PDF herunterladen
Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr 2012; 80(1): 36-43
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1282051
Neuroethik
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Zehn Jahre Neuroethik des pharmazeutischen kognitiven Enhancements – Aktuelle Probleme und Handlungsrichtlinien für die Praxis

Neuroethics of Pharmaceutical Cognitive Enhancement: The First Ten Years – Current Problems and Practical Guiding Principles
T. K. Metzinger
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
10. Januar 2012 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Ein auswertender Überblick über die Entwicklung der Neuroethik des pharmazeutischen kognitiven Enhancements (PCE) innerhalb der letzten zehn Jahre, mit einem Schwerpunkt auf der Situation in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Der Artikel benennt die wichtigsten begrifflichen Probleme, aktuelle Substanzen und zentrale ethisch-juristische Fragestellungen; am Ende werden allererste Handlungsrichtlinien und Empfehlungen für die Politikgestaltung formuliert.

Abstract

An evaluating survey of the development of the neuroethics of pharmaceutical cognitive enhancement (PCE) during the last decade, focussing on the situation in Germany, has been undertaken. This article presents the most important conceptual problems, current substances and central ethical and legal issues. Very first guidelines and recommendations for policy-makers are formulated at the end of the text.

Schüsselwörter

Neuroethik - pharmazeutisches kognitives Enhancement - Krankheitserfindung - Handlungsautonomie - Psychostimulantien - Forschungspolitik

Key words

neuroethics - pharmaceutical cognitive enhancement - disease mongering - treatment autonomy - psychostimulants - research politics
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Illes J, Sahakian BJ. The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Marcus SJ (ed.) Neuroethics: Mapping the Field. New York: The Dana Press; 2002
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Farah M. Neuroscience and neuroethics in the 21st centruy. In: Illes J, Sahakian BJ. The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011: 761-781
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Metzinger T, Hildt E. Cognitive enhancement. In: Illes J, Sahakian BJ. The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011: 245-264
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Morein-Zamir S, Sahakian B. Pharmaceutical cognitive enhancement. In: Illes J, Sahakian BJ. The Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011: 229-244
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Sahakian B, Morein-Zamir S. Neuorethical issues in cognitive enhancement. J Psychopharm 2011; 25 (02) 197-204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Glannon W. Psychopharmacological enhancement. Neuroethics 2008; 1: 45-54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 De Jongh R, Bolt I, Schermer M et al. Botox for the brain: enhancement of cognition, mood and pro-social behavior and blunting of unwanted memories. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2008; 32: 760-776
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Mehlman MJ. Cognition-enhancing drugs. Milbank Quart 2004; 82 (03) 483-506
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Larriviere D, Williams MA, Rizzo M et al. Responding to requests from adult patients for neuroenhancements: guidance of the Ethics, Law and Humanities Committee. Neurol 2009; 73 (17) 1406-1412
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Lieb K. Hirndoping. Mannheim: Tamtmos, Artemis & Winkler; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Schöne-Seifert B, Talbot D (Hrsg) Enhancement. Die ethische Debatte. Paderborn: mentis; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Förstl H. Neuro-Enhancement – Gehirndoping. Der Nervenarzt 2009; 7: 840-845
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hoy KE, Fitzgerald PB. Brain stimulation in psychiatry and its effects on cognition. Nat Rev Neurol 2010; 6: 267-275
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Kramer PD. Listening to Prozac. A Psychiatrist Explores Antidepressant Drugs and the Remaking of the Self. Viking Press; 1993
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Cerullo MA. Cosmetic psychopharmacology and the President’s Council on Bioethics. Persp Biol Med 2006; 49 (04) 515-523
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Clark A, Chalmers DJ. Der erweiterte Geist. In: Metzinger T, (Hrsg) Grundkurs Philosophie des Geistes. Band III: Intentionalität und mentale Repräsentation.
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Menary R (Hrsg) The Extended Mind. Cambridge: MA: MIT Press; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Buller T. Neurotechnology, invasiveness and the extended mind. Neuroethics 2011; DOI: 10.1007/s12152-011-9133-9135.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Schermer M, Bolt I, de Jongh R et al. The future of psychopharmacological enhancements: expectations and policies. Neuroethics 2009; 2: 75-87
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Outram SM. Ethical considerations in the framing of the cognitive enhancement debate. Neuroethics 2011; DOI: 10.1007/s12152-011-9131-7.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Jüngst ET. What does enhancement mean?. In: Parens E, (ed.) Enhancing human traits: ethical and social implications. Washington D.C: Georgetown University Press; 1998: 29-47
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Harris J. Enhancing Evolution. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Greely H, Sahakian B, Harris J et al. Towards responsible use of cognitive-enhancing drugs by the healthy. Nature 2008; 456: 702-705
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Daniels N. Normal functioning and the treatment-enhancement distinction. Camb Quart Health Eth 2000; 9: 309-322
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Synofzik M. Ethically justified, clinically applicable criteria for physician decision-making in psychopharmacological enhancement. Neuroethics 2009; 2: 89-102
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Murphy D. Concepts of disease and health. In: Zalta EN, (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.(Fall 2009 edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/health-disease/ [Epub only]
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Kutschenko L. In quest of “good” medical classification systems. Med Stud 2011; 3 (1): 53-70
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Birnbacher D. Bioethik zwischen Natur und Interesse. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; 2006
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Birnbacher D. Analytische Einführung in die Ethik. 2. . Aufl. Berlin: de Gruyter; 2007
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Gather J. The evaluation of psychopharmacological enhancers beyond a normative “natural”-“artificial” dichtomoy. Med Stud 2011; 3 (1): 19-27
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Krämer F. Authenticity anyone? The enhancement of emotions via neuro-psychopharmacology. Neuroethics 2011; 4: 51-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Singh I. Beyond polemics: science and ethics of ADHD. Nat Rev Neur 2008; 9: 957-964
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Wilens TE, Adler LA, Adams J et al. Misuse and diversion of stimulants prescribed for ADHD: a systematic review of the literature. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2008; 47 (01) 21-31
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Low KG, Gendaszek AE. Illicit use of stimulants among college students: A preliminary study. Psych Hea & Med 2002; 7: 283-287
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Forlini C, Racine E. Autonomy and coercion in academic “Cognitive Enhancement” using methylphenidate: perspectives of key stakeholders. Neuroethics 2009; 2: 163-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Repantis D, Schlattmann P, Laisney O et al. Modafinil and methylphenidate for neuroenhancement in healthy individuals: A systematic review. Pharmacol Res 2010; 62 (03) 187-210
    Google Scholar
  • 38 Repantis D. Die Wirkung von Psychopharmaka bei Gesunden. In: Wienke A, Eberbach WH, Kramer HJ, Janke K, (Hrsg) Die Verbesserung des Menschen: Tatsächliche und rechtliche Aspekte der wunscherfüllenden Medizin. Heidelberg: Springer; 2009: 63-68
    Google Scholar
  • 39 Franke AG, Bonertz C, Christmann M et al. Non-medical use of prescription stimulants and illicit use of stimulants for cognitive enhancement in pupils and students in Germany. Pharmacopsychiatry 2011; 43: 1-7
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Franke AG, Konrad A, Lieb K et al. Psychostimulantien und Nicht-Stimulantien in der heutigen und zukünftigen ADHS-Therapie. Fortschr Neurol Psychiat 2011; 79: 1-11
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Singh I, Kelleher KJ. Neuroenhancement in Young People: Proposal for Research, Policy, and Clinical Management.  AJOB Neuroscience 2010; 1 (01) 3-16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Singh I, Kendall T, Taylor C et al. Young people’s experience of ADHD and stimulant medication: A qualitative study for the NIC guideline. Child Adol Ment Health 2010; 15 (04) 186-192
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Singh I. A disorder of anger and aggression: Children’s perspectives on attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the UK. Soc Scie & Med 2011; 73 (06) 889-896
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Minzenberg MJ, Carter CS. Modafinil: a review of neurochemical actions and effects on cognition. Neuropsychopharmacology 2008; 33 (07) 1477-1502
    Google Scholar
  • 45 Repantis D, Laisney O, Heuser I et al. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine for neuroenhancement in healthy individuals: A systematic review. Pharmacol Res 2010; 61 (06) 473-481
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Repantis D, Schlattmann P, Laisney O et al. Antidepressants for neuroenhancement in healthy individuals: A systematic review. Poiesis & Praxis 2009; 6 (03) 139-174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Slingsby B. The Prozac boom and its placebogenic counterpart – a culturally fashioned phenomenon. Med Sci Monit 2002; 8 (05) CR389-CR393
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 DAK (Deutsche Angestellten-Krankenkasse). Gesundheitsreport 2009. Analyse der Arbeitsunfähigkeitsdaten. Schwerpunktthema Doping am Arbeitsplatz. Berlin: 2009 http://www.dak.de/content/filesopen/Gesundheitsreport_2009.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 McCabe SE, Knight JR, Teter CJ et al. Non-medical use of prescriptions stimulants among US college students: prevalence and correlates from a national survey. Addiction 2005; 100 (01) 96-106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Franke A, Lieb K. Pharmakologisches Neuroenhancement und „Hirndoping”: Chancen und Risiken. Bundesgesundheitsbl 2010; 53: 853-858
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Maher B. Poll results: look who's doping. Nature 2008; 452: 674-675
    Google Scholar
  • 52 Sahakian BJ, Morein-Zamir S. Professor’s little helper. Nature 2007; 450: 1157-1159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Schleim S, Walter H. Cognitive Enhancement – Fakten und Mythen. Nervenheilkunde 2007; 26: 83-87
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Galert T, Bublitz C, Heuser I et al. Das optimierte Gehirn. Ein Memorandum zu Chancen und Risiken des Neuroenhancements. Gehirn & Geist 2009; 11:  40-48
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Douglas T. Moral enhancement. J Appl Philos 2008; 25: 228-245
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Harris J. Moral enhancement and freedom. Bioethics 2011; 25 (02) 102-111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Persson I, Savulescu J. The perils of cognitive enhancement and the urgent imperative to enhance the moral character of humanity. J Appl Philos 2008; 25: 162-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Fröding BEE. Cognitive enhancement, virtue ethics and the good life. Neuroethics 2011; 4: 223-234
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Moynihan R, Doran E, Henry D. Disease mongering is now part of the global health debate. PLoS Med 2008; 5 (05) e106 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0050106.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Public Library of Science. A collection of articles on disease mongering. PLoS Med 2008; 3 (04) e191 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030191. http://collections.plos.org/plosmedicine/diseasemongering-2006.php
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Davis K. Rethinking „normal”. Hast Cen Rep 2007; 37 (03) 44-47
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Metzinger T. The no-self-alternative (Chapter 11). In: Gallagher S, (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of the Self. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011: 279-296
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Metzinger T. Der Ego-Tunnel. Berlin: Bloomsbury; 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 64 Metzinger T. Why are identity-disorders interesting for philosophers?. In: Schramme T, Thome J, (eds.) Philosophy and Psychiatry. Berlin: de Gruyter; 2004: 311-325
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Metzinger T. Being No One. The Self-Model Theory of Subjectivity. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 66 Bolt I, Schermer M. Psychopharmaceutical enhancers: enhancing identity?. Neuroethics 2008; 2: 103-111
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Olson ET. Personal identity. In: Zalta EN, (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.(Winter 2010 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/identity-personal/ [Epub only]
    Google Scholar
  • 68 Shoemaker D. Personal identity and ethics. In: Zalta EN, (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.(Winter 2010 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/identity-ethics/ [Epub only]
    Google Scholar
  • 69 DeGrazia D. Human Identity and Bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Galert T. Wie mag Neuro-Enhancement Personen verändern?. In: Schöne-Seifert B, Talbot D, Opolka U, Ach JS, (Hrsg) Neuro-Enhancement. Ethik vor neuen Herausforderungen. Paderborn: mentis; 2008: 159-187
    Google Scholar
  • 71 Gillett G. Subjectivity and Being Somebody: Human Identity and Neuroethics. Exeter: Imprint; 2008
    Google Scholar
  • 72 Merkel R, Boer R, Fegert J et al. Intervening in the brain – Changing Psyche and Society. Berlin: Springer; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 73 Bublitz JC, Merkel R. Autonomy and authenticity of enhanced personality traits. Bioethics 2009; 23 (06) 360-374
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Califano J. “You’ve got drugs!” Prescription drug pushers on the internet. New York: Columbia University: The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse; 2008: 1-15
    Google Scholar
  • 75 Sententia W. Neuroethical considerations: Cognitive liberty and converging technologies for improving human cognition. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2004; 1013: 221-228
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Capps B. Libertarianism, legitimation, and the problems of regulating cognition-enhancing drugs. Neuroethics 2011; 4: 119-128
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Nagel SK. Too much of a good thing? Enhancement and the burden of self-determination. Neuroethics 2010; 3: 109-119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Nagel SK. Ethics and the Neurosciences: Ethical and Social Consequences of Neuroscientific Progress. Paderborn: mentis; 2010
    Google Scholar