Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Who, if not the fda, should regulate implantable brain-computer interface devices?

  • Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology
  • Santa Clara University

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Implantable brain-computer interface (BCI) and other devices with potential for both therapeutic purposes and human enhancement are being rapidly developed. The distinction between therapeutic and enhancement uses of these devices is not well defined. While the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rightly determines what is safe and effective, this article argues that the FDA should not make subjective, value-laden assessments about risks and benefits when it comes to approval of BCIs for therapy and enhancement. This article also argues that determining BCIs' benefits to society requires deliberations on values that the FDA is neither accustomed to making nor qualified to make. Given the inadequacy of the FDA's safe-and-effective standard to judge devices spanning the spectrum of therapy to enhancement, this article argues that BCI regulation should not be overseen by the FDA.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)E7454-E749
JournalAMA Journal of Ethics
Volume23
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2021

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Who, if not the fda, should regulate implantable brain-computer interface devices?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this