From brain scans to beta-blockers, neuro-technologies are proving controversial. Stanford-trained neurologist and ethicist Dr Judy Illes led a discussion on the role of neuroscience in performance enhancement at UBC Robson Square on September 17.

Illes lectured an audience of nine, mostly neuroscientists, about the perils of using brain science in the pursuit for athletic perfection.
“These issues aren’t purely black and white,” said Illes, “but we need to proceed with thoughtfulness if we are to take these technologies out of the medical arena and into the sports arena.”

Her talk was the first in a series of 20 thought-provoking public lectures entitled “Intellectual Muscle,” hosted by VANOC and UBC Continuing Studies, in collaboration with universities across Canada and The Globe and Mail. Future lectures will touch on issues of gender, ethics and sustainability as they relate to the 2010 Winter Games.

“We’re spending $30,000 to host these talks from Canada’s best and brightest,” said Don Black, director of education programs for VANOC, who is assisting with the podcasting of 20 of the coming lectures. Illes’ was the first and will be posted to the Globe online in October. “We’re really hoping to engage people in what the Games mean for society, not only for 2010 but also with thought for the future,” said Black.

“The public needs a better understanding of the ethics behind these issues,” said Illes. “It’s important that neuroscience doesn’t get pulled into a place where it shouldn’t be.” As the director of UBC’s National Core for Neuroethics—a think tank concerned with tackling ethical issues at the intersection of neuroscience and society—one of Illes’ primary research agendas is public knowledgeability about brain research. The Olympics have proven a good platform to advance this agenda when the nature of human achievement is top of the mind for many.

Since the early 90s, cognitive neuroscientists have been using brain-imaging technology such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to observe the human brain in action. Evidently it has become a powerful tool in analyzing athletic ability.

“We are definitely seeing an emergence of imaging technologies in sport,” said Illes, “primarily for diagnostic purposes, but more and more it is being used to assess ability.” 

Canada’s Olympic swim team has been quick to take advantage of this development. Hap Davis, the team’s psychologist, uses fMRI technology to provide feedback on aquatic performance. An article published in the June 2008 issue of Brain Imaging and Behavior demonstrated that the swimmers who watched a video of their own poor performance had increased activity in emotional centres of the brain associated with depression. More significantly, they correlated this depressive state with decreased activity in parts of the cerebral cortex essential for planning movement.

This research, conducted in part by neuroscientist Mario Liotti from SFU, has influenced the swim team’s strategy, Davis said in an interview with Science magazine. “We pick up on [any negativity] right away and intervene.” Such interventions include visualizing swimming a better race as well as jumping exercises, both of which have been shown to have a positive effect on improving mood and performance.

What concerns Illes, however, is not the benefit of jumping jacks but ways in which technologies traditionally used for medical intervention can now be used to enhance performance. What if selective-serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), often used to treat depression and anxiety, could give a sombre snowboarder an extra edge by boosting her mood?

SSRIs are not on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) list of prohibited substances and in fact they are recommended as an allowed alternative to Modafinil, a substance used to treat narcolepsy but also shown to enhance alertness in healthy individuals.

Public speakers and musicians often use anxiety-alleviating drugs called beta-blockers (developed to treat high blood pressure) to reduce performance anxiety during a speech or concert, but beta-blockers are prohibited from most Olympic events, except hockey and figure skating. Illes questions the safety of blockers on the ice. Could a reduced fear response increase injury or amplify aggression?

Brain scans are capable of observing atypical patterns of activity within an individual brain that may be associated with the use of prohibited substances. Could brain imaging be the next best drug-test? “There is something much more personal about picturing the brain than taking a blood or urine sample,” said Illes. “Personally, I would prefer the latter if I had a choice.”

Another consequence of using a medical device for a non-medical purpose is potentially discovering a previously undetected abnormality. What responsibility would a sports psychologist have to reveal a brain disease—such as a tumour—to an athlete, especially if it could jeopardize his career? On the flip side, would a scan make an athlete less inclined to train if they believed that they had a gold-medal brain?

And while the benefits to performance from brain scans may be minute, obviously not all athletes have access to these boons. As Illes noted from a recent trip to Africa, the entire country of Uganda only has one fMRI machine. Many developing countries competing in the Olympics have a difficult time accessing even essential medications, let alone beta-blockers.

But the ethical implications of using drugs for performance enhancement pale in comparison to stimulating the brain using electrodes.

Burrowing electrical leads deep into brain tissue using an intervention known as deep brain stimulation has been shown to alleviate tremors associated with Parkinson’s as well in treating chronic depression. A study reported in the December 2004 issue of Neuron showed that stimulating the motor cortex of primates “improved muscle coordination and movement velocity”.

“I think it’s a real possibility that DBS could have future implications for athletic performance, not to mention for society in general,” said Linda Lanyon, a computational neuroscientist with the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research. “Are we all going to have to go around in the future taking drugs and getting implants just to keep up?”