Posts tagged national security

NEUROWAR: Future Wars May Be Fought By Synapses.

AKA: My side project may not be too far off after all, you guys.

In the not-too-distant future, technologies called brain-machine interfaces could allow the combination of human brains with sophisticated computer programs. Analysts with a brain chip could quickly sift through huge amounts of intelligence data, and fighter pilots merged with computer search algorithms could rapidly lock onto an enemy target, for instance.  

Neuroscience could also find its way into interrogation rooms: As scientists learn more about how the brain generates feelings of trust, drugs could be developed that inspire that emotion in prisoners and detainees. Oxytocin, a hormone produced by mothers’ bodies after childbirth, is one such candidate. Perhaps a whiff of oxytocin could dampen a person’s executive functions, turning an uncooperative detainee into a chatty friend.

Other sorts of psychopharmacological manipulation could be used to boost soldiers’ performance, allowing them to remain vigilant without sleep, heighten their perceptual powers and erase memories of their actions on the battlefield. Because neuroscientists are beginning to understand how the brain forms memories, it’s not inconceivable that a drug could be designed to prevent PTSD. Such technology could enable more sinister applications, though, such as creating soldiers who wouldn’t remember atrocities they committed or detainees who couldn’t recall their own torture.

I’ll be meeting with my ex KGB source again, and plan on asking his thoughts about this. I’ve got more of his accounts on interrogation before we move on to torture and sniper work.

"Transitioning brain research – From the laboratory to the field."

While neuroscientists and science writers are busy ping-ponging back and forth speculating about the merit and potential of neuro lab research applications in the real world, private, non-profit agencies and the government are wasting no time. I found a very interesting hub of information dealing with the “ethical, legal, and social issues associated with emerging neurotechnology,”  that assists in  ”shepherding constructive discourse on these issues”….. and, why not?  I’ll be posting some of their peer reviewed abstracts here and leaving it up for discussion, because it should be discussed. You, know…I’ll be going to the Arlington/D.C. area again soon, and wonder if I could pop in for a tour? Dibs on this one, kids!

While brain research shows great potential for advancing critical national security interests, the products of the laboratory cannot be realized in operational practice without the polishing and maturing demanded by federal science and technology (S&T) acquisition processes, particularly those of the Department of Defense. Although many acquisition planning functions are relatively conventional, new or evolving capabilities resulting from brain research applications may impact national security doctrine in unexpected ways. Integrating brain research into operating doctrine and practice may therefore demand a fresh look at the steps of the acquisition process itself, and earlier collaborations between researchers, operational communities, and acquisition managers to ensure the significant benefits of this S&T domain without inducing unwanted surprise.

Via: Synesis: A Journal of Science, Technology, Ethics, and Policy 2011; 2(1):T 17-25
Steve Murray, PhD, Matthew A. Yanagi

Interested in Neuroethics and National Security? Well you are now.

This article – informed by science studies scholarship and consonant with the emerging enterprise of “critical neuroscience” – critiques recent neuroscience research, and its current and potential applications in the national security context. The author expresses concern about the subtle interplay between the national security and neuroscience communities, and the hazards of the mutual enchantment that may ensue.

The Bush administration’s “war on terror” has provided numerous examples of the abuse of medicine, behavioral psychology, polygraphy and satellite imagery. The defense and national security communities have an ongoing interest in neuroscience too – in particular, neuroimaging and psychoactive drugs (including oxytocin) as aids to interrogation. Given the seductive allure of neuroscientific explanations and colorful brain images, neuroscience in a national security context is particularly vulnerable to abuse. The author calls for an urgent re-evaluation of national security neuroscience as part of a broader public discussion about neuroscience’s non-therapeutic goals.

I really like the tone of this one: Fascinating article that constructively criticizes the crossroads of neuroscience and the real world applications that exist “where the translation from research lab to real life may involve great leaps, among them the troubling jump from brain scanning to terrorist screening.”

 One point particularly well articulated is about the linguistic “hazards—practical and ethical—that arise from the deployment of opaque terminology” speaking to how common of a misconception is it for the layman to be under the impression that because we have a big important name for a part of the brain- that must mean we understand everything about it, selling  pseudo intellectual fluency…which is clearly far from the truth.

My ‘ol buddy (in my head) Dr. Gudjonsson makes a quick appearance referencing to SERE tactics and interrogations leading to the recognition that there is a lack of research surrounding national security and neuroscience. From truth serums to oxytocin laced drugs, polygrpahs and to my personal fav, brain imaging…these instruments are presented and deconstructed in a way that is easy to understand and at the same time, makes us question how we could ever trust their use for lie detection or terrorist screening. You might say duh, but this is the court where ball is being played now.

LSD and, increasingly, the polygraph may seem consigned to the annals of U.S. national security. But no one should doubt that the concerns that have motivated their use are alive and well in the neuroscience and national security communities. Via

I’ll take that as a fair warning.

Marks, J.H. (2010). A Neuroskeptic’s Guide to Neuroethics and National Security American Journal of Bioethics: Neuroscience, 1 (2), 4-12 (in press)