Desktop version

Home arrow Health arrow Cognitive enhancement : ethical and policy implications in international perspectives

Source

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship of the Fritz-Thyssen- Foundation and the Cologne Graduate School in Management, Economics, and Social Sciences. I am grateful to Veljko Dubljevic, Guido Mehlkop, Peter Graeff, and Constantin Wiegel for helpful comments. Thanks to Cynthia Hall for editorial assistance.

Notes

i. Based on a subjective evaluation by the author.

ii. Studies assessing the use of potential CE substances that do not clearly refer to CE as a motive were excluded (e.g., Lohmann, Gusy, and Drewes36).

iii. Research on factors influencing CE drug use is of high importance (see next section) but is beyond the scope of this chapter (for more information, see pertinent

references9,20,21,30,31,35).

References

  • 1. Metzinger T. Zehn Jahre Neuroethik des pharmazeutischen kognitiven Enhancements— Aktuelle Probleme und Handlungsrichtlinien fur die Praxis. Fortschr. Neurol. Psychiatr. 2012;80(1):36-43.
  • 2. Bostrom N, Sandberg A. Cognitive enhancement: Methods, ethics, regulatory challenges. Sci Eng Ethics. 2009;15(3):311-341.
  • 3. Smith M, Farah M. Are prescription stimulants “smart pills”? The epidemiology and cognitive neuroscience of prescription stimulant use by normal healthy individuals. Psychol Bull. 2011;137(5):717-741.
  • 4. Dresler M, Sandberg A, Ohla K, et al. Non-pharmacological cognitive enhancement.

Neuropharmacol. 2013;64(1): 529-543.

  • 5. Forstl H. Neuro-enhancement. DerNervenarzt. 2009;80(7):840-846.
  • 6. Glaeske G, Merchlewicz M, Schepker R, Soellner R, Boning J, Gaftmann R. Hirndoping. Sucht. 2011;57(5):402-407.
  • 7. Franke AG, Lieb K. Pharmakologisches neuroenhancement und “hirndoping”.

Bundesgesundheitsblatt. 2010;53(8):853-860.

  • 8. Wulf M, Joksimovic L, Tress W. The struggle for meaning and acknowledgement- A psychodynamic view of the phenomenon of neuroenhancement (NE). Ethik Med. 2012;24(1):29-42.
  • 9. Sattler S, Mehlkop G, Graeff P, Sauer C. Evaluating the drivers of and obstacles to the willingness to use cognitive enhancement drugs: The influence of drug characteristics, social environment, and personal characteristics. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2014;9(1):8.
  • 10. Racine E, Forlini C. Cognitive enhancement, lifestyle choice of misuse of prescription drugs? Ethics blind spots in current debates. Neuroethics. 2010;3(1):1-4.
  • 11. Galert T, Bublitz C, Heuser I, et al. Das optimierte Gehirn. Gehirn & Geist. 2009;8(11):40-48.
  • 12. Schleim S. Cognitive Enhancement-Sechs Grunde Dagegen. In: Fink H, Rosenzweig R, eds. Kunstliche Sinne, gedoptes Gehirn. Paderborn: Mentis; 2010:179-207.
  • 13. Retzbach J. Schlau auf Rezept? http://www.spektrum.de/alias/hirndoping/schlau-auf- rezept/11698622012 [cited March 20, 2014].
  • 14. Hollmer K. Hochgefahrenes Hirn http://www.sueddeutsche.de/gesundheit/missbrauch- von-ritalin-hochgefahrenes-hirn-1.1677687 [cited March 2, 2014].
  • 15. Moorstedt T. Per Pille zum Superhirn http://www.focus.de/panorama/welt/best-of- playboy/menschen-und-storys/tid-21558/selbstversuch-per-pille-zum-superhirn_aid_ 605310.html2011 [cited March 2, 2014].
  • 16. Langlitz N. Neuro-Enhancement: Das Gehirn ist kein Muskel http://www.faz.net/ aktuell/wissen/medizin/neuro-enhancement-dasgehirn-ist-kein-muskel-1912020. html2010 [cited March 2, 2014].
  • 17. Eickenhorst P, Klapp B, Groneberg D. Neuroenhancement among German university students: Motives, expectations, and relationship with psychoactive lifestyle drugs. J

Psychoact Drugs. 2012;44:418-427.

  • 18. Kipke R, Heimann H, Wiesing U, Heinz A. Falsche Voraussetzungen in der aktuellen Debatte. Dtsch. Aerztebl. 2010;107(48):2384-2387.
  • 19. Normann C, Boldt J, Maio G, Berger M. Moglichkeiten und Grenzen des pharmakolo- gischen neuroenhancements. Nervenarzt. 2010;81(1):66-74.
  • 20. Sattler S, Wiegel C. Cognitive test anxiety and cognitive enhancement: The influence of students’ worries on their use of performance-enhancing drugs. Subst Use Misuse. 2013;48(3):220-232.
  • 21. Sattler S, Forlini C, Racine E, Sauer C. Impact of contextual factors and substance characteristics on perspectives toward cognitive enhancement. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e71452.
  • 22. Franke A, Bonertz C, Christmann M, Engeser S, Lieb K. Attitudes toward cognitive enhancement in users and nonusers of stimulants for cognitive enhancement: A pilot study. Am J Bioeth Prim Res. 2012;3(1):48-57.
  • 23. Franke A, 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;44:60-66.
  • 24. Middendorff E, Poskowsky J, Isserstedt W. Formen der Stresskompensation und Leistungssteigerung bei Studierenden Hannover: HIS; 2012.
  • 25. DAK. Gesundheitsreport 2009. Analyse der Arbeitsunfahigkeitsdaten. Schwerpunktthema Doping am Arbeitsplatz. Berlin/Hamburg: DAK/IGES; 2009.
  • 26. Dietz P, Striegel H, Franke A, Lieb K, Simon P, Ulrich R. Randomized response estimates for the 12-month prevalence of cognitive-enhancing drug use in university students. Pharmacotherapy. 2013;33(1):44-50.
  • 27. Ragan C, Bard I, Singh I. What should we do about student use of cognitive enhancers? An analysis of current evidence. Neuropharmacol. 2013;64:588-595.
  • 28. Hoebel J, Kamtsiuris P, Lange C, Muters S, Schilling R, von der Lippe E.

Ergebnisbericht: KOLIBRI-Studie zum Konsum leistungsbeeinflussender Mittel in Alltag und Freizeit. Berlin: RKI; 2011.

  • 29. Mache S, Eickenhorst P, Vitzthum K, Klapp B, Groneberg D. Cognitive-enhancing substance use at German universities: Frequency, reasons and gender differences. Wien Med Wochenschr. 2012;162(11-12):262-271.
  • 30. Dubljevic V, Sattler S, Racine E. Cognitive enhancement and academic misconduct: A study exploring their frequency and relationship. Ethics Behav. 2014;24(5):408-420.
  • 31. Wiegel C, Sattler S, Goritz A, Diewald M. Work-related stress and cognitive enhancement among university teachers. Anxiety Stress Copin. 2016;29(1):110-117.
  • 32. Tourangeau R, Yan T. Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol Bull. 2007;133(5):859-883.
  • 33. Kreuter F, Presser S, Tourangeau R. Social desirability bias in CATI, IVR, and web surveys: The effects of mode and question sensitivity. Public Opin Quart. 2008;72(5):847-865.
  • 34. Sattler S, Sauer C, Mehlkop G, Graeff P. The rationale for consuming cognitive enhancement drugs in university students and teachers. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(7): e68821.
  • 35. Bell S, Partridge B, Lucke J, Hall W. Australian university students’ attitudes towards the acceptability and regulation of pharmaceuticals to improve academic performance.

Neuroethics. 2013;6(6):197-205.

  • 36. Lohmann K, Gusy B, Drewes J. Medikamentenkonsum bei Studierenden. Pravention und Gesundheitsforderung. 2010;5(3):276-281.
  • 37. Wolff W, Brand R. Subjective stressors in school and their relation to neuroenhancement: A behavioral perspective on students’ everyday life “doping”. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2013;8(1):23.
  • 38. Franke A, Christmann M, Bonertz C, Fellgiebel A, Huss M, Lieb K. Use of coffee, caffein- ated drinks and caffeine tablets for cognitive enhancement in pupils and students in Germany. Pharmacopsychiatry. 2011;44(7):331-338.
  • 39. Franke A, Bagusat C, Dietz P, et al. Use of illicit and prescription drugs for cognitive or mood enhancement among surgeons. BMC Med. 2013;11(1):102.
  • 40. Dietz P, Ulrich R, Dalaker R, et al. Associations between physical and cognitive doping-a cross-sectional study in 2,997 triathletes. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(11):e78702.
  • 41. Kowalski H. Neuroenhancement-gehirndoping am arbeitsplatz. In: Badura B, Ducki A, Schroder H, Klose J, Meyer M, eds. Fehlzeiten-Report 2013. Berlin: Springer; 2013:27-34.
  • 42. Farah M, Illes J, Cook-Deegan R, et al. Neurocognitive enhancement: What can we do and what should we do? Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004;5(5):421-425.
  • 43. Greely H, Sahakian B, Harris J, et al. Towards responsible use of cognitive enhancing drugs by the healthy. Nature. 2008;456(7223):702-705.
  • 44. Zentrale Ethikkommission. Arztliche behandlungen ohne krankheitsbezug unter besonderer berucksichtigung der asthetischen chirurgie. Dtsch. Aerztebl. 2012;109(40):2000-2004.
  • 45. Walcher-Andris E. Ethische aspekte des pharmakologischen “cognition enhancement” am beispiel des gebrauchs von psychostimulanzien durch kinder und jugendliche. Ethik in der Medizin. 2006;18(1):27-36.
  • 46. Wolff W, Baumgarten F, Brand R. Reduced self-control leads to disregard of an unfamiliar behavioral option: An experimental approach to the study of neuroenhancement.

Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2013;8(1):41.

  • 47. Repantis D, Schlattmann P, Laisney O, Heuser I. Modafinil and methylphenidate for neuroenhancement in healthy individuals: A systematic review. Pharmacol Res. 2010;62(3):187-206.
  • 48. Sahakian B, Morein-Zamir S. Professor'slittle helper. Nature. 2007;450(7173):1157-1159.
  • 49. Dubljevic V. Prohibition or coffee shops: Regulation of amphetamine and methylphenidate for enhancement use by healthy adults. Am J Bioeth. 2013;13(7):23-33.
 
Source
Found a mistake? Please highlight the word and press Shift + Enter  
< Prev   CONTENTS   Next >