I’m taking a break from literally trying to make order out of chaos and checking out a web site recommended by the friend with whom I went on vacation. She’s interested in how psychic stuff works and so also follows brain research.
The Dana Foundation’s web site on brain, immunology, and arts education (interesting combination, no?) could keep me linking around it for days on end, since it covers three of the subjects in which I’m most intersted.
It’s not bad enough that our personal and private space contnues to be invaded and assaulted by everyone from our government to spammers. The site’s “Brain in the News” section includes this (year-old-but-still-disturbing) piece.
Some Fear Loss of Privacy as Science Pries into Brain. By Carey Goldberg, Boston Globe, May 1, 2003, p. A1
Brain imaging techniques, now able to observe which brain areas may be active when lying, experiencing unconscious racism, or reacting to a consumer product, are raising new concerns about “brain privacy,” part of the rapidly expanding field of neuroethics Ethicists are concerned that current privacy laws may not prevent this kind of information from being requested – or even misused – by courts, government, the military, employers, or insurers – who may draw conclusions, about potential violence or mental illness. Some scientists say that brain-based lie detector tests may also not be far off. While imaging equipment is currently too expensive to be used by nonscientists, and existing human experiementation rules protect subjects from coercion, many scientists hope that new consumer laws, or ethical guidelines for doctors, can be enacted.
Neuroethics. Part of Bioethics. So, there’s a President’s Council on Bioethics. Heh. How about a President’s Advisory Council on Presidential Ethics. Period.