360 GRADI MAGAZINE // MAY-JUNE 2021

that a person with Deep Brain Stimulation,
this is the technical name of the intervention,
feels or lives as a different person?
Why? What is the relationship between
us and our brain? We are in a season in
which technological advancement raises
questions to which scientific knowledge
and ethical needs are forced to chase each
other trying to offer an answer.
In addition to electronic systems, we have
experience in a series of chemical-pharmacological
interventions; we know a series
of molecules which, interacting with
neuronal receptors, alter the functioning
of individuals, such as, for example, antidepressants.
All of these substances originally
had to do with pathological conditions,
but today we are able to target the
functioning of some human personality
traits and modify them, even when not in
the psychopathological field. One field of
study, for example, is the wake-sleep cycle;
we have always been looking for stimulants,
from simple coffee to drugs that we
find sold on the streets. There are people
who manage to stay awake for 72 hours,
using substances such as cocaine; after
72 hours there is an unpleasant reaction,
called a crash, which lasts from nine hours
to four days. The person implodes and becomes
narcoleptic (heavy sleepiness), this
phase is characterized by sadness, apathy,
difficulty in attention and concentration,
anorexia and insomnia. We know, however,
some neuro-stimulators whose use
allows cycles of maximum attention and
maximum vigilance for 72 hours, then allowing
the individual to resume his functioning
in a normal way. Experiments of
this type were done with amphetamines
during World War II, for example, as pilots
needed high concentration; they
took these substances for long flight
missions, needing full attention for long
periods of time.
In more recent times, using off-label substances
(in ways not provided for that
drug) substances used to treat pathologies
such as Attention Disorder Syndrome,
we have the possibility to increase
the concentration of normal subjects in
a way unthinkable until now. These
substances, in a very recent report by
the journal Neuron, are the most widespread
substances in American colleges,
the most expensive ones, where you get
to pay from 30,000 to 50,000 dollars
for a year of studies. It is clear that we
want a very high yield compared to the
amounts invested, and these substances
allow students to do this, in addition to
having a normal social life; they go out
late at night and, before the exams, take
these drugs and manage to study whole
nights without ever losing concentration.
They are widely used among creatives
and professional poker players
favor them, as they allow them to stay
focused all night until morning. Many
truck drivers, even in Italy, take Provigil,
which is a drug against narcolepsy, to
be able to drive 12 or 13 hours without
falling asleep. Using neuro-drugs with
the aim of improvement is now a culturally
widespread practice. We are within
a culture that says that the human is
something malleable, on which we can
get our hands, and that the threshold of
the limit is simply linked to the will of
the subject.
Pharmacologically, we are able to control
what the memory process is; two drugs
are being approved by the FDA (the US
government body, which deals with the
regulation of food and pharmaceutical
products), whose initials are MEM-1213
and MEM-10111. These molecules give a
healthy subject the ability to permanently
settle memories; imagine a college student
who, after taking the pill, reads the book
and never forgets it for a lifetime. Obviously,
the risk is that this stay can also relate
to negative experiences, such as the
experience of violence; the person would
be condemned to live that traumatic event
every day with the same freshness and
with the same immediacy as when it happened.
We are sure that forgetting is not
a defect of human nature, but something
that we need to live life as we know it; understand
how necessary it becomes to ask
meaningful questions about the things we
can do.
We also know of the drugs that can be
used with those who went to be a soldier
on the front line and that allow, instead,
the cancellation of sedimented memories.
One general claimed that the United
States spends about $ 3 million to train
and equip a Marine who goes to the front.
Thanks to the training and equipment he
comes home alive from the battlefield, after
two nights he kills his wife, son, dog,
two neighbors and four passersby. This is
because his brain has been under severe
stress and he responds with a traumatic
condition, which is called PTSD. He needs a
substance for his brain that makes him immune
to this danger; for this purpose, cannabinoid-based
drugs are being developed
which, associated with psychotherapy, allow
the removal of selective memories.
What is at the base is the very concept
of malleability and improvement of the
human person.
The problem is represented by this ambiguity
of technology, which is colored
with different meanings, depending on
its use, and the challenge is posed precisely
at this level; the idea is to be able
to arrive at what is called an augmented
reality vision. This means putting layers
of information between us and reality,
in order to enrich the latter. This
system is now in the public domain and
the latest iPhone, in its operating system,
has incorporated elements of augmented
reality. NBIC (Nanotechnology,
Biotechnology, Information technology
and Cognitive science) conveys the idea
that, thanks to nanotechnologies, we
are now able to have machines that
can interface with molecules, because
they work more or less in the same dimension.
If we, at the nanometer level,
make these machines interact with a
biological system, we can have an information
exchange within a living body
controlled by us, which can produce a
cognitive response in the direction we
want. The question that arises at this
point is: can we do all we can do? All the
arguments articulated on this theme
are nothing more than a composition of
a few key arguments, which are played
with each other to obtain a yes or a no.
The main argument concerns the fear
of the uncertain and, in fact, responds
to the idea that every time we put our
hands on man, precisely because of the
complexity, we do not necessarily get
what we wanted to achieve, there is al-
36 360 GRADI 360 GRADI
37