Ethical aspects of the abuse of pharmaceutical enhancements by healthy people in the context of improving cognitive functions

Abstract

Better memory, greater motivation and concentration lead to greater productivity, efficiency and performance, all of which are features that are highly valued in a modern society focused on productivity. In the effort for better cognitive abilities, otherwise healthy individuals use cognitive enhancers (also known as nootropics), medicines for the treatment of cognitive deficits of patients with various disorders and health problems, such as Alzheimer’s disease, schizophrenia, stroke, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder or ageing. The use of these is more common in professions with emphasised cognitive abilities, or in occupations that require more attention, focus and alertness. Their use is also associated with the general working population, in that they are supposed to use them to alleviate the effects of sleep deprivation and to cope with increasing workloads. In the paper, we are addressing the ethical issue and the dilemmas of the use of pharmaceutical enhancements by healthy people who have no medical reason for taking such substances, in the context of improving their cognitive functions.

Pharmacological Neuroenhancement: Current Aspects of Categorization, Epidemiology, Pharmacology, Drug Development, Ethics, and Future Perspectives

“…pNE users and susceptible groups primarily involve students and employees with predominantly cognitive activity conducting either sporadic situational or habitual pNE. In addition, professions with predominant night work, shift, or extended work are also affected, as pNE is supposed to attenuate the effects of sleep deprivation and increasing workloads [ 83 ]. Notably, the misuse of pNE drugs can also increase the susceptibility to use alcohol and illicit substances [ 44 , 47 , 49 , 84 – 90 ].…”

“…The numerous advantages of pNE for an individual are apparent: increase in cognitive performance, sleep reduction, mood enhancement, improvement of executive functions, reduction of psychosomatic side effects, increase in efficiency and controllability of mental processes, hedonism, an individual complication-free adaptation to external and internal requirements, and no “hardships of learning” [ 83 , 199 , 200 ]. Further advantages might include benefits for the society due to reduced resting periods, greater competitiveness, increased productivity and efficiency, advantages on the job market, and related higher living standards [ 83 , 201 ]. The economic and social benefits could be dependent on reliable, consistent, and sustainable cognitive performance, emotional stability, and intellectual creativity and innovation [ 83 ].…”

“…Further advantages might include benefits for the society due to reduced resting periods, greater competitiveness, increased productivity and efficiency, advantages on the job market, and related higher living standards [ 83 , 201 ]. The economic and social benefits could be dependent on reliable, consistent, and sustainable cognitive performance, emotional stability, and intellectual creativity and innovation [ 83 ].…”

“…In contrast, there are numerous, partially fatal disadvantages of pNE, such as negative consequences on individual and public somatic and mental health, furthermore the dissolving of a clear distinction between work and life undermining work-life balance. Uncontrolled competition among students, academics, and other employees, related physical and mental health implications; globalization of social life; and a consumer-focused society with disintegration of traditional moral conceptions are other major concerns [ 83 ].…”

“…The apparent ethical dilemma seems to be a theoretical one at the first glance. It directly affects the philosophical concepts of brain-mind relation [ 83 , 202 , 203 ]. From a neuroethical point of view, the exceptional ethical implications of pharmacological brain modulation by pNE have to be considered, in specific, the questioning of human subject quality and its authenticity [ 200 ].…”