EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT Science and Technology Options Assessment S T O A HUMAN ENHANCEMENT STUDY (IP/A/STOA/FWC/2005-28/SC35, 41 & 45) IPOL/A/STOA/2007-13 PE 417.483 DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT A: ECONOMIC AND SCIENTIFIC POLICY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS ASSESSMENT HUMAN ENHANCEMENT STUDY Abstract The study attempts to bridge the gap between visions on human enhancement (HE) and the relevant technoscientific developments. It outlines possible strategies of how to deal with HE in a European context, identifying a reasoned pro-enhancement approach, a reasoned restrictive approach and a case-by-case approach as viable options for the EU. The authors propose setting up a European body (temporary committee or working group) for the development of a normative framework that guides the formulation of EU policies on HE. IP/A/STOA/FWC/2005-28/SC35, 41 & 45 May 2009 PE 417.483 EN STOA - Science and Technology Options Assessment This project was carried out by the Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS), Research Centre Karlsruhe, and the Rathenau Institute, as members of the European Technology Assessment Group (ETAG). It was commissioned under specific contracts IP/A/STOA/FWC/2005-28/SC35, 41 & 45. AUTHORS Mr Christopher COENEN (ITAS) Ms Mirjam SCHUIJFF (Rathenau Institute) Ms Martijntje SMITS (Rathenau Institute) Mr Pim KLAASSEN (University of Amsterdam) Mr Leonhard HENNEN (ITAS) Mr Michael RADER (ITAS) Mr Gregor WOLBRING (University of Calgary) RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATOR Mr Theodoros KARAPIPERIS Policy Department A: Economic and Scientific Policy DG Internal Policies European Parliament Rue Wiertz 60 - ATR 00K070 B-1047 Brussels E-mail: [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN ABOUT THE EDITOR To contact STOA or to subscribe to its newsletter please write to: [email protected] Manuscript completed in May 2009. Brussels, © European Parliament, 2009. This document is available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/default_en.htm DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. 2 Human Enhancement CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 1. HUMAN ENHANCEMENT TECHNOLOGIES 16 1.1 Defining Human Enhancement and Enhancement Technologies 16 1.1.1 Therapy and Enhancement 17 1.1.2 Enhancement, Technoscience and Nature/Nurture 20 1.1.3 Our Definitions and the Further Aims of the Study 22 1.2 Progress and Prospects of Non-Therapeutic Enhancements 25 1.2.1 Cognition and Perception 26 1.2.2 Motor Skills and Strength 32 1.2.3 Conclusion 35 2. TOWARD AN ENHANCEMENT SOCIETY? 38 2.1 Heated Discussions and Far-Ranging Visions 40 2.1.1 The Concerns of Dehumanisation and Moral Decline 40 2.1.2 Concerns Regarding the Political Abuse of Enhancement Technologies 42 2.1.3 Belief in Technological Fixes 42 2.1.4 Questioning the Hype and the Trends toward an Enhancement Society 43 2.2 Broader Societal Tendencies and Issues 46 2.2.1 Globalisation 47 2.2.2 Popular Views of Human Enhancement 49 2.2.3 Religion and Cultural Differences 52 2.2.4 Changes in Concepts and Systems of Health Care 57 2.2.5 Disability, Human Enhancement, and Environmental Challenges 60 2.3 Pushing Boundaries with Genetic Therapies and Doping? 64 2.3.1. Gene Therapy, Genetic Enhancement and Gene Doping 64 2.3.2 Introduction of Gene Doping: Concerns and Consequences 66 2.3.3 Obstinate Questions and Issues 70 2.4 The Case of Designer Babies 71 2.4.1 It’s a Fantasy: the Dream of the Perfect Child 72 2.4.2 It is a Reality: the Saviour Baby, Cosmetic Baby and Disability Baby 73 2.4.3 Status Quo of PGD: the Technique and its Demand 76 2.4.4 Main Social and Ethical Worries on PGD 77 2.4.5 Regulatory Arrangements on PGD 78 2.4.6 Conclusion 79 3 STOA - Science and Technology Options Assessment 2.5 Better Performing Students and Employees with Ritalin? 80 2.5.1 The Success Story of Ritalin 81 2.5.2 Ongoing Controversies 82 2.5.3 Remaining Issues of Concern 86 2.6 Deep Brain Stimulation: Push-Button Mood Control? 86 2.6.1. Deep Brain Stimulation and its Applications: State-of-the-Art 87 2.6.2. Promises of the Present and Images of the Past 87 2.6.3 Concerns and Consequences 89 2.6.4 Conclusion 91 2.7 One Trend Instead of Four Separate Cases 92 2.7.1 New Practices Arise from Cutting-Edge Science 92 2.7.2 Sufficiently Regulated New Practices? 93 2.8 The Promotion of Human Enhancement 94 2.8.1 Organised Transhumanists, Their Mentors and Milieus 95 2.8.2 Science Communication and the Ethics of Technology 97 2.8.3 Policy Activities on Converging Technologies 103 2.8.4 Industry and Investors 106 2.8.5 Military and Space Research 107 2.8.6 The Ideology of Extreme Progress 109 2.9 Enhancement, Progress and European Cultural Values 111 3. THE GOVERNANCE OF HUMAN ENHANCEMENT AND THE EU 115 3.1 The European Debate on Human Enhancement 115 3.1.1 Nanotechnology, Converging Technologies and Human Enhancement 116 3.1.2 The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies 121 3.1.3 Other Relevant EU-Funded Projects 124 3.1.4 Conclusions 125 3.2 Selected EU-Funded Research and Development Projects 126 3.3 Challenges to Existing Normative Frameworks 129 3.4 Legal and Regulatory Aspects of Human Enhancement 134 3.5 First Steps toward the Governance of Human Enhancement 139 4. POLICY OPTIONS FOR THE EU 141 4.1 Domains challenged by human enhancement trends 143 4.2 Developing a normative framework 144 4.3 A European Body on Human Enhancement Technologies 148 4 Human Enhancement REFERENCES 151 APPENDICES 170 1. The Expert Meetings 170 1.1 Invited Experts 170 1.2 The First Expert Meeting 171 1.3 The Second Expert Meeting 178 1.4 Our Conclusions of Both Meetings 188 2. The STOA Workshop in the European Parliament 190 5 STOA - Science and Technology Options Assessment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The umbrella term “human enhancement” refers to a wide range of existing, emerging and visionary technologies, including pharmaceutical products: neuroimplants that provide replacement sight or other artificial senses, drugs that boost brain power, human germline engineering and existing reproductive technologies, nutritional supplements, new brain stimulation technologies to alleviate suffering and control mood, gene doping in sports, cosmetic surgery, growth hormones for children of short stature, anti-ageing medication, and highly sophisticated prosthetic applications that may provide specialised sensory input or mechanical output. All these technologies signal the blurring of boundaries between restorative therapy and interventions that aim to bring about improvements extending beyond such therapy. As most of them stem from the medical realm, they can boost societal tendencies of medicalisation when increasingly used to treat non-pathological conditions. In the present study, we do not rely on the still widespread conceptual distinction between “therapy” and “enhancement”, but instead, in line with recent political statements on the issue, adopt a notion of human enhancement that includes non-therapeutic as well as some therapeutic measures. Defining human enhancement, for heuristic and politically pragmatic reasons, as any “modification aimed at improving individual human performance and brought about by science-based or technology-based interventions in the human body”, we distinguish between (i) restorative or preventive, non-enhancing interventions, (ii) therapeutic enhancements, and (iii) non-therapeutic enhancements. We view human enhancement primarily as offering a specific perspective on developments in science, technology, medicine and society. The effects of human enhancement technologies (HET) can be either long term or even permanent (as in the case of genetic enhancements), or temporary (such as improved concentration levels brought about by drugs). The aim may be to improve our natural abilities (for example by making us stronger or happier) or to give us characteristics or abilities that no human being has ever possessed before, such as full night vision, or even extra senses. The phenomenon of human enhancement shows a Janus face: on the one hand, there are a range of technoscientific developments, and of social and individual demands and desires that often appear in themselves to be highly relevant from an ethical or political point of view, yet also interact in a way that can be said to amount to a tendency towards an “enhancement society”. On the other hand, the convergence of technologies and of the related visions of human enhancement is actively driven forward by a number of social groups and networks in science, technology and research policy, among them a couple of key players in these fields. Faced with the often highly visionary and strongly ideological character of the debate on human enhancement, one must strive for a balance between advancing a rational discussion through critical analysis of the relevant visions and normative stances, and taking a close look at the diversity of HET and their actual social, technological and political significance. 6 Human Enhancement The present study is a systematic attempt to bridge the gap between, on the one hand, the visions and their cultural and ideological aspects, and, on the other hand, the technoscientific developments in question and their social aspects and implications. The tension between these two faces of the human enhancement topic is maintained throughout the study. It neither relies on views that discard the issue (and with it many of the technologies in question) on account of its speculative features, nor does it intermingle fantasies and vision with real or emerging developments in a way that hinders rational dis- cussion and misleads policy-makers and the public.