Nano-Bio-Info-Cogno (NBIC) technologies

Leave a comment
Martin-Sanchez, F., & Maojo, V.. (2009). Biomedical Informatics and the Convergence of Nano-Bio-Info-Cogno (NBIC) Technologies. Yearbook of Medical Informatics

, 18(01), 134–142.
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1638652
DOI URL
directSciHub download


Abstract

Objectives: To analyze the role that biomedical informatics could play in the application of the NBIC Converging Technologies in the medical field and raise awareness of these new areas throughout the Biomedical Informatics community.

Methods: Review of the literature and analysis of the reference documents in this domain from the biomedical informatics perspective. Detailing existing developments showing that partial convergence of technologies have already yielded relevant results in biomedicine (such as bioinformatics or biochips). Input from current projects in which the authors are involved is also used.

Results: Information processing is a key issue in enabling the convergence of NBIC technologies. Researchers in biomedical informatics are in a privileged position to participate and actively develop this new scientific direction. The experience of biomedical informaticians in five decades of research in the medical area and their involvement in the completion of the Human and other genome projects will help them participate in a similar role for the development of applications of converging technologies -particularly in nanomedicine.

Conclusions: The proposed convergence will bring bridges between traditional disciplines. Particular attention should be placed on the ethical, legal, and social issues raised by the NBIC convergence. These technologies provide new directions for research and education in Biomedical Informatics placing a greater emphasis in multidisciplinary approaches.

Similar articles

A brief definition of “cognitive liberty” (Sententia, 2004)

Leave a comment

Wrye Sententia (2004, p. 227) defined cognitive liberty as concisely as

the right and freedom to control one’s own consciousness and electrochemical thought process.


SENTENTIA, W.. (2006). Neuroethical Considerations: Cognitive Liberty and Converging Technologies for Improving Human Cognition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

, 1013(1), 221–228.
Plain numerical DOI: 10.1196/annals.1305.014
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Further References

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 9 articles

See all “Cited by” articles

A History of Freedom of Thought (Bury, 1923)

Leave a comment

URL: archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.90642

Cognitive Liberty, Freedom of Thought, Neurorights, Neuroethics, Neurolaw, Neuropolitics, References

Alston, P. (1984). Conjuring up new human rights: a proposal for quality control. Am. J. Int. Law 78, 607–621. doi: 10.2307/2202599

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Baker, L. R. (2000). Persons And Bodies: A Constitution View. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Google Scholar

Berlin, I. (1969). Two Concepts of Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Google Scholar

Boire, R. G. (2001). On cognitive liberty. J. Cogn. Liberties 2, 7–22.

Google Scholar

Brandeis, L., and Warren, S. (1890). The right to privacy. Harv. Law Rev. 4, 193–220.

Google Scholar

Brimacombe, P. (2000). All the Queen’s Men: The World of Elizabeth I. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Google Scholar

Bublitz, C. (2015). “Cognitive Liberty or the International Human Right to Freedom of Thought,” in Handbook of Neuroethics, eds J. Clausen and N. Levy (Dordrecht: Springer), 1309–1333. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-4707-4_166

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bublitz, C. (2016). Moral Enhancement and Mental Freedom. J. Appl. Phil. 33, 88–106. doi: 10.1111/japp.12108

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bublitz, J.-C. (2013). “My mind is mine!? Cognitive liberty as a legal concept,” in Cognitive Enhancement, ed. H. Franke (Berlin: Springer), 233–264. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-6253-4_19

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bury, J. (1913). A History of Freedom of Thought, 1913. Alburgh: Facsimile Publisher.

Google Scholar

Cascio, J. (2017). Do brains need rights? New Scientist 234, 24–25. doi: 10.1016/s0262-4079(17)31163-6

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Collins, R. F., and Harrington, D. J. (1999). First Corinthians. Collegeville: Liturgical Press.

Google Scholar

Farah, M. J. (2002). Emerging ethical issues in neuroscience. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 1123–1129. doi: 10.1038/nn1102-1123

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Farah, M. J., Illes, J., Cook-Deegan, R., Gardner, H., Kandel, E., King, P., et al. (2004). Neurocognitive enhancement: what can we do and what should we do? Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 5, 421–425.

Google Scholar

Farahany, N. A. (2012). Incriminating thoughts. Stanford Law Rev. 64:351.

Google Scholar

Favaretto, M., De Clercq, E., Gaab, J., and Elger, B. S. (2020). First do no harm: an exploration of researchers’ ethics of conduct in Big Data behavioral studies. PLoS One 15:e0241865. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.024186

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fins, J. J. (2004). Neuromodulation, free will and determinism: lessons from the psychosurgery debate. Clin. Neurosci. Res. 4, 113–118. doi: 10.1016/j.cnr.2004.06.011

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Garcia, M. (2016). Racist in the machine: the disturbing implications of algorithmic bias. World Pol. J. 33, 111–117. doi: 10.1215/07402775-3813015

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Gaustad, E. S. (2001). Roger Williams: Prophet of Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Google Scholar

Goering, S., Klein, E., Sullivan, L. S., Wexler, A., y Arcas, B. A., Bi, J., et al. (2021). Recommendations for Responsible Development and Application of Neurotechnologies. Neuroethics 2021, 1–22. doi: 10.1007/s12152-021-09468-6

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hallinan, D., Schütz, P., Friedewald, M., and De Hert, P. (2014). Neurodata and neuroprivacy: data protection outdated? Surveillance Soc. 12, 55–72. doi: 10.24908/ss.v12i1.4500

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hayes, B. (2017). Migration and data protection: doing no harm in an age of mass displacement, mass surveillance and “big data”. Int. Rev. Red Cross 99, 179–209. doi: 10.1017/s1816383117000637

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ienca, M. (2015). Neuroprivacy, neurosecurity and brain-hacking: emerging issues in neural engineering. Bioethica Forum 8, 51–53.

Google Scholar

Ienca, M., and Andorno, R. (2017a). A New Category of Human Rights: Neurorights. Research in Progress [Online]. Available Online at: from: blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2017/04/26/new-category-human-rights-neurorights/ [Accessed April 26, 2017].

Google Scholar

Ienca, M., and Andorno, R. (2017b). Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology. Life Sci. Soc. Pol. 13:5.

Google Scholar

Ienca, M., and Ignatiadis, K. (2020). Artificial intelligence in clinical neuroscience: methodological and ethical challenges. AJOB Neurosci. 11, 77–87. doi: 10.1080/21507740.2020.1740352

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ienca, M., and Vayena, E. (2018). Cambridge Analytica and Online Manipulation. Scientific American. Basingstoke: Springer Nature.

Google Scholar

Illes, J., Kirschen, M. P., and Gabrieli, J. D. (2003). From neuroimaging to neuroethics. Nat. Neurosci. 6, 205–205.

Google Scholar

Illes, J., Rosen, A. C., Huang, L., Goldstein, R., Raffin, T. A., Swan, G., et al. (2004). Ethical consideration of incidental findings on adult brain MRI in research. Neurology 62, 888–890. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000118531.90418.89

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Inman, T. (1861). Foundation for A New Theory and Practice of Medicine. Churchill.

Google Scholar

Koh, H. H. (1998). How is international human rights law enforced. Indiana Law J. 74:1397.

Google Scholar

Lavazza, A. (2018). Freedom of Thought and Mental Integrity: the Moral Requirements for Any Neural Prosthesis. Front. Neurosci. 12:82. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00082

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Long, A. A. (2002). Epictetus: A Stoic and Socratic guide to Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Google Scholar

Luzzatti, L. (2006). God in Freedom: Studies in the Relations Between Church and State. New York: Cosimo, Inc.

Google Scholar

Machado, C. (2007). The concept of brain death did not evolve to benefit organ transplants. Brain Death 7, 1–20.

Google Scholar

Meslin, E. M. (1990). Protecting human subjects from harm through improved risk judgments. IRB Ethics Hum. Res. 12, 7–10. doi: 10.2307/3563683

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mill, J. S. (1859). Essay on Liberty. London: John W Parker and Son.

Google Scholar

Milton, J. (1791). Comus: A Mask. Proprietors, Under the Direction of John Bell. Oxford: Oxford University.

Google Scholar

Moreno, J. D. (2003). Neuroethics: an agenda for neuroscience and society. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 4, 149–153. doi: 10.1038/nrn1031

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Moscrop, H. (2014). Enforcing International Human Rights Law: Problems and Prospects. E-International Relations. Available online at: www.e-ir.info/2014/04/29/enforcing-international-human-rights-law-problems-and-prospects/

Google Scholar

Munoz, J. M. (2019). Chile–right to free will needs definition. Nature 574, 634–635. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-03295-9

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Nawrot, O. (2019). What about the interior castle? Response to Ienca’s and Andorno’s new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology. Roczniki Teologiczne 66, 69–85. doi: 10.18290/rt.2019.66.3-5

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Nickel, J., Pogge, T., Smith, M., and Wenar, L. (2013). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Human Rights. Stanford: Stanford University.

Google Scholar

OECD-Council. (2019). OECD Recommendation on Responsible Innovation in Neurotechnology. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Google Scholar

Pereboom, D., and Caruso, G. (2002). “Hard-incompatibilist existentialism: Neuroscience, punishment, and meaning in life,” in Neuroexistentialism: Meaning, Morals, and Purpose in the Age of Neuroscience, eds G. D. Caruso and O. Flanagan (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

Google Scholar

Pizzetti, F. (2017). ‘A Proposal for a: “Universal Declaration on Neuroscience and Human Rights”. Bioethical 6, 3–6. doi: 10.4000/books.ifra.440

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Polenberg, R. (1996). Cardozo and the Criminal Law: Palko v. Connecticut Reconsidered. J. Supr. Court Hist. 21, 92–105. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5818.1996.tb00051.x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Reider, L. (1998). Toward a new test for the insanity defense: incorporating the discoveries of neuroscience into moral and legal theories. UCLA Law Rev. 46:289.

Google Scholar

Repetti, R. (2018). Buddhism, Meditation, and Free Will: A Theory of Mental Freedom. Oxforshire: Routledge.

Google Scholar

Safire, W. (2002). “Visions for a new field of neuroethics,” in Neuroethics: Mapping the Field, Conference Proceedings, May 13-14, 2002, (San Francisco: The Dana Press), 4–9.

Google Scholar

Schaffer, J. (2015). What not to multiply without necessity. Australas. J. Philos. 93, 644–664. doi: 10.1080/00048402.2014.992447

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sententia, W. (2004). Neuroethical considerations: cognitive liberty and converging technologies for improving human cognition. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1013, 221–228. doi: 10.1196/annals.1305.014

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Shen, F. X. (2013). Neuroscience, mental privacy, and the law. Harv. J. Law Public Pol. 36, 653–173.

Google Scholar

Shen, F. X. (2016). The overlooked history of neurolaw. Fordham L. Rev. 85:667.

Google Scholar

Smith, C. M. (2005). Origin and Uses of Primum Non Nocere—Above All. Do No Harm! J. Clin. Pharmacol. 45, 371–377. doi: 10.1177/0091270004273680

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Sommaggio, P., and Mazzocca, M. (2020). “Cognitive Liberty and Human Rights,” in Neuroscience and Law, eds A. D’Aloia and M. Errigo. (Cham: Springer), 95–111.

Google Scholar

Taylor, J. S., Harp, J. A., and Elliott, T. (1991). Neuropsychologists and neurolawyers. Neuropsychology 5:293. doi: 10.1037/0894-4105.5.4.293

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Turner, D. C., and Sahakian, B. J. (2006). Neuroethics of cognitive enhancement. BioSocieties 1, 113–123.

Google Scholar

United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) (1993). ”General Comment No. 22: The Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion (Article 18), UN Doc. No”. CCPR/C/21/Rev. 1/Add. 4). Available Online at: www.refworld.org/docid/453883fb22.html [accessed July 31 2021].

Google Scholar

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) (1948). United Nations General Assembly, Palais de Chaillot, Paris. Paris: UDHR.

Google Scholar

Van Inwagen, P. (1997). Materialism and the psychological-continuity account of personal identity. Philos. Perspect. 11, 305–319. doi: 10.1111/0029-4624.31.s11.14

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Welford, A. T. (1970). Mental Integrity and the Nature of Life. Med. J. Australia 1, 1135–1138. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1970.tb84477.x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Westin, A. F. (1968). Privacy and freedom. Wash. Lee Law Rev. 25:166.

Google Scholar

Wolpe, P. R. (2017). “Neuroprivacy and Cognitive Liberty,” in The Routledge Handbook of Neuroethics, eds L. S. M. Johnson and K. S. Rommelfanger (New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group), 214–224. doi: 10.4324/9781315708652-16

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Woolf, V. (1929). A Room of One’s Own and Three Guineas. Oxford: OUP Oxford.

Google Scholar

Yuste, R., Genser, J., and Herrmann, S. (2021). It’s Time for Neuro-Rights. Horizons J. Int. Relat. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 154–165.

Google Scholar

Yuste, R., Goering, S., Bi, G., Carmena, J. M., Carter, A., Fins, J. J., et al. (2017). Four ethical priorities for neurotechnologies and AI. Nat. News 551, 159–163. doi: 10.1038/551159a

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zeki, S., Goodenough, O., and O’hara, E. A. (2004). How neuroscience might advance the law. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 359, 1677–1684. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2004.1541

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Understanding Coercive Gradualism

Leave a comment
Pierce, W. G., Douds, D. G., & Marra, M. A.. (2015). Understanding Coercive Gradualism. Parameters

See article 7, p.51 seq.
publications.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/3710.pdf

Brain Recording, Mind-Reading, and Neurotechnology

Leave a comment



Further References

Magnetic control of the nervous system (vs. Optogenetics & Chemogenetics)

Leave a comment

Christiansen, M. G., Senko, A. W., & Anikeeva, P.. (2019). Magnetic Strategies for Nervous System Control. Annual Review of Neuroscience

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1146/annurev-neuro-070918-050241
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Wheeler, M. A., Smith, C. J., Ottolini, M., Barker, B. S., Purohit, A. M., Grippo, R. M., … Güler, A. D.. (2016). Genetically targeted magnetic control of the nervous system. Nature Neuroscience

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1038/nn.4265
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Adamczyk, A. K., & Zawadzki, P.. (2020). The Memory-Modifying Potential of Optogenetics and the Need for Neuroethics. NanoEthics

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1007/s11569-020-00377-1
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Kole, K., Zhang, Y., Jansen, E. J. R., Brouns, T., Bijlsma, A., Calcini, N., … Celikel, T.. (2020). Assessing the utility of Magneto to control neuronal excitability in the somatosensory cortex. Nature Neuroscience

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1038/s41593-019-0474-4
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Keifer, O., Kambara, K., Lau, A., Makinson, S., & Bertrand, D.. (2020). Chemogenetics a robust approach to pharmacology and gene therapy. Biochemical Pharmacology

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2020.113889
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Magnus, C. J., Lee, P. H., Bonaventura, J., Zemla, R., Gomez, J. L., Ramirez, M. H., … Sternson, S. M.. (2019). Ultrapotent chemogenetics for research and potential clinical applications. Science

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1126/science.aav5282
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Poth, K. M., Texakalidis, P., & Boulis, N. M.. (2021). Chemogenetics: Beyond Lesions and Electrodes. Neurosurgery

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1093/neuros/nyab147
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Vlasov, K., Van Dort, C. J., & Solt, K.. (2018). Optogenetics and Chemogenetics. In Methods in Enzymology

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1016/bs.mie.2018.01.022
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Aldous Huxley (Moksha, 1977): No more thinking – Everybody’s Happy Now

Leave a comment
meditate, woman, yoga

No more thinking – just obey and conform


Everybody’s Happy Now
No more Mammy, no more Pappy:
Ain’t we lucky, ain’t we happy?
Everybody’s oh so happy,
Everybody’s happy now!
Sex galore, but no more marriages;
No more pushing baby carriages;
No one has to change a nappy
Ain’t we lucky, ain’t we happy:
Everybody’s happy now.
Dope for tea and dope for dinner,
Fun all night, and love and laughter;
No remorse, no morning after.
Where’s the sin, and who’s the sinner?
Everybody’s happy now!
Girls pneumatic, girls exotic,
Girls ecstatic, girls erotic
Hug me, Baby; make it snappy.
Everybody’s oh so happy,
Everybody’s happy now!
Lots to eat and hours for drinking
Soma cocktails–no more thinking.
NO MORE THINKING, NO MORE THINKING!
~ Aldous Huxley


Aldous Huxley – a Fabian socialist advocating mind-control (a wolf in sheep’s clothing)