Multilingual AI translation:

Neuroweapons & neurohacking (dual-use neuroscience)

Janus, Roman god of gates, doorways, beginnings, and endings, and Bellona, Roman goddess of war. Sculpture by Johann Wilhelm Beyer, 1773-80 CE, Vienna, Schönbrunn Garden.

 

Why Gene Editors Like CRISPR/Cas May Be a Game-Changer for Neuroweapons

“This year marks the Eighth Review Conference (RevCon) of the Biological Toxins and Weapons Convention (BWC). At the same time, ongoing international efforts to further and more deeply investigate the brain’s complex neuronal circuitry are creating unprecedented capabilities to both understand and control neurological processes of thought, emotion, and behavior. These advances have tremendous promise for human health, but the potential for their misuse has also been noted, with most discussions centering on research and development of agents that are addressed by existing BWC and Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) proscriptions. In this article, we discuss the dual-use possibilities fostered by employing emergent biotechnologic techniques and tools—specifically, novel gene editors like clustered regular interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)—to produce neuroweapons. Based on our analyses, we posit the strong likelihood that development of genetically modified or created neurotropic substances will advance apace with other gene-based therapeutics, and we assert that this represents a novel—and realizable—path to creating potential neuroweapons. In light of this, we propose that it will be important to re-address current categorizations of weaponizable tools and substances, so as to better inform and generate tractable policy to enable improved surveillance and governance of novel neuroweapons.
The authors discuss the dual-use possibilities fostered by employing emergent biotechnologic techniques and tools—specifically, novel gene editors like clustered regular interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)—to produce neuroweapons. They posit the strong likelihood that development of genetically modified or created neurotropic substances will advance apace with other gene-based therapeutics and assert that this represents a novel—and realizable—path to creating potential neuroweapons.”
[…] “In the interim, it is likely that more indirect means of manipulating the brain and behavior will be developed. ‘‘Neurohacking’’ will increase, and biotechnology, such as CRISPR/Cas and novel gene editors, will provide tools to realize production of novel neuroagents with dual-use po-
tential. Simple acknowledgment of these facts, however, is insufficient. It will be essential to pursue and obtain a deeper and fuller understanding of the ways that genetic pathways to human cognitive and behavioral modification can be engaged for dual and direct use as neuroweapons, to
formulate policies based on this level of understanding, and to engage surveillance of the use of these technologies in various silos of development and application, so as to afford both preventive and more preparatory capabilities.”

DiEuliis, D., & Giordano, J.. (2017). Why Gene Editors Like CRISPR/Cas May Be a Game-Changer for Neuroweapons. Health Security, 15(3), 296–302.

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1089/hs.2016.0120
DOI URL
directSciHub download


Janus and his two faces: past and future.

“There is a scientific race for decoding the human brain. current and near future technology will make it possible to not only merely influence the enemy’s mind and behavior, but to actually control it. breakthroughs in neuroscience will enable new types of non-lethal weapons for precise behavioral manipulation, for example through behavior-altering neurotropic drugs, through remote electromagnetic brain monitoring and stimulation, through acoustic weapons beaming voices directly into enemy heads, and even through holographic projections and other ‘complex battlefield illusions.’ within ten years soldiers could be equipped with transcranial magnetic stimulation devices or brain-computer interfaces, which would make it possible for their commanders to steer their emotions and to control their thoughts. this paper will discuss how the emerging sixth domain of warfare (the mind) is likely to transform military operations and profoundly change how wars are conducted. it is argued that military operations will be increasingly centered on achieving desired psychological effects, which will, on the positive side, reduce the need for physical destruction and killing. at the same time, ‘neuroweapons’ will also create new and unprecedented dangers, resulting from misuse and proliferation, which will need to be addressed through development of a concept of ‘neurosecurity’ that will be outlined.”

Krishnan, A.. (2014). From Psyops to Neurowar: What Are the Dangers?. Paper to Be Presented at the ISAC-ISSS Conference in Austin, 14-16 November 2014

Further References

Bruner, R. C., & Lentzos, F.. (2019). Militarising the Mind: Assessing the Weapons of the Ultimate Battlefield. BioSocieties

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1057/s41292-018-0121-4
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Evans, N. G.. (2021). Neuroweapons. In The Ethics of Neuroscience and National Security

Plain numerical DOI: 10.4324/9780429447259-6
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Dando, M.. (2015). Neuroscience and the Future of Chemical-Biological Weapons. Neuroscience and the Future of Chemical-Biological Weapons

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1057/9781137381828
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Dando, M.. (2015). Novel Neuroweapons. In Neuroscience and the Future of Chemical-Biological Weapons

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1057/9781137381828_6
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Giordano, J. J.. (2015). Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Advances in neurotechnology
Dando, M.. (2015). Novel Neuroweapons. In Neuroscience and the Future of Chemical-Biological Weapons

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1057/9781137381828.0013
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Giordano, J., & Wurzman, R.. (2011). Neurotechnologies as weapons in national intelligence and defense – An overview. Neurogenetics
Noll, G.. (2014). Weaponising neurotechnology: International humanitarian law and the loss of language. London Review of International Law

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1093/lril/lru009
DOI URL
directSciHub download

DeFranco, J., DiEuliis, D., & Giordano, J.. (2020). Redefining Neuroweapons: Emerging Capabilities in Neuroscience and Neurotechnology. PRISM
Nørgaard, K., & Linden-Vørnle, M.. (2021). Cyborgs, Neuroweapons, and Network Command. Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies

Plain numerical DOI: 10.31374/sjms.86
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Additional references
Giordano J, Forsythe C, Olds J. Neuroscience, neuro-
technology, and national security: the need for preparedness
and an ethics of responsible action. AJOB – Neuroscience
2010;1(2):1-3.
2. Giordano J, Wurzman R. Neurotechnologies as weapons in
national intelligence and defense. Synesis: A Journal of Science,
Technology, Ethics and Policy 2011;2:138-151.
3. Forsythe C, Giordano J. On the need for neurotechnology in
the national intelligence and defense agenda: scope and tra-
jectory. Synesis: A Journal of Science, Technology, Ethics and
Policy 2011;2(1):T5-8.
4. Giordano J. Neurotechnololgy in National Security and De-
fense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Boca
Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2014.
5. Dando M. Neurosciences advances in future warfare. In: J
Clausen, N Levy, eds. Handbook of Neuroethics. Dordrecht:
Springer; 2014.
6. Dando M. Neuroscience and the Future of Chemical-Biological
Weapons. New York: Springer; 2015.
7. The White House. The BRAIN initiative. April 2, 2013.
www.whitehouse.gov/BRAIN. No longer available.
8. European Union. The Human Brain Project. October 2013.
www.humanbrainproject.eu/. Accessed April 14,
2017.
9. Giordano J. The neuroweapons threat. Bull At Sci 2016;
72(3):1-4.
10. Dando M. Advances in neuroscience and the Biological and
Toxin Weapons Convention. Biotechnol Res Int 2011;2011:
973851

National Research Council. Emerging Cognitive Neuroscience
and Related Technologies. Washington, DC: National Aca-
demies Press; 2008.
14. Lentzos F, Koblentz G. It’s time to modernize the Biological
Weapons Convention. Bull At Sci 2016. thebulletin.
org/it%E2%80%99s-time-modernize-bioweapons-convention
10128. Accessed April 14, 2017.
15. Add-Gene. www.addgene.org/crispr/bacteria/. Ac-
cessed April 14, 2017
16. Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology; Division on
Earth and Life Studies. Strategies for Identifying and Address-
ing Biodefense Vulnerabilities Posed by Synthetic Biology.
National Academies website. 2016. dels.nas.edu/Study-
In-Progress/Strategies-Identifying-Addressing-Vulnerabilities/
DELS-BCST-16-04. Accessed April 14, 2017.
17. Sander JD, Joung JK. CRISPR-Cas systems for editing,
regulating and targeting genomes. Nat Biotechnol 2014;3(4):
347-355.
18. Wang H, La Russa M, Qi LS. CRISPR/Cas9 in genome
editing and beyond. Annu Rev Biochem 2016;85:227-264.
19. Ledford H. CRISPR: gene editing is just the beginning.
Nature 2016;531:156-159.
20. Hesman Saey T. Gene drives spread their wings. Science News
Dec 12, 2015;188(12):16.
21. Bennett J. 11 crazy gene-hacking things we can do with
CRISPR. Popular Mechanics Jan 26, 2016.
22. Cyranowski D, Reardon S. Embryo editing sparks epic de-
bate. Nature 2015;520:593-594.
23. The National Academies. International Summit on Human
Gene Editing Initiative. Human Gene-Editing Initiative
website. December 1-3, 2015. Washington, DC. www.
nationalacademies.org/gene-editing/Gene-Edit-Summit/index.
htm. Accessed April 14, 2017.
24. Clapper J. Statement for the Record. Worldwide Threat
Assessment of the US Intelligence Community. Senate
Armed Services Committee. February 9, 2016. www.
dni.gov/files/documents/SASC_Unclassified_2016_ATA_SFR_
FINAL.pdf. Accessed April 14, 2017.
25. The White House. PCAST Letter to the President on Action
Needed to Protect Against Biological Attack. Washington,
DC: Office of Science and Technology Policy; 2016. https://
obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2016/11/15/pcast-letter-
president-action-needed-protect-against-biological-attack.
Accessed April 14, 2017.
26. Evans NG, Moreno JD. When neuroscience leads to neu-
roweapons. Bull At Sci 2016.
27. Sidell FR. Nerve agents. In: Textbook of Military Medicine:
Medical Aspects of Chemical and Biological Warfare. Wash-
ington, DC: TMM Publications; Office of the Surgeon
General, Walter Reed Army Medical Center; 1997:129-179.
28. Giordano J. Battlescape brain: engaging neuroscience in
defense operations. HDIAC Journal 2017;3(4).
29. Scaife MA, Smith GS. Towards developing algal synthetic
biology. Biochem Soc Trans 2016;44(3):716-722.
30. Ramus F. Genes, brain, and cognition: a roadmap for the
cognitive scientist. Cognition 101 2006;2:274-269

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

+ 86 = 89