A Breakthrough in the Checkered History Of Brain Hacking

A recent military-funded program could up-end the way brain research is conducted.

An actual human brain displayed inside a glass box, as part of an interactive exhbition 'Brain: a world inside your head', in Sao Paulo, Brazil, on August 21, 2009.
National Journal
Patrick Tucker, Defense One
Add to Briefcase
Patrick Tucker, Defense One
July 2, 2014, 7:07 a.m.

Sci­ent­ists fun­ded by the De­fense De­part­ment have just an­nounced a break­through that could al­low re­search­ers to cre­ate in 220 days an ex­tremely de­tailed pic­ture of the brain that pre­vi­ously would have taken 80 years of scans to com­plete.

The mil­it­ary has been look­ing to build bet­ter brain hacks for dec­ades with res­ults that ranged form the fright­en­ing to the com­ic­al. This latest de­vel­op­ment could re­vo­lu­tion­ize the study of the brain but also the na­tion­al se­cur­ity ap­plic­a­tions of neur­os­cience.

Sci­ent­ists at Stan­ford Uni­versity who de­veloped the new way to see the brain in great­er de­tail, out­lined in the journ­al Nature Pro­to­cols, said that it could mark a new era of rap­id brain ima­ging, al­low­ing re­search­ers to see in much great­er de­tail not only how parts of the brain in­ter­act on a cel­lu­lar level but also to bet­ter un­der­stand those in­ter­ac­tions across the en­tire brain.

“I ab­so­lutely be­lieve this is go­ing to trans­form the way that we study the brain and how we per­form neur­os­cience re­search,” said Justin Sanc­hez, pro­gram man­ager for the Neuro Func­tion, Activ­ity, Struc­ture, and Tech­no­logy, or Neuro-FAST, pro­gram at the De­fense Ad­vanced Re­search Pro­jects Agency, or DARPA, which fun­ded the re­search. “What we’re say­ing here today is that we can de­vel­op new tech­no­logy that changes how we ob­serve and in­ter­act with the cir­cuits of the brain.”

The most com­mon re­search meth­ods for ex­plor­ing the brain today in­volve the sens­ing of brains’ elec­tric­al activ­ity, a tech­nique called EEG, or ob­serving of hemo­globin flow un­der func­tion­al mag­net­ic res­on­ance, called fMRI. Rather than simply listen to the brain’s thought spasms of elec­tro-mag­net­ic activ­ity, the Stan­ford re­search­ers’ tech­nique in­stead uses light to re­veal caus­al re­la­tion­ships in the cir­cuits them­selves. “It’s all about op­tic­al in­ter­faces for the brain, op­tic­al tech­niques to im­age the brain, op­tic­al tech­niques to re­cord activ­ity from the brain and op­tic­al tech­niques to re­cord neur­ons and their fir­ing ef­fects form oth­er neur­ons,” said Sanc­hez.

This tech­nique is re­lated to the emer­ging sub­field of op­to­gen­et­ics, and while it is con­sidered the cut­ting edge of neur­os­cience re­search, it’s not new. But the tech­nique pi­on­eered by the Stan­ford re­search­ers al­lows for three-di­men­sion­al visu­al­iz­a­tion that is both gran­u­lar and wide enough to en­com­pass the en­tire brain. Said Sanc­hez, “Tra­di­tion­ally, with the op­to­gen­et­ic tech­nique, you really don’t have the struc­ture to go along with the ac­tiv­a­tion. That’s why the Neuro-FAST pro­gram is so ex­cit­ing.”

Sanc­hez and DARPA of­fi­cials were adam­ant (ex­ceed­ingly so) that the in­tent of the Neuro-FAST pro­gram is to ad­vance brain sci­ence broadly. Of­fi­cials were re­luct­ant to dis­cuss any oth­er spe­cif­ic ap­plic­a­tions for that re­search. But that doesn’t mean those ap­plic­a­tions don’t ex­ist, or that the mil­it­ary isn’t in­ter­ested in them.

The Checkered His­tory of Mil­it­ary Brain Tam­per­ing

For a quick and his­tor­ic tour of the De­fense De­part­ment’s in­terest in brain hack­ing, start with this 1973 re­port, writ­ten forDARPA, de­tail­ing So­viet re­search in­to psy­chokin­es­is, the ma­nip­u­la­tion of mat­ter through thought, and oth­er as­pects of “paranor­mal phe­nom­ena.” This re­port be­came part of the bases for the book and film The Men Who Stare At Goats, the later of which saw the char­ac­ter of George Clooney, as an army trained “psych­ic weapon,” suc­cess­fully killing one of the un­lucky hoofed an­im­als en­tirely through the force of fo­cused will.

Then move on to this 1988 Na­tion­al Academy Press re­port on is­sues, the­or­ies and tech­niques for “En­han­cing Hu­man Per­form­ance,” which eagerly an­ti­cip­ates fu­ture su­per sol­dier mo­tor skills and con­cen­tra­tion states ac­quired through ap­plied brain sci­ence. From there, con­tin­ue to this 2009 re­port out­lining Op­por­tun­it­ies in Neur­os­cience for Fu­ture Army Ap­plic­a­tions.

Over the years, the mil­it­ary’s re­search in­to brain sci­ence has pro­duced some bizarre res­ults, such as the DARPA ” rob­or­at” a rat that had elec­trodes im­planted in­to its mo­tor cor­tex al­low­ing re­search­ers to ma­nip­u­late dir­ec­tion and move­ment.

There have also been some big hits.

Re­search­ers at San­dia Na­tion­al Labor­at­ory showed in 2012 that the hu­man brain’s elec­tric­al activ­ity could pre­dict how well an in­di­vidu­al was go­ing to per­form on a test. Ac­cord­ing to The Fu­tur­ist magazine:

The re­search­ers asked 23 people to at­tempt to mem­or­ize a list of words while un­der­go­ing brain scan­ning. The av­er­age sub­ject re­called 45% of the words on the list. The EEG data cor­rectly pre­dicted which five of the 23 sub­jects would beat the com­pet­i­tion, re­mem­ber­ing 72% of the words on av­er­age.

If you had someone learn­ing new ma­ter­i­al and you were re­cord­ing the EEG, you might be able to tell them, ‘You’re go­ing to for­get this, you should study this again,’ or tell them, ‘OK, you got it and go on to the next thing,’” chief re­search­er Laura Matzen said in a state­ment.

A pre­vi­ous pro­gram ac­tu­ally did yield some re­mark­able in­sight in­to the po­ten­tial for bet­ter sol­dier per­form­ance through fo­cused brain states. Amy Kraus, a former DARPA pro­gram man­ager, on Monday told a group at the Po­tom­ac In­sti­tute for Policy Stud­ies, the work that she presided over suc­ceeded in find­ing the secret men­tal secret that pre­ceded good marks­man­ship. “It turns out the ex­pert marks­man has a brain state,” she said, “a state that they enter be­fore they take the per­fect shot. Can I teach a novice to cre­ate this brain state? The an­swer was yes.”

She said that by re­cog­niz­ing that state, re­search­ers were able to im­prove the abil­ity of reg­u­lar people to im­prove their marks­man­ship by 100 per­cent. “These are re­cord­able, meas­ur­able, al­gortyh­m­ic­al,” Kraus said.

But ac­cord­ing to Sanc­hez, im­proved per­form­ance through changes in brain state is still not something we truly un­der­stand.

“The neuro­pro­cesses as­so­ci­ated with those ad­vanced func­tions ““ we don’t know what they are yet. We don’t know how all of those ad­vanced cir­cuits can pro­duce those brain func­tions. That’s why we’re at the more ba­sic level.”

The abil­ity to see the cel­lu­lar in­ter­con­nec­tions that ac­tu­ally con­trib­ute to men­tal activ­ity is far more im­port­ant to an ac­tu­al un­der­stand­ing of men­tal states ““ su­per and oth­er­wise ““ than is the abil­ity to meas­ure the elec­tro­mag­net­ic rum­blings as­so­ci­ated with those states. Sim­il­arly, a bit of know-how about an­im­al hus­bandry will tell you something about why a horse is fast or slow but not nearly as much as will ge­net­ics.

One of the most sig­ni­fic­ant near-term ap­plic­a­tions of mil­it­ary-fun­ded neur­os­cience is not the po­ten­tial to cre­ate su­per sol­diers but rather an un­der­stand­ing the ef­fects of com­bat and train­ing on ser­vice men and wo­men. “As we’re do­ing more to and with war fight­ers, how much of a bur­den can we place on them? How much risk can we ex­pect them to take over a life­time? How much med­ic­a­tion? How many devices? How much change in their be­ha­vi­or, through dir­ect ma­nip­u­la­tion of their brains?” said Jonath­an D. Moreno, Uni­versity of Pennsylvania pro­fess­or and au­thor of the book Mind Wars, at the Po­tom­ac In­sti­tute. “These are people who sign up to de­fend us. They sign up to take risks. Non­ethe­less, in the 21st cen­tury, we will have to slice that finer than we have in the past be­cause we are ask­ing them to do more for us.”

What We're Following See More »
Report: Trump Asked FBI to Deny Russia Stories
2 days ago

"The FBI rejected a recent White House request to publicly knock down media reports about communications between Donald Trump's associates and Russians known to US intelligence during the 2016 presidential campaign, multiple US officials briefed on the matter tell CNN. But a White House official said late Thursday that the request was only made after the FBI indicated to the White House it did not believe the reporting to be accurate."

How Many Signatures Has the Petition for Trump’s Tax Returns Received?
3 days ago

More than 1 million, setting a record. More than 100,000 signatures triggers an official White House response.

Sen. Collins Open to Subpoena of Trump’s Tax Returns
3 days ago

Sen. Susan Collins, who sits on the Intelligence Committee, "said on Wednesday she's open to using a subpoena to investigate President Donald Trump's tax returns for potential connections to Russia." She said the committee is also open to subpoenaing Trump himself. "This is a counter-intelligence operation in many ways," she said of Russia's interference. "That's what our committee specializes in. We are used to probing in depth in this area."

Obama Staffers Launch Group to Monitor Trump Ethics
3 days ago

"Top lawyers who helped the Obama White House craft and hold to rules of conduct believe President Donald Trump and his staff will break ethics norms meant to guard against politicization of the government — and they’ve formed a new group to prepare, and fight. United to Protect Democracy, which draws its name from a line in President Barack Obama’s farewell address that urged his supporters to pick up where he was leaving off, has already raised a $1.5 million operating budget, hired five staffers and has plans to double that in the coming months." Meanwhile, NPR has launched a "Trump Ethics Monitor" to track the resolution of ten ethics-related promises that the president has made.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.