RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 True and false concerns about neuroenhancement: a response to ‘Neuroenhancers, addiction and research ethics’, by D M Shaw
JF Journal of Medical Ethics
JO J Med Ethics
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Institute of Medical Ethics
SP 286
OP 287
DO 10.1136/medethics-2013-101317
VO 40
IS 4
A1 Andreas Heinz
A1 Roland Kipke
A1 Sabine Müller
A1 Urban Wiesing
YR 2014
UL http://jme.bmj.com/content/40/4/286.abstract
AB In his critical comment on our paper in this journal, Shaw argues that ‘false assumptions’ which we have criticised are in fact correct (‘Neuroenhancers, addiction and research ethics’). He suggests that the risk of addiction to neuroenhancers may not be relevant, and that safety and research in regard to neuroenhancement do not pose unique ethical problems. Here, we demonstrate that Shaw ignores key empirical research results, trivialises addiction, commits logical errors, confuses addictions and passions, argues on a speculative basis, and fails to distinguish the specific ethical conditions of clinical research from those relevant for research in healthy volunteers. Therefore, Shaw's criticism cannot convince.