEED MY 8 HOURS.

SO FOR THAT REASON, U.S.

MILITARY, MANY OTHER MILITARIES

AROUND THE WORLD, MAKE THESE

STIMULANTS AVAILABLE TO THEIR

WAR FIGHTERS SO THEY CAN WORK 24

PLUS HOUR SHIFTS AND THINK

CLEARLY AND FEEL OKAY.

I SHOULD MENTION THAT THERE IS

ALSO A LITERATURE SUGGESTING

THAT MOW DAV NIL, IN ADDITION TO

HELPING IF YOU'RE SLEEP

DEPRIVED, IS SOMEWHAT HELPFUL

FOR COGNITION.

IF YOU'RE WELL RESTED.

SO COLLEAGUES AT THE UNIVERSITY

OF CAMBRIDGE HAVE FOUND THAT

SOMESULTS BUT SIGNIFICANT

EXECUTIVE FUNCTION ENHANCEMENT

USING THIS DRUG.

SO THESE ARE THINGS THAT ARE

HERE NOW.

LET ME JUST POINT TO SOME THINGS

IN THE PIPELINE.

THIS IS FROM THE WEBSITE OF

MEMORY PHARMACEUTICALS, A

COMPANY STARTED BY ERIC CANDLE

AND HIS COLLEAGUES, TO TRY TO

PUT TO USE SOME OF WHAT THEY

LEARNED ABOUT THE NEUROBIOLOGY,

THE MOLECULAR NEUROBIOLOGY OF

MEMORY, TO DEVELOPING MEMORY

DRUGS.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THIS PIE

CHART, I DON'T FINISH YOU CAN

SEE FROM THERE WHAT THESE

DIFFERENT INDICATIONS ARE, BUT

YOU SEE ALZHEIMER'S, MILD

COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT,

PSYCHIATRIC INDICATIONS, NOTHING

SURPRISING THERE.

BUT THIS SLICE OF THE PIE SAYS,

AGE-ASSOCIATED COGNITIVE

DECLINE.

IN OTHER WORDS, ONE OF THE

TARGETS -- I CAN'T CALL IT

THERAPEUTIC TARGETS BECAUSE

THERE IS NO THEY WERE FE THERE

IS NO DISEASE, ONE OF THE GOALS,

THE EXPLICIT GOALS OF THIS

COMPANY, IS TO IMPROVE THE

MEMORY OF PEOPLE LIKE ME AND

MANY OF YOU IN THE AUDIENCE,

AGING BABYBOOMERS WHO DON'T

REMEMBER AS WELL AS WE USED TO.

SO, CLEARLY, BRAINENCANCEMENT

FOR PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL

REASONS IS ON THEIR BUCKET LIST

AS WELL.

OKAY.

IN ADDITION TO ENHANCING

COGNITION, IT'S WORTH MENTIONING

THAT NON-COGNITIVE PROCESSES AND

EMOTIONAL PROCESSES CAN BE

MANIPULATED WITH INCREASING

ACTIVITY.

THIS IS A CHART OF A FAIRLY OLD

PUBLICATION ON THE EFFECTS OF

OXYTOCIN COMPARED TO PLACEBO ON

THE BEHAVIOR OF SUBJECTS IN AN

ECONOMIC GAME WHERE USING ONE

LOAD, ONE STRATEGY APPROACH TO

THE GAME, PEOPLE CAN BE MORE

GENEROUS AND TRANSFER MORE MONEY

TO THE OTHER PLAYER.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS THE

NUMBER OF DOLLARS TRANSFERRED.

THERE IS QUITE A SIGNIFICANT

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PEOPLE

PLAYING ON OXYTOCIN COMPARED TO

THE PEOPLE PLAYING ON PLACEBO.

YOU CAN IMAGINE THE BENEFITS OF

THIS IN NON-MEDICAL

CIRCUMSTANCES FROM A KIND OF

OPEN, CONSENSUAL USE, PERHAPS IN

COUPLE'S COUNSELING.

LARRY YOUNG PIONEERED THIS

RESEARCH TELLS ME THAT HE IS

ALWAYS MEETING PSYCHIATRISTS

WHEN HE GIVES A TALK AT

CONFERENCES, WHO TELL HIM THAT

THEY HAVE FORMULATED THEIR OWN

LITTLE OXYTOCIN TO GIVE COUPLES

AND THEY BELIEVE THEY ARE

GETTING GOOD RESULTS.

NOW ALSO YOU CAN IMAGINE SORT OF

BAD USES.

FOR EXAMPLE BUSINESS

NEGOTIATIONS, POLITICAL

NEGOTIATIONS WHERE YOU CAN

ENHANCE THE GENEROSITY OR TRUST

OF SOMEBODY ELSE.

FOR YOUR OWN PURPOSES.

A BIG PROBLEM WITH TRYING TO USE

OXYTOCIN IN THESE WAYS IS THAT

IT DOESN'T EASILY CROSS THE

BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER.

BUT THERE ARE NEW MOLECULES

BEING DEVELOPED THAT ACTIVATE

THE OXYTOCIN SYSTEM, NOT WITH

OXYTOCIN BUT OTHER MOLECULES

THAT DO PASS THE BLOOD-BRAIN

BARRIER.

FOR EXAMPLE THIS WAY 267464.

SO THIS IS NOT HERE AND NOW BUT

SOMETHING THAT IS I THINK WE

COULD ACCURATELY SAY, IN THE

PIPELINE.

FINALLY, WE CAN TALK ABOUT, CALL

IT ENHANCEMENT, CALL IT

THERAPEUTIC JUSTICE.

BUT WITH CRIMINAL OFFENDERS,

SOMETIMES IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO

TRY TO REHABILITATE THEM THAN TO

SIMPLY INCARCERATE THEM OR

PUNISH THEM IN SOME OTHER WAY,

BOTH FOR THEIR SAKE'S AND FOR

SOCIETY'S SAKE N LINE WITH THIS,

THERE ARE ALREADY USES OF CNS

INTERVENTIONS FOR THE SAKE OF

IMPROVING OR MAKING PEOPLE MORE

LAW-ABIDING, LESS ANTISOCIAL.

SO ANDROGEN TREATMENTS FOR SEX

OFFENSES, THESE ARE CALLED

CHEMICAL CASTRATION SOMETIMES.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS

CURRENTLY DONE, IN FACT IT'S

MANDATED BY STATE LAW IN MANY

STATES.

AND YOU KNOW, AS WE KNOW, THE

ANDROGENS EFFECT MORE THAN ONE

ORGAN.

THEY ALSO HAVE THEIR EFFECT VIA

THE BRAIN.

SSRIs ARE USEFUL FOR LIMITING

IMPULSIVE VIOLENCE AND ALSO FOR

SEX OFFENSES, BECAUSE WHAT WHAT

IS A SIDE EFFECT, NAMELY LOSS OF

LIBIDO FOR PEOPLE USING THESE

DRUGS FOR SAY, DEPRESSION, IS A

USEFUL EFFECT FOR DEALING WITH

SEX OFFENDERS.

SO, THESE ARE CASES WHERE AGAIN,

NEUROPSYCHIATRY CAN BE PUT TO

WORK NOT FOR PATIENT

POPULATIONS, FOR HEALTHY

POPULATIONS, TO ACHIEVE GOALS

THAT WE OR THEY OR ALL OF THE

ABOVE DESIRE.

I'M GOING TO JUST GIVE YOU A

COUPLE OF SLIDES ABOUT

NON-INVASIVE BRAIN STIMULATION.

YOU HAVE SOMEBODY AT NIH WHO

PIONEERED THIS TECHNIQUE OF

TRANSCRANIAL DIRECT CURRENT

STIMULATION.

TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC

STIMULATIONS IS BETTER KNOWN.

IN BOTH CASES, THESE ARE DEVICES

THAT, FROM OUTSIDE OF THE HEAD,

CREATE CURRENTS INSIDE THE HEAD

THAT CAN FAIRLY SELECTIVELY

ALTER PSYCHOLOGICAL FUNCTION.

EITHER IN THE SHORT-TERM OR EVEN

WITH LASTING EFFECTS.

AND THEY HAVE BEEN FOUND TO

ENHANCE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF

COGNITION IN NORMAL HEALTHY

SUBJECTS.

AT LEAST AS MEASURED IN THE

LABORATORY.

NOW, I WANT TO MENTION THAT

THERE IS A GROWING DO IT

YOURSELF COMMUNITY USING TEE

DEESEUOUS WHICH REQUIRES

SALINE-SOAKED GAUZE PADS AND

SQUIERS A 9-VOLT BATTERY, WHO

ARE PRACTICING THIS ON THEIR OWN

AT HOME AND BELIEVE -- THIS IS

NOT EXACTLY RANDOMIZED CLINICAL

TRIALS, BUT THEY BELIEVE THEY

ARE GETTING IMPROVEMENTS IN

MOOD, COGNITION AND SO FORTH.

FINALLY JUST BEFORE LEAVING

BRAIN STIMULATION, OBVIOUSLY IN

DEEP BRAIN STIMULATION, IT'S NOT

GOING TO BE USED FOR ENHANCEMENT

ANY TIME SOON.

BUT, THE PATHWAY ALONG WHICH WE

CAN EXPECT THIS TO HAPPEN IS

GOING TO BE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING

IMPLANTED FOR SOME BONA FIDE

MEDICAL REASON WHO SAY, LOOK, IF

YOU CAN ALSO PUT A CONTACT HERE,

HELP MODULATE THIS OR THAT, DEEP

BRAIN STIMULATION HAS MANY

PERSONALITY, MOOD, COGNITIVE

EFFECTS, TYPICALLY CLASSIFIED AS

SIDE EFFECTS FOR THE TIME BEING.

CERTAINLY A SIDE EFFECT IF

YOU'RE TREATING A MOTOR

DISORDER.

BUT HERE IS A LITTLE EXCERPT

FROM THE TESTIMONY OF A PATIENT

OPERATED ON BY REESE COSGROVE

FROM HIS TESTIMONY TO THE BUSH'S

BIOETHICS COMMISSION THAT GIVES

YOU A SENSE OF HOW NOT FAR OUT

THE IDEA THAT WE COULD USE THIS

KIND OF TECHNOLOGY FOR

ENHANCEMENT.

YOU KNOW WHAT?

I WON'T OR MAYBE I WILL READ IT

OUT LOUD.

I'M TOLD PEOPLE ARE LISTENING TO

THIS ON A PODCAST.

WHEN I'M AT HOME, DOING MY

REGULAR THINGS, I'D PREFER TO

HAVE CONTACT TWO, BUT IF I'M

GOING OUT FOR A PARTY WHERE I

HAVE TO BE AND, YOU KNOW, I'M

GOING TO DO A LOT OF

SOCIALIZING, I'D PREFER CONTACT

4 BECAUSE IT MAKES ME REVVED UP

AND MORE ARTICULATE AND MORE

CREATIVE.

AND THIS IS NOT A UNIQUE

OBSERVATION.

SO THERE IS THE POTENTIAL TO USE

THIS KIND OF MEDICAL DEVICE FOR

ENHANCEMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH

THERAPY FOR NOW.

AND OF COURSE WE HAVE PEOPLE

WORKING ON WAYS OF DOING DEEP

BRAIN STIMULATION,

NONINVASIVELY, IF YOU CAN

BELIEVE THAT, USING ULTRASOUND.

SO NOW THE QUESTION I HAVE TO

POSE, I'M GOING TO POSE IT

BECAUSE PROBABLY SOME OF YOU ARE

ALREADY POSING IT IN YOUR OWN

MIND.

IS THIS JUST LIKE SCIENCE

FICTION?

OR IS THIS TRINK?

YES, YOU CAN FIND NUT CASES ON

LINE

PUTTING -- FRINGE -- PUTTING

ELECTRODES ON THEIR SCALPS AND

YES, THERE ARE A FEW COLLEGE

STUDENTS TRADING ADD ROLE.

AND EVERYBODY'S HAS THEIR DRUGGY

THINGS IN COLLEGE, BUT THIS IS

NOT EXACTLY A NEW SOCIAL

PHENOMENON.

I DON'T THINK SO.

JUST THE NUMBERS SUCH THAT WE

HAVE THEM SAY IT'S NOT TRUE.

AND HERE IS ONE INDICATION OF

THE FACT THAT THIS REALLY IS

ENTERING THE MAINSTREAM,

ENTERING THE WAY WE LIVE OUR

LIVES AND THINK ABOUT OUR LIVES.

THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF

NEUROLOGY, A FEW YEARS AGO,

ASKED THEIR COMMITTEE ON ETHICS

TO CONSIDER WHETHER THERE WAS

ANY LEGAL OR ETHICAL REASON FOR

A NEUROLOGIST NOT TO PROVIDE

COGNITIVE ENHANCEMENT MEDICATION

TO A PATIENT TO A NORMAL,

HEALTHY PATIENT, WHO COMES TO

THEM ASKING FOR IT.

AND THEIR CONCLUSION WAS, IN A

WORD, NO.

NO REASON NOT TO.

IF THE PERSON IS A COMPETENT

ADULT, THEN USE YOUR MEDICAL

JUDGMENT AND GO FORWARD THE.

THEY ARE TAKING THE NEXT STEP,

WHICH IS DRAWING A PRACTICE

GUIDELINES TO ACTUALLY HELP

NEUROLOGISTS KNOW WHAT IS WORTH

PRESCRIBING, TO WHOM UNDER WHAT

CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THE GOAL OF

ACHIEVING WHAT OUTCOME.

I'M ON THAT COMMITTEE THAT IS

TRYING TO DRAW THESE PRACTICE

GUIDELINES, READING MOUNTAINS

AND MOUNTAINS OF PAPERS.

BUT I HAVE TO SAY, I NEVER

THOUGHT I WOULD SEE THE DAY THAT

A PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION

WOULD BE GEARING UP TO

ESSENTIALLY PRACTICE COSMETIC

NEUROLOGY, THE SAME WAY THAT

PLASTIC SURGEONS, SOME OF THEM

PRACTICE COSMETIC SURGERY.

BUT, I THINK THIS IS NOT A SORT

OF FLAKY, FRINGY, ABARENT DATA

POINT.

THIS IS REALLY WHERE THE SOCIETY

IS GOING.

FOR BETTER OR WORSE.

WE'LL TALK ABOUT WHICH OF THOSE

IT MAY BE OR A COMBINATION,

LATER.

THIS IS WHAT I WANTED TO EXPOSE

YOU TO ON THE BRAIN ENHANCEMENT

PART OF THE TALK.

LET ME SPEAK ABOUT BRAIN IMAGE

COMING I AM SURE YOU HAVE BEEN

EXPOSED TO IN NIH.

SO YOU HAVE A SENSE OF SOME OF

THE WONDERFUL THINGS THAT BRAIN

IMAGING CAN DO, PARTICULARLY

WHEN COMBINED WITH SOME OF THE

PATTERN CLASSIFIERS THAT PEOPLE

NOW USE TO LOOK FOR CORRELATES

AND PREDICTORS IN PATTERNS OF

BRAIN ACTIVATION OR BRAIN

STRUCTURE.

I'M GOING TO JUST GIVE YOU THREE

EXAMPLES OF NON-MEDICAL USES OF

BRAIN IMAGING.

FROM BASIC RESEARCH ON MEDICINE

TO MARKETING.

SO THIS IS FROM THE WEBSITE OF

FKF APPLIED RESEARCH, THE LEADER

IN NEUROMARKETTING.

WE LOOK BEYOND THE SPOKEN WORD

TO PROVIDE IMMENSE AND

ACTIONABLE INSIGHTS INTO A

BRAND, AN ADVERTISEMENT OR A

COMPETITIVE FRAMEWORK.

FIND OUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN

WHAT CONSUMERS SAY AND WHAT THEY

ARE REALLY THINKING.

THIS IDEA OF LOOKING INSIDE THE

BRAIN AND FINDING OUT WHAT

PEOPLE ARE REALLY THINKING,

MOTIVATES THE COMMERCIAL USES OF

BRAIN IMAGING.

THERE ARE -- I SHOULD HAVE

REFRESHED MY MEMORY AS TO THE

NUMBER OF COMPANIES OFFERING

NEUROIMAGING, BUT IT'S A SUB

SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER.

AND THE UNBELIEVABLE OF

COMPANIES USING THE SERVICES OF

NEUROMARKETTING FIRMS ALSO

SUBSTANTIAL.

AND INCLUDES MANY BIG NAMES,

PEPSI COLA, VOLKSWAGEN, MANY

FORTUNE 500 COMPANIES RATHER

THAN TELL YOU THE WRONG

ONES -- MANY FORTUNE 500

COMPANIES.

YOU CAN LOOK ONLINE AND FIND THE

SPECIFICS.

THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO WROTE

THE MEMORABLE NEW YORK TIMES

SUNDAY OP ED PIECE A FEW YEARS

AGO NOW CLAIMING THAT THEY COULD

ANALYZE THE REACTIONS OF VOTERS

TO PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES IN

EACH PARTY PRIOR TO THE 2008

ELECTIONS.

AND IT WAS KIND OF AN ATROCIOUS

PIECE OF STORY TELLING, LIKE THE

INTERIOR CINGULATE LIGHTS UP

WHEN PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT

HILLARY CLINTON.

WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE

INTERIOR CINGULATE?

IT'S ACTIVE IN COGNITIVE

CONFLICT.

THEREFORE VOTERS FEEL CONFLICTED

ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON.

I MEAN, REALLY STUPID

INTERPRETATION.

HOWEVER, LET ME SAY THAT WHEN

NEUROMARKETTERS DON'T TRY TO GO

QUITE SO FAR AFIELD FROM WHAT

THEIR METHODS CAN TELL THEM,

THEY SEEM TO BE FAIRLY OR SEEM

TO HAVE THEIR HANDS ON A FAIRLY

POWERFUL TOOL FOR BASICALLY JUST

GAUGING HOW MUCH WANTING AND

LIKING A GIVEN PRODUCT OR

PACKAGING OR ADVERTISING

CAMPAIGN AROUSES IN PEOPLE.

SO, NEUROMARKETTING IS ONE

NON-MEDICAL USE THAT SOME PEOPLE

FIND SOCIALLY UNDESIRABLE

BECAUSE OF -- WE CAN TALK ABOUT

WHY THEY MIGHT FIND IT THAT WAY,

LATER.

THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT HAS

ACTUALLY PUT A BAND ON USING

BRAIN IMAGING FOR NONMEDICAL

APPLICATIONS LIKE THIS, REACTING

TO THAT KIND OF NEGATIVE

REACTION.

HERE IS ANOTHER APPLICATION

BRAIN IMAGING THAT IS INTRIGUING

AND AGAIN, PLAYOS THIS IDEA THAT

YOU KNOW, MEASURING BRAIN

FUNCTION IS SOMEHOW VERY

OBJECTIVE AND YOU CAN REALLY

FIND OUT WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON

IN SOMEBODY'S MIND BY LOOKING AT

THEIR BRAIN SCAN.

THIS IS THE WEBSITE OF A COMPANY

WHICH OFFERS FMRI LIE DETECTION.

THERE IS ANOTHER COMPANY IN THIS

PART OF THE MARKET ALSO CALLED,

NO LIE MRI.

AND THEY BOTH ARE MAKING USE OF

SCANNING FMRI SCANNING PARADIGMS

THAT SHOW DIFFERENCES IN THE LAB

BETWEEN WHEN SUBJECTS ARE

TELLING THE TRUTH AND WHEN THEY

ARE LYING AND THEY HAVE

ATTEMPTED TO ADAPT THOSE

SCANNING PARADIGMS TO MAKE A

MORE ECK LOGICALLY VALID AND

USEFUL DEVICE FOR TELLING

WHETHER SOMEBODY IS TELLING THE

TRUTH OR NOT.

THEY ARE MAINLY USED IN SORT OF

PERSONAL ISSUES LIKE HONEY, I

WAS REALLY WORKING LATE AFTER

WORK AND I'LL TAKE A BRAIN SCAN

TO PROVE IT.

THERE HAVE BEEN ATTEMPTS TO GET

THESE TECHNOLOGIES ADMITTED AS

EVIDENCE IN COURTS IN THE U.S.

SO FAR, THEY HAVEN'T SUCCEEDED

BUT THEY ARE STILL TRYING.

AND WE WERE TALKING EARLIER

TODAY, SOME OF US ABOUT A

HEARING WHERE CEPHOS WAS

TESTIFYING ABOUT THE

ADMISSIBILITY OF THEIR METHOD IN

FEDERAL COURT.

IT HASN'T HAPPENED YET BUT

ESSENTIALLY THE JUDGE IN THAT

CASE KIND OF LAID OUT, HERE IS

YOU WHAT NEED TO DO IF YOU WANT

TO DO THIS.

AND CLEARLY THEY ARE HARD AT

WORK TRYING TO MEET THOSE

CRITERIA.

ANOTHER AREA WHERE BRAIN IMAGING

SEEMS TO HAVE POTENTIAL IS IN

EDUCATION.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE FROM THE WORK

OF PHARMACOHEFT AND COLLEAGUES

AT STANFORD SHOWING THAT YOU CAN

SCAN CHILDREN IN TASKS INVOLVING

FARM LOGICAL PROCESSING,

AWARENESS, AND THEN YOU CAN

PREDICT WHO IS GOING TO BE

READING FLUENTLY VERSUS STILL

HAVING TROUBLE READING SOMETIME

LATER OR PERHAPS 6 MONTHS OR A

YEAR

LATER.

YOU CAN STILL GET SUBSTANTIAL

IMPROVEMENT IN FIGURING OUT WHO

IS READY TO CRACK THAT CODE,

THAT READING CODE, BY

INCORPORATING STRUCTURAL AND

FUNCTIONAL NEUROIMAGING.

THAT IS YET ANOTHER APPLICATION.

FINALLY THE NEUROSCIENCE WORLD.

I THINK IT'S WELL SUMMED UP BY

FRANCIS CRICK IN HIS BOOK, THE

ASTONISHING HYPOTHESES.

IT SAYS, YOU, YOUR JOYCE AND

SORROWS AND YOUR MEMORIES AND

AMBITIONS AND SENSE OF PERSONAL

IDENTITY AND FREE WILL, ARE IN

FACT NO MORE THAN THE BEHAVIOR

OF A VAST ASSEMBLY OF NERVE

CELLS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED

MOLECULES.

NOW, I THINK THE ISSUE HERE IS

WE, WHEN WE ARE WORKING AS

NEUROSCIENTISTS, THOSE OF US WHO

ARE, MOST OF US, NOT ALL, BUT

MOST OF US ARE INCLINED TO

BELIEVE THAT PRETTY MUCH THIS

THREE POUND ORGAN IS ALL THERE

IS.

BUT, INTUITIVELY, WHEN WE ARE

NOT SORT OF CAREFULLY

POSITIONING OURSELVES IN THE

SCIENTIFIC FRAMEWORK,ITUTIVELY,

MOST OF US ARE DUALISTS AND

THINK THERE IS SOMETHING MORE TO

A PERSON THAN THE PHYSICAL STUFF

THAT YOU CAN TOUCH AND WEIGH AND

POINT TO.

THAT GETS HARDER AND HARDER TO

MAINTAIN AS NEUROSCIENCE SHOWS

THE NEURAL SUBSTRATES OF MORE

AND MORE OF OUR HUMAN

ATTRIBUTES.

SO, I GUESS I FIND MYSELF DIVING

IN HERE IN DUALISM.

LET ME JUST START THERE.

BACK IN THE DAY, LATE 20th

CENTURY, WHERE THE ONLY ASPECTS

OF HUMAN PSYCHOLOGY WHERE WE

REALLY HAD KIND OF WELL WORKED

OUT MODELS OF HOW THE BRAIN DID

STUFF, DID PSYCHOLOGICAL STUFF,

WAS YOU KNOW, COLOR VISION,

MOTOR CONTROL, SORT OF THINGS

THAT WERE PRETTY CLOSE TO THE

INSULTS AND OUTPUTS WHAT HAVE A

BRAIN DOES  --

INPUTS AND OUT PUTS.

YOU CAN STILL BELIEVE IN THE

GHOST AND THE MACHINE AND YOU

COULD JUST SAY, OKAY, LOOK, THE

GHOST DOESN'T DO COLOR VISION OR

MOTOR CONTROL.

THAT'S PART OF THE MACHINE THERE

FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE

GHOST.

BUT NOW, AS NEUROSCIENCE SHOWS

US NEUROCORLE ATS OF MATERNAL

LOVE FOR CHILDREN, MATHEMATICAL

REASON, LOGIC, MORAL REASONING,

EMPATHY, THE THINGS THAT WE

THINK OF AS REALLY WHAT WE, AS

PERSONS, DO, IT'S HARDER TO SAY

OKAY, THOSE THINGS ARE PART OF

THE MACHINE FOR THE SAKE OF THE

GHOST BECAUSE WHAT IS THE GHOST

DOING AT THIS POINT?

WHY HAVE A GHOST AT ALL?

IT'S AN RAISER KIND OF ARGUMENT.

AND OF COURSE YOU COULD SAY THAT

IS JUST BRAIN IMAGING OR

CORRELATION DOESN'T EQUAL

CAUSATION.

BUT IF YOU GET LESIONS IN THOSE

SAME PARTS OF THE BRAIN, YOU NO

LONGER DO THE MORAL REASONING OR

HAVE THE EMPATHY.

OKAY?

SO IT REALLY DOES SEEM LIKE

THOSE BRAIN SYSTEMS ARE BOTH

NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT FOR

THESE PROCESSES.

SO THAT SORT OF RAISES THE

QUESTION OF, IS THERE ANY PLACE

FOR THE IMMATERIAL PART OF A

PERSON WHO AS AGAIN, I SAY WE

TEND TO SORT OF INTUITIVELY

THINK OF EACH OTHER THAT WAY.

PERSON HOOD, JUST POPPING UP ON

THE LIST FOR A MINUTE, I THINK

PLAYS AN INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT

ROLE IN MANY ASPECTS OF

BIOETHICS AND POLITICAL

PHILOSOPHY AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

BASICALLY THE IDEA OF A PERSON

IS THAT IT IS A QUALITATIVELY

DIFFERENT KIND OF CATEGORY OF

THING FROM THE OTHER THINGS IN

THE WORLD.

WE ARE NOT JUST EXTRA SMART

ANIMALS.

WE ARE NOT JUST EXTRA KIND OF

WARM, ORGANIC BRICES, COMPLEX

COMPUTING DEVICES.

WE TEND TO INTUITIVELY THINK OF

EACH OTHER AS QUALITATIVELY

DIFFERENT KIND OF THING IN THE

MEAT PHYSICS IN THE WORLD.

THE MANUAL CONT SAID,

FUNDAMENTAL MORAL DISTINCTION,

YOU CAN USE THINGS TO ACHIEVE

YOUR ULTIMATE MEANS, BUT YOU

CAN'T USE PERSONS TO, AS MEANS

TO AN END.

PERSONS HAVE TO BE ENDS IN

THEMSELVES.

BUT YOU KNOW WHAT?

IF EVERYTHING WE ARE IS

BASICALLY JUST THIS ORGAN

FUNCTIONING, THEN THERE IS NO

QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCE BECAUSE

THERE THERE IS NO QUALITATIVE

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS OBJECT

AND, YOU KNOW, THAT OBJECT IN A

MONKEY OR THAT OBJECT IN A

HUMAN-ANIMAL, NEURAL CHIMERA OR

DESIGN YOUR OWN SLIPPERY SLOPE,

BUT IT BECOMES A MATTER OF

GEDDATION, NO LONGER A MATTER OF

A QUALITATIVE DIFFERENT

CATEGORY.

I THINK IN THE INTEREST OF TIME,

I'M GOING TO JUST TOUCH VERY

QUICKLY ON RELIGION AND SAY

THAT, ALTHOUGH RELIGONS DON'T

ALL INCLUDE A BELIEF IN AN

IMMATERIAL SOUL, MOST DO.

AND SO TO THE EXTENT THAT

NEUROSCIENCE SEEMS TO BE

CROWDING OUT THE SOUL, SORT OF

SAYING, LOOK, RATIONALLY WHY

WOULD YOU BELIEVE IN THIS?

THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE

FROM THIS.

WE HAVE MORE AND MORE

AFFIRMATIVE EVIDENCE THAT THE

PHYSICAL BODY DOES IT ALL, THEN

THAT POSES A CHALLENGE.

WHY WOULD YOU BELIEVE IN AN

IMMATERIAL SOUL?

IN THAT CASE WHY WOULD YOU

BELIEVE IN SURVIVAL AFTER DEATH?

AND SO FORTH.

I THINK COMPARED TO THE SORT OF

EVOLUTION WARS, WHICH I REALIZE

STILL RAGE ON IN SOME CONTEXTS,

THIS IS MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE A

POINT OF CONFLICT BETWEEN MANY,

MANY RELIGONS AND NEUROSCIENCE

THAN NATURAL SELECTION.

AND FINALLY, MORAL AND LEGAL

RESPONSIBILITY.

IN ADDITION TO BRAIN SCANS, TO

TELL YOU WHETHER YOU'RE LYING OR

NOT, THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS ARE

INCREASINGLY RELYING ON BRAIN

SCANS TO SHOW THAT THEIR CLIENTS

HAVE SORT OF SOMETHING WRONG OR

EVEN JUST SOMETHING DIFFERENT

ABOUT THEIR BRAINS.

SO IT'S LIKE, MY BRAIN MADE ME

DO IT.

RIGHT?

WELL, NOT ONLY PEOPLE WITH BIG

COOLERS IN THE BRAIN OR BIG

HOLES, CAN CLAIM THEIR BRAIN

MADE THEM DO IT.

I MEAN, EVERYTHING, ANY OF US

DO, IS A RESULT OF BRAIN

FUNCTION.

AND OUR BRAINS CAME TO FUNCTION

THAT WAY AS A RESULT OF THE GENE

THAT IS WE STARTED WITH AND THE

EXPERIENCES WE HAVE ENCOUNTERED.

AND WE DIDN'T ASK FOR THOSE

GENES AND WE DIDN'T ASK FOR

THOSE EXPERIENCES.

AND SO, HOW CAN YOU HOLD

SOMEBODY ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHAT

THE PHYSICAL LAWS OF THE

UNIVERSE REQUIRE THEM TO DO?

YOU CAN'T ASK SOMEBODY TO DEFY

THE LAWS OF PHYSICS.

SO, THIS POTENTIALLY CAN

UNDERMINE CERTAINLY OUR MOST OR

OUR SIMPLEST IN TUITION BUSY

MORAL RESPONSIBILITY AND LEGAL

RESPONSIBILITY, THOSE BASED ON

FREE WILL.

I WANT TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE

ELSIs.

SOMETIMES REFERRED TO AS

NEUROETHICS.

THERE ARE A BUNCH OF THESE UP

HERE WHICH, AS YOU CAN SEE,

THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF MATERIAL

THERE.

AND I'M NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT

ANY OF THEM.

THEY HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED TO

DEATH PRETTY MUCH IN THE

NEUROETHICS LITERATURE.

I'M GUILTY IN PART OF ADDING TO

THAT CIRCUIT OF WRITINGS.

I THINK THERE ARE PLENTY OF OPEN

QUESTIONS HERE AND I DON'T WANT

FEEL IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO LIST

THEM RIGHT NOW.

LET ME TALK ABOUT WHAT I WOULD

CALL NEW CHALLENGES FOR

NEUROSCIENCE IN THE 21st

CENTURY.

THEY ARE PRETTY SIMPLE.

THE FIRST IS JUST NEUROSCIENCE

LITERACY OR NEUROLITERACY FOR

THE NEUROCENTURY, 21st

CENTURY, WE ARE INCREASINGLY

GOING TO BE OFFERED TECHNOLOGIES

TO CHANGE OUR BRAINS OFFERED

INFORMATION FROM BRAIN SCIENCE

TECHNOLOGY TO MAKE DECISIONS

ABOUT OUR LIVES, OUR KID'S

EDUCATION, WHATEVER.

HOWEVER BAD YOU THINK THE STATE

OF SCIENCE LITERACY IS IN THIS

COUNTRY, NEUROSCIENCE LITERACY

IS EVEN WORSE.

I RECENTLY LOOKED AT THE

CURRICULUM FOR ADVANCED

PLACEMENT BIOLOGY NEURO SCIENCE

IS NOT IN THERE AT ALL.

STUDENTS ARE NOT GETTING TAUGHT

NEUROSCIENCE AND AS

DEBMENTIONED, ONE OF THE THINGS

I'M WORKING ON IN COLLABORATION

WITH THE FRANKLIN INSTITUTE IN

PHILLY, IS SUPER AMBITIOUS K-12

PROGRAM OF NEUROSCIENCE

EDUCATION WHICH IS GOING TO

INCLUDE HIGH SCHOOL COURSES THAT

WE HOPE EVENTUALLY TO

DISSEMINATE OUT TO THE WHOLE

COUNTRY.

INCREASE PEOPLE'S UNDERSTANDING

OF THE BRAIN AND OF WHAT BRAIN

SCIENCE CAN AND CAN'T DO FOR US.

I MEAN, EVEN CORRECTING

MISCONCEPTIONS LIKE IF YOU SEE

IT IN THE BRAIN, IT MUST BE

GENETIC.

IT MUST BE HARD WIRED.

HUGE AREA OF NEUROSCIENCE IS

BRAIN PLASTICITY AND HOW THE

BRAIN CHANGES IN RESPONSE TO

EXPERIENCE.

THERE IS A LOT OF WORK TO BE

DONE THERE.

OWNERSHIP.

THE WAY IN WHICH NEUROSCIENCE

RESEARCH HAS BEEN SUPPORTED

UNTIL RECENTLY, UNTIL THIS

NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH CAME ABOUT

HAS BEEN FROM TWO KINDS OF

SOURCES, THREE KINDS OF SOURCES.

SO WE HAD BASIC SCIENCE FUNDING

FROM PLACES LIKE THE NSF AND

NIH, WE HAD HEALTH SCIENCE

RELATED FUNDING.

AND THEN WE HAD PRIVATE

PROPRIETARY FUNDING BY DRUG

COMPANIES AND THE LIKE.

JUST THINK ABOUT HOW WELL THAT

PRIVATE FUNDING -- HOW EFFECTIVE

THEY ARE AND HOW SAFE THEY

REALLY ARE.

THINK ABOUT HOW WELL THAT WORKED

IN TERMS OF DEVELOPING PRODUCTS

THAT ARE REALLY NEEDED.

PRODUCTS THAT WILL BE PROFITABLE

FOR INDUSTRY.

THE NEXT DRUG WITH THE BIG

ADCAMPAIGN AS OPPOSED TO

DEVELOPING A NEW DRUG OR TO

TREAT A NEW CONDITION OR TREAT A

CONDITION BETTER.

TO APPROXIMATION, ALL PRIVATE

FUNDING.

SO, YOU KNOW, NO LIE MRI ARE THE

ONES THAT ARE DEVELOPING

BRAIN-BASED LIE DETECTION.

TRANSPARENTS SEHARD TO FIND OUT

HOW USEFUL THESE THINGS ARE.

I E-MAILED THE CEO OF CEPHO.

AND SAID, YOU SAID ON YOUR SITE

YOU HAVE 90% ACCURACY.

CAN YOU SHARE THOSE DATA WITH

ME?

HIS WORD WAS, IT WAS NOT EACH

APPROVED.

TO JUST THINK THAT IT'S REALLY

IMPORTANT TO HAVE PUBLIC, AT

LEAST PARTLY PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF

SOME OF THESE NEW NON-MEDICAL

NEUROSCIENCE APPLICATIONS FOR

OUR SAKE.

IF WE WANT TO REALLY KNOW, DO

THEY WORK OR NOT?

IF WE WANT TO KNOW DO THEY HAVE

SIDE EFFECTS OR NOT.

AND IF WE REALLY WANT THE THINGS

THAT ARE MOST VALUABLE TO BE

DEVELOPED AS OPPOSED TO THE

THINGS THAT YOU KNOW, ARE MOST

PROFITABLE FOR THE INDUSTRY,

APPEAL TO OUR STUPIDITY LIKE SIX

DIFFERENT SCREENS GOING ON AT

ONCE.

THAT'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE.

OKAY.

SO THAT IS MY APPEAL FOR

THINKING ABOUT HOW THIS NEW

REALM OF NEUROSCIENCE RESEARCH

AND DEVELOPMENT IS FUNDED.

AND FINALLY, THE LAST THING IS,

AVOIDING ANNIHILISM.

AND YOU KNOW, STEVEN WEINBERG,

THE PHYSICIST AT HARVARD, WROTE

IN HIS BOOK, THE FIRST THREE

MINUTES, HE SAID "THE MORE THE

UNIVERSE SEEMS UNDERSTANDABLE,

THE MORE IT SEEMS POINTLESS."

AND I THINK IF THAT IS TRUE FOR

PHYSICS, IT'S MORE TRUE FOR

NEUROSCIENCE.

I MEAN, IF WE ARE JUST THAT

BRAIN WITH A THOUGHT BUBBLE,

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES ANYTHING

MAKE?

RIGHT?

I THINK YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T HAVE

TO BE A TOTALLY OUT OF TOUCH

PHILOSOPHER TO BE DISTURBED BY

THIS.

HERE IS A FACTOID.

SOME RESEARCHERS PUBLISHED IN

PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, A PLUG

FOR ASSOCIATION FOR

PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE.

AND FOUND IF PEOPLE READ THAT

QUOTE I SHOWED YOU EARLIER FROM

FRANCIS CRICK, VERSUS PEOPLE WHO

READ SOME OTHER QUOTE ABOUT

SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO

DO WITH BRAINS AND NEURONS AND

PERSONAL IDENTITY, AND YOU THEN,

IN A SEEMINGLY UNRELATED

EXPERIMENT, SAY OKAY, NOW COME

INTO THIS ROOM, DO THIS COMPUTER

ICED TASK, REPORT TO

US -- COMPUTERIZED TASK AND

REPORT TO US THE ACCURACY OF

YOUR PERFORMANCE AND WE'LL PAY

YOU ACCORDINGLY.

WHEN PEOPLE WERE PRIMED WITH THE

NOTION THAT THEY ARE JUST

NEURONS AND DON'T HAVE FREE WILL

OR VOLITION OR THERE IS NOTHING

ELSE, THEY WERE MORE LIKELY TO

CHEAT.

SO, I THINK IT'S NOT

INCONSEQUENTIAL WHETHER THIS

NEUROSCIENCE VIEW -- LET ME SAY,

I THINK WE NEED TO THINK PRETTY

HARD ABOUT HOW TO ASSIMILATE

THIS NEUROSCIENCE WORLD VIEW

WITHOUT REALLY BECOMING

ANNIHILLISTIC AND WITHOUT

LETTING IT JUSTIFY IN OURSELVES

OR IN OUR JUDGMENTS OF OTHERS, A

SORT OF STANDARDS OF CONDUCT

THAT WOULD NOT BE GOOD FOR

HUMANITY.

SO WITH THAT, I WILL END HERE.

I'LL SAY CHECK OUT OUR WEBSITE

IF YOU'RE INTERESTED ON LEARNING

MORE AND I WANT TO THANK YOU

VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PATIENCE.

[ APPLAUSE ]

NOW DO I TAKE QUESTIONS?

YES, QUESTIONS.

NOBODY HAS A QUESTION?

THE QUESTION IS, WHEN DOES THAT

RECEPTION START.

OKAY.

YOU KNOW WHAT -- THERE IS A

QUESTION, THANK YOU.

>> SO, LET ME JUST SAY SOMETHING

THIS WAY.

I THINK YOU CONFLATED THE

DESIRABILITY OF AVOIDING THE

RECOGNITION THAT YOU MIGHT NOT

HAVE FREE WILL WITH WHETHER IT

EXISTS OR NOT.

THAT IS, EVERYTHING YOU SAY

ABOUT THE NEURAL BASIS AND

CHEMICAL BASIS FOR BEHAVIOR CAN

BE CORRECT, BUT IT MAY ALSO BE

TRUE SO IS LOGICALLY THAT'S NOT

IDEAL FOR INFORMING PEOPLE'S

BEHAVIOR -- SO IS

LOGICALLY -- PRECISELY BECAUSE

THE WIRING CAUSES THE PROBLEMS

AS YOU TALK ABOUT.

AS A SCIENTIST ASKING THAT

QUESTION CAN'T BE BASED ON

DESIRABILITY OF THE ALTERNATIVE

SOLUTION.

AND I SEE A BIT OF THAT IN THE

WAY YOU PRESENT TODAY AND IT

GOES BACK TO CLASSES I TOOK IN

1970 WHERE I HAD THIS ARGUMENT

WITH MY PROFESSOR AND HE

DOWNGRADED MY PATIENCE PAPERS

WHEN HE SAID THERE IS NO FREE

WILL.

SO THIS IS A LONGSTANDING

ARGUMENT, GOES WAY BACK BEFORE

THIS PRESENT DISCUSSION OR ALL

THE DRUGS.

AND THERE REALLY IS A DIFFERENCE

BETWEEN WHAT WE HOPE IS TRUE AND

WHAT DISCOVERY MIGHT REVEAL IS

THE TRUTH.

>> OKAY.

LET ME ADDRESS THAT AND CLARIFY

WHAT I WAS SAYING.

FIRST OF ALL, I SUSPECT YOU'RE

RIGHT.

I THINK YOU'RE POINTING TOWARDS

AN EVOLUTIONARY ACCOUNT OF WHY

WE WOULD HAVE THESE BELIEFS IN

FREE WILL AND PERSON HOOD AND

IMMA MATERIAL SOULS AND ALL THE

REST, THAT PROBABLY HAVING THESE

BELIEFS LEADS US TO BEHAVE IN

WAYS THAT ULTIMATELY MAKE FOR

MORE OF OUR DNA AND SIMILAR DNA.

BUT, WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT, AS

NEUROSCIENCE MAKES THIS PROGRESS

AND AS THIS PROGRESS IS TAKEN UP

IN PEOPLE'S SORT OF BACKGROUND,

CULTURAL KNOWLEDGE, READING THE

"NEW YORK TIMES" SCIENCE

SECTION, YOU KNOW, READING OR

ENCOUNTERED IN OTHER WAYS,

HEARING ABOUT DEFENSE ARGUMENTS

WHERE THE PERSON IS CLAIMING

THAT THEIR CLIENT'S BRAIN MADE

THEM DO IT.

AS THIS IDEA THAT WE ARE JUST,

YOU KNOW, VERY FANCY

COMPUTATIONAL NETWORKS, TAKES

HOLD AND BECOMES PART OF OUR

COMMON SENSE UNDERSTANDING OF

THE WORLD, THEN THAT STANDS TO

UNDERMINE OR ERODE THE

RESPONSIBLE BEHAVIOR.

NOW WOULD YOU DISAGREE WITH

THAT?

>> NO, THAT'S ACTUALLY WHAT I

SAID.

BUT THE PROBLEM IS, THAT'S LIKE

SAYING, IT'S BETTER FOR HOW YOU

BEHAVE IN CHURCH ON SUNDAY TO

BELIEVE, NOT BELIEVE IN

EVOLUTION BECAUSE THEN YOU CAN

PAY ATTENTION TO THE BIBLE

CORRECTLY, THEREFORE WE WILL

PRESUME THAT EVOLUTION DIDN'T

EXIST.

AND I THINK THAT IS A VERY

DANGEROUS ARGUMENT TO MAKE ON

THAT BASIS.

AND SO THERE IS THE SOCIETAL

BENEFIT OF BEING, IF YOU WANT

DELUSIONAL ABOUT HOW WE REALLY

BEHAVE, AND HOW YOU THINK ABOUT

IT FROM A SCIENTIFIC STANDPOINT.

I'M AFRAID OF CONFLATING THOSE

THINGS.

>> AGREED.

BUT THE QUESTION THEN REMAINS,

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT

INFORMING SOCIETY, HELPING

PEOPLE THINK ABOUT WHAT A PERSON

IS?

I MEAN, IS THERE SOME VERSION OF

WHAT PHILOSOPHERS CALL

COMPATIBLISM THAT WE CAN ACCEPT

OURSELVES AND ENCOURAGE OUR

FELLOW CITIZEN TO ACCEPT?

I MEAN, I'LL JUST LEAVE THAT

QUESTION THERE.

>> ONE SIZE DOESN'T FIT ALL.

THERE IS A SEGMENT OF SOCIETY

THEY ACTUALLY KEPT FUNCTION WELL

IF THEY HAVE TO ACCEPT EVOLUTION

AND NOT THE BIBLICAL ORIGIN OF

MAN.

AND THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO

ARE PERFECTLY HAPPY GOING ABOUT

THEIR BUSINESS WITHOUT BEING

IMPACTED BY THINKING THAT

EVOLUTION OCCURRED IN THE WAY

THAT MANY SCIENTISTS BELIEVE IT

DID.

AND I THINK THAT THERE WILL BE

THAT DIVIDE IN THE LARGER

POPULATION FROM A NEUROSCIENCE

BASIS AND ANY QUESTIONS, WHAT IS

THE OVERALL BALANCE TO SOCIETY

AND HOW THAT COMES OUT.

AND THAT'S LIKE THINKING ABOUT

WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE

NEXT ELECTION.

>> OKAY.

>> I'M NOT GOING TO TOUCH THAT.

[ LAUGHTER ]

I HAVE A DIFFERENT KIND OF

QUESTION.

AS YOU WERE TALKING, IT STRUCK

ME THAT ROGER CLEMENS, THE

BASEBALL PLAYER IS CURRENTLY ON

TRIAL YET AGAIN FOR USING

PERFORMANCE-ENHANCING DRUGS FOR

BASEBALL AND LYING ABOUT IT.

AND SO, IN ATHLETICS, THAT'S A

CRIME TO ENHANCE YOUR

PERFORMANCE, MAYBE QUOTE

ARTIFICIALLY, AND YET THE

ACADEMY FOR NEUROLOGY IS

DEVELOPING GUIDELINES ON HOW TO

DO THAT FOR COGNITIVE

PERFORMANCE OR OTHER KINDS OF

QUOTE, BRAIN PERFORMANCES.

CAN YOU COMMENT ON THAT?

AND ALSO THINGS LIKE EXERCISE,

WHICH AT LEAST IN ANIMALS, HAS

BEEN SHOWN TO STIMULATE

NEUROJENIS AND HAVE A LOT OF

OTHER HEALTHY EFFECTS.

I MEAN, IS THAT JUST ANOTHER

DRUG?

WOULD THAT BE OKAY?

>> OH, GOSH.

YOU ASKED TWO OF MY FAVORITE

QUESTIONS.

SO I'M GOING ANSWER THEM BOTH.

FIRST OF ALL, THE CONTRAST WITH

PERFORMANCE-ENHANCING DRUGS AND

SPORTS.

IN A SPORTS COMPETITION, THE

GOAL IS TO SEE WHO IS BETTER AND

THE RULE IS THAT YOU'RE SEEING

WHO IS BETTER WITHOUT EXTRA

SUBSTANCES, INCREASING STRENGTH

OR CARDIOVASCULAR CAPACITY OR

WHATEVER.

IN MOST REAL WORLD CONTEXTS,

COGNITIVE ENHANCEMENT IS EITHER

NOT HELPING IN A COMPETITION OR

IT'S NOT ONLY HELPING IN A

COMPETITION.

BUT IT IS ARGUABLY -- ASSUMING

IT WORKS, AND WE'LL GET TO THAT

IN A SECOND -- IT'S HELP PEOPLE

LEARN MORE.

IT'S HELPING THE SURGEON ON

NIGHT CALL FOCUS AND BE ALERT

AND DO A BETTER OPERATION.

SO, FOR A COGNITIVE ENHANCEMENT,

THERE ARE GOALS OTHER THAN JUST

TRYING TO PROOF WHO IS BEST.

CLEARLY THERE ARE COMPETITIVE

SITUATIONS AND DUKE UNIVERSITY

AND I THINK SOME OTHER

UNIVERSITIES NOW TOO HAVE AS

PART OF THEIR HONOR CODE THAT

YOU WILL NOT USE ADDER AND WILL

OTHER ADHD MEDS BECAUSE THAT'S

CONSIDERED CHEATING.

SO THEY ARE FOCUSING ON THE SORT

OF COMPETITION ASPECT OF IT.

BUT, A STUDENT WHO WANTS TO USE

THESE DRUGS MIGHT MAKE THE

ARGUMENT THAT OKAY, BUT IT'S

ALSO HELPING ME LEARN MORE AND

BECOME A BETTER ENGINEER OR CURE

CANCER OR WHATEVER.

NOW LET ME SEGUE THERE TO YOUR

SECOND QUESTION ABOUT EXERCISE

AND OTHER KINDS OF

INTERVENTIONS.

WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT HOW

EFFECTIVE THESE DRUGS ARE?

WELL, CLEARLY IF YOU'RE SLEEP

DEPRIVED OR YOU DO MAKE A BIG

DIFFERENCE, STIMULANTS, IF

YOU'RE NOT SLEEP DEPRIVED, IT'S

REALLY NOT CLEAR HOW MUCH OF AN

EFFECT THERE IS.

THERE IS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT

THERE IS A LOT OF LIKE

UNPUBLISHED RESULTS AND IT'S NOT

REALLY CLEAR HOW EFFECTIVE THEY

ARE IN.

CONTRAST, THE EXERCISE

LITERATURE IN ANIMALS AS YOU

SAY, IN HUMANS, THERE HAVE BEEN

RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS NOW

SHOWING SUBSTANTIAL COGNITIVE

GAINS IN ADULTS, RANDOMIZED TO

EXERCISE OR NOT.

AND IT'S REALLY, I THINK YOU

KNOW, WHEN I TALK TO STUDENTS

ABOUT COGNITIVE ENHANCEMENT, I

SAY, LOOK, THE BEST THINGS TO DO

ARE WHAT YOUR GRANDMOTHER TOLD

YOU TO DO AND IN FACT, NOW

NEUROSCIENCE IS CATCHING UP AND

SHOWING YOU, USING BRAIN IMAGING

AND OTHERS METHODS THAT GRANDMA

REAL DEHAVE THE RIGHT IDEAS.

SO, IN ADDITION TO BEHAVIORAL

RESULTS AND EXERCISING LOOMS HAS

VARIOUS KINDS

OF -- HUMANS -- FLUOROIMAGING

CORRELATES THAT SUGGESTS IT'S

BENEFITING YOUR BRAIN.

ANOTHER THING WE WERE TALKING

EARLIER ABOUT MINDFULNESS

MEDITATION.

ASTONISHINGLY SHORT

INTERVENTIONS, 5 HOURS OF

TRAINING, SOMETHING CRAZY LIKE

THAT, WITH MINDFULNESS

MEDITATION, ACTUALLY RESULTS IN

DEDUCTIBLE CHANGES IN BRAIN

STRUCTURE AND OR FUNCTION.

I CAN'T REMEMBER IF THE 5 HOURS

OR 11 HOURS.

BUT ONE OF THEM SHOWED -- MAYBE

JAY KNOWS.

I'M LOOKING TO HIM FOR HELP.

IMPROVED WHITE MATTER INTEGRITY

GOING INTO THE INTERIOR

CINGULATE CORTEX.

VERY LARGE SUBSTANTIAL EFFECTS.

SLEEP, GETTING ADEQUATE NIGHT'S

SLEEP WHICH FEWER AND FEWER OF

US DO.

ALSO HAS MEASURABLE EFFECTS ON

BRAIN FUNCTION.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE OTHER

THINGS THAT GRANDMA -- THERE IS

STRESS MANAGEMENT, MEDITATION,

EXERCISE, I CAN'T REMEMBER.

ANY WAY, IT'S, PEOPLE LIKE

TAKING A PILL.

BUT IT'S NOT CLEAR THAT THOSE

EFFECTS REALLY ARE THE BIGGEST.

>> FUNCTIONALITY --

[ INDISCERNIBLE ]

WE ARE USING IT FOR

UNDERSTANDING A LOT OF ISSUES,

STARTING FROM AUTISM TO OTHR

ISSUES AND IF YOU BELIEVE IN

GOOD ENOUGH THEN A LOT OF

DECISION-MAKERS WHO STARTED WAR

OR SOME OTHER MAJOR ISSUES THAT

DRAIN ON THE ECONOMY -- WALL

STREET, SO DON'T YOU THINK IT IS

A GOOD IDEA TO SELECT THAT

BEFORE -- WE SHOULD HAVE A GOOD

FUNCTIONAL IMAGING OF THEIR

BRAIN FOR CHOOSING THE RIGHT

DECISION-MAKER.

>> YES.

YOU KNOW WHAT?

I APPRECIATE THAT QUESTION

BECAUSE I THINK SOME PEOPLE

WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, WHAT A FANS

I FULL SCIENCE FICTION IDEA BUT

I THINK IT'S A NATURAL THING TO

ASK GIVEN WHAT WE READ IN THE

JOURNALS.

AMONG ITS TERRIFIC

ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF FUNCTIONAL

NEURAL IMAGING, IS NOT BEING

ABLE TO TELL YOU MUCH ABOUT THE

PSYCHOLOGY OF INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE.

THAT'S CHANGING.

THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS ALREADY.

BUT, YOU REALLY WOULD NOT LEARN

MUCH.

I MEAN, YES, NOW THERE ARE

IMAGING PROTOCOLS THAT SEEM TO

OFFER PRETTY GOOD PREDICTION OF

ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE.

A NUMBER OF YEARS BEFORE

SOMEBODY IS SYMPTOMATIC.

MAYBE IF WE WERE GOING TO ELECT

JACK OR MABYE RONALD REGAN,

SCANNED, WE MIGHT HAVE

RECOGNIZED THAT WAS A COMING

PROBLEM.

ASIDE FROM ALZHEIMER DISEASE,

GOOD JUDGMENT, HONESTY, THESE

KINDS OF THINGS, I DON'T THINK

RIGHT NOW WE KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT

HOW TO SCAN FOR THOSE TRAITS AND

HOW TO INTERPRET THE SCANS.

I THINK IN 20 YEARS, MAYBE EVEN

10, THE ANSWER WILL BE DIFFERENT

BUT RIGHT NOW I DON'T THINK WE

REALLY KNOW.

>> SINCE YOU ARE COVERING THESES

AND WIDELY KNOWN, MAYBE SHOULD

YOU WRITE AN EDITORIAL IN THE

JOURNAL SUGGESTING THIS SHOULD

BE DONE.

[ LAUGHTER ]

OKAY.

I THINK PERHAPS --

>> I HAVE A QUESTION, IF I MAY.

>> THE ISSUE OF

NEUROENHANCEMENT.

I THINK TO SOME DEGREE MAYBE

IT'S AT LEAST A FEW HUNDRED

YEARS OUT-OF-DATE.

JUST FROM THE IDEAS OF CAFFEINE

AND COFFEE AND TEA AND THE

SUPPOSITION THAT THAT IS THE

BIGGEST ENGINE TO THE

RENAISSANCE AND KIND OF HOW WE

ENDED UP HERE.

SO, TO SOME DEGREE, I GUESS IT

SEEMS INEVITABLE BECAUSE WE HAVE

ALREADY BEEN DOING IT.

>> I MEAN, I THINK THERE IS A

SENSE OF --

>> AND MAYBE THE LINE IS

ARBITRARIY.

>> OKAY.

SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE LINE

BETWEEN THESE KINDS OF NEW

NEUROPSYCHIATRY STIMULANTS AND

OLDER THINGS.

COCOA LEAVES, FARMERS IN SOUTH

AMERICA HAVE BEEN CHEWING COCOA

LEAVES FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS TO

GIVE THEM ENERGY AND SORT OF

PERSISTENCE WHEN THEY ARE

WORKING LONG HOURS TO BRING IN

THE HARVEST AND SO FORTH.

BUT THERE ARE SOME IMPORTANT

DIFFERENCES AS WELL.

THE VERY LENGTH OF TIME THAT WE

HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH THINGS LIKE

CAFFEINE, GIVES IT A CERTAIN

SAFETY FACTOR THAT WE DON'T

HAVE.

I MEAN, WE KNOW VERY BATTLE LONG

TERM EFFECTS OF THESE DRUGS IN

ANYBODY LET ALONE NORMAL HEALTHY

PEOPLE TAKING THEM, FOR EXAMPLE.

SO AND WE ALSO -- THE DIFFERENCE

BETWEEN CHEWING COCOA LEAVES AND

TAKING COCAINE OR A SYNTHETIC

DRUG LIKE AMPHETAMINE AND SORT

OF EVERYTHING FROM THE

BEHAVIORAL EFFECTS TO RISKS OF

ADDICTION AND SO FORTH, SHOWS

THAT YOU CAN BE BASICALLY SORT

OF TWEAKING THE SAME

NEUROCHEMISTRY BUT THE MOLECULE

BY WHICH YOU TWEAK IT AND THE

DELIVERY OF THE DRUG BY WHICH

YOU TWEAK IT CAN REALLY CHANGE

THE IMPACT ON THE INDIVIDUAL AND

ON SOCIETY.

SO I THINK THERE IS A SENSE IN

WHICH THESE ARE FAMILIAR ISSUES

BUT A SENSE IN WHICH THEY ARE

NEW AS WELL.

>> IF I CAN FOLLOW-UP.

BUT THAT SORT OF OPENS ANOTHER

DOOR IN THAT IT SORT OF SAYING

IF WE CAN PROVE THAT IT IS OR IT

WILL BE BENEFICIAL THAN IT IS

OKAY.

IF THERE AREN'T -- IF THE GOOD

OUT WEIGHS THE BAD, THEN IT'S

OKAY.

SO IT'S NOT REALLY ANISH OF

ENHANCEMENT, IT'S AN ISSUE OF

BENEFIT AND DANGER.

>> WELL, OKAY.

WHO WANTS A SECOND TALK.

BASICALLY THE FINE PRINT IN MY

ELSIs SLIDE WOULD BE KIND OF A

PLACE MARKER FOR WHERE WE WOULD

TALK ABOUT THESE THINGS.

I THINK YOU CAN JUST TAKE THE

SAME KIND OF RISK BENEFIT CAM

DECLARATION APPROACH TO

ENHANCEMENT THAT YOU DO TO

THERAPEUTIC MEDICATION AND JUST

BASICALLY SAY, OKAY, MAYBE WE

SHOULD COUNT THE BENEFIT A

LITTLE LESS BECAUSE THE PERSON

ISN'T SICK TO BEGIN WITH.

WHATEVER.

THERE ARE DIFFERENCES.

HERE IS ONE EXAMPLE.

LET'S SAY THAT YOU'RE IN AN

OFFICE WHERE A FEW PEOPLE IN

YOUR GROUP OF SIX, ARE USING

RODAV NIL TO ADD WORN ALLNIGHTER

TO THEIR WORK WEEK EACH WEEK.

SO AFTER A WHILE, YOUR BOSS

SUPPORTS NOTICE, GEE, THERE IS

REALLY FANTASTICALLY PRODUCTIVE

PEOPLE ON THIS TEAM AND THERE

ARE SOME PEOPLE LOOKING MORE AND

MORE LIKE SLACKERS, LIKE YOU.

AND YOU BEGIN TO GET PRESSURE

EITHER IMPLICIT OR EXPLICIT TO

START DOING THIS YOURSELF.

THIS IS NOT -- HOW DO YOU COME

UP WITH AN EXAMPLE THAT HAS A

SIMILAR QUALITY TO IT WITH

THERAPEUTIC USING OF

MEDICATIONS.

IT WOULD BE HARD.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I SEE AS

NOT LIKE IN THE UNREALISTIC

SCIENCE FICTION FUTURE BUT

POTENTIALLY AN ISSUE COMING UP

SOON OR EVEN NOW WITH PEOPLE WHO

FEEL LIKE IF THEY ARE GOING TO

KEEP UP, THEY NEED THESE DRUGS.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, IT CAN HAVE

THE EFFECT OF LIMITING OUR

FREEDOM OR OUR FREEDOM TO CHOOSE

NOT TO USE THESE DRUGS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[ APPLAUSE ]

>> THANK YOU AND PLEASE JOIN US

FOR THE RECEPTION IN THE

LIBRARY.