Geekend: Predicting Your Future By Scanning Your Brain - InformationWeek
IoT
IoT
IT Life
Commentary
1/9/2015
10:50 AM
David Wagner
David Wagner
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
100%
0%

Geekend: Predicting Your Future By Scanning Your Brain

Is your entire future locked up in a few brain scans?

Top 10 Social Network Blunders Of 2014
Top 10 Social Network Blunders Of 2014
(Click image for larger view and slideshow.)

Give me a few minutes and an MRI and I'll tell you whether you're going to be good at math, or drink too much this weekend, or even end up in jail. Well, maybe I can't, but a review of research on brain scans done by functional MRI, published in the journal Neuron, is showing we're starting to unlock the keys to certain behaviors that will predict future days (and sometimes decades) in advance.

It makes sense. While we tend to think of a brain as a brain, we all have variations in size and shape and function. Scientists call those "neuromarkers." A neuromarker might be something as simple as the size of a portion of your brain, or a measure of the activity inside a section, or even the metabolism in a part of a brain. Really, it is anything we can measure and show there is deviation. Some neuromarkers don't mean anything at all, but we're starting to see some that can mean a great deal.

Just as an example, if you have a higher-volume striatum, a part of your forebrain, you're probably going to be good at video games. This isn't a real shocker. The striatum helps govern movement, and we think it might also govern some "executive functions" like task flexibility and memory. Since video games are all about physical skills and task flexibility, having a big striatum is obviously a good thing.

[Maybe you should've done a brain scan during the hiring process. See 10 Signs You've Hired The Wrong Person.]

But some are less obvious and a little more ominous. One of the least successful areas of human psychology is understanding whether a person is likely to commit another crime after getting out of prison. Simply put, we're really bad at it. However, a study reviewed in the paper was able to strongly correlate whether a person would return to prison within four years based on whether he had a high or low activation rate in the anterior cingulate cortex. The correlation was much stronger than any previous method used to predict recurring crime. You don't need to know what the anterior cingulate cortex does (it deals with cognitive conflict) to see the frightening implications of this.

While predicting whether someone will commit a crime again is a benefit to society, an increased likelihood is not a certainty. Making decisions on bail, parole, or sentencing based on probabilities is rather frightening. And God forbid we start scanning people to see if they will commit their first crime before they've done anything wrong.

(Source: NIH)
(Source: NIH)

The amazing thing is that this paper reviewed dozens of studies just like these two. We have studies showing we can predict your future success in reading and math from infancy, how you will respond to psychological and pharmacological treatments for depression, and even your chances of using sunscreen.

They all have varying levels of success. Some do not necessarily live up to existing or less-expensive methods of determining certain outcomes. But many do. Many (bearing in mind many still have small sample sizes) are showing an ability to predict, better than current methods, your very future. Taking a single test to see how well you will play video games is one thing. But as we pile up these tests something frightening happens. We get to know your whole future.

With ample testing we could tell if a baby is going to be good at reading, be good at math, be an alcoholic, be a good musician, be a drug addict, be a criminal, use sunscreen, or be able to quit (or start) smoking. And that's just some of the 20+ potential outcomes reviewed in the study. They will continue to add up.

So here's the thing: Your brain at birth is not your total existence. Your experience matters, too. You might have a great big striatum and never play a video game or be an athlete or whatever. You might waste your striatum without ever knowing it. You also might have a tiny striatum but play video games every day and get better at them than me. (Well, actually no one is better at video games than me, but you get the point.)

Not all of these things are dead certainties. Some are probabilities, correlations, peeks into our potential. In some cases we can actually intervene and "fix" you. If we know at birth you are more likely to be an alcoholic, we might be able to intervene before you ever drink a beer.

But some are a little more certain -- like your response to certain medications. You can't practice being susceptible to certain drugs (although your experience with drugs can alter your susceptibility). Heck, we even have a test that shows whether you are more likely to feel the effects of a placebo.

Navigating these probabilities and certainties is going to be a tough job. We've seen science say we're 100% going to destroy the Earth if we don't reduce carbon emissions, and a bunch of people don't believe it or act as if they don't. Imagine if a scientist says, "That man is 60% likely to commit a crime." The political and social response would be insane. And imagine if that scientist said something like, "People with a certain skin color are more likely to have a neuromarker that makes them 60% more likely to commit a crime." Pandemonium.

On the other hand, what if a neuromarker said that we could keep someone from killing herself if we put her on this drug today, and she would feel like a happier, healthier version of herself? Or if a neuromarker said, "This child has musical gifts" -- give her a violin?

We're only scratching the surface, but we're scratching it as fast as a cat falling off a couch. We're going to have to be ready for when this early neuromarker knowledge becomes mature enough that scientists can start making predictions we may or may not want to hear. What will you do when a test can tell you your baby isn't that smart, even before it says its first words? Or if it tells you he or she could be a genius?

Would you take these tests? How would you act, based on the results? Should governments make use of them in legal cases? In effect, how much of you and your future are predestined by your brain? Share your thoughts (assuming they aren't pre-destined) in the comments.

Attend Interop Las Vegas, the leading independent technology conference and expo series designed to inspire, inform, and connect the world's IT community. In 2015, look for all new programs, networking opportunities, and classes that will help you set your organization’s IT action plan. It happens April 27 to May 1. Register with Discount Code MPOIWK for $200 off Total Access & Conference Passes.

David has been writing on business and technology for over 10 years and was most recently Managing Editor at Enterpriseefficiency.com. Before that he was an Assistant Editor at MIT Sloan Management Review, where he covered a wide range of business topics including IT, ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
tjgkg
50%
50%
tjgkg,
User Rank: Ninja
2/21/2015 | 6:50:11 AM
Re: Expectations
Hi Susan, It is so important to treat children with kindness and encouragement. Starting life feeling worthless or not good enough is very difficult. The world can be a cruel place and kids need to feel that they can be successful and bring a lot of talent to the table. Not to the point like you see on some of those early American Idol auditions, but realistic encouragement. Because it only gets tougher as you grow older.
batye
50%
50%
batye,
User Rank: Ninja
2/3/2015 | 11:17:54 AM
Re: The end of crime?
@GAProgrammer interesting to know, I could not agree more... but where we should draw a line...??? or should we??? :)
kstaron
50%
50%
kstaron,
User Rank: Ninja
1/16/2015 | 4:41:31 PM
Nature vs. Nurture
The way the brain works can determine a lot of things about you, but with experience an alcoholic can be in recovery a learning disabled child can still read and be good a math. Nature is who are genes make us, Nurture is how the world changes us. For evidence of this look at studies that focus on identical twins seperated at birth. At birth they had the same brain but often go in different directions depending on the love and care they recieve while going through different life experiences. This brain scan technology could have great benefits to help people use their best gifts and mitigate their worst faults if we use it wisely.
David Wagner
50%
50%
David Wagner,
User Rank: Strategist
1/16/2015 | 11:34:53 AM
Re: The end of crime?
@li tan- No, not at all. And it doesn't claim to. At best, what it can do is identify the characteristics of the brain that makes certain crimes possible-- like impulse control. The goal of the study was to simply make better parole decisions by seeing what were the characteristics of people who stayed out of jail a second time and who came back. There's a long way to go before being predictive. But the study was already more accurate than some existing methods we use. 
Li Tan
50%
50%
Li Tan,
User Rank: Ninja
1/16/2015 | 10:44:09 AM
Re: The end of crime?
Well, I do believe that this is science but I doubt about the reliability of the test. Can it predict all possible criminals? If someone is predicted to be a potential criminal, what we should do? Arrest him even if he did not commit any crime?
David Wagner
50%
50%
David Wagner,
User Rank: Strategist
1/15/2015 | 1:07:24 PM
Re: The end of crime?
@Susan- While I love the thought of nanobots, I still think the vaccine approach or increased early detection is goign to win out. There's no reason we can't train the immune system to do what we're planning on teaching those nanobots to do. And probably faster. Our immune system is amazingly good at adatping and killing things. 

Also, sending genetic signals to cancer cells to behave like "normal" cells has promise, too. I think we've got a better chance of doing either of those faster than inventing nanobots and teahcing them to kill only cancer cells.
Susan Fourtané
50%
50%
Susan Fourtané,
User Rank: Author
1/14/2015 | 10:15:09 PM
Re: The end of crime?
David, 

There were treatments left, but did it mean she had a chance, or was it more something to extend her suffering for a bit longer? That's the true thing to look into. Because, I am again assuming that if she was ready to die is because she was going to die anyway anytime soon, treatments or not treatments. Probably tolerating those treatments had become too much for her. 

I am assuming if she would have had a chance of survival --which is rare in cancer cases-- she would have kept fighting. Extending her suffering is not giving her quality of life. Forcing her to tolerate her condition is even worse, physical and psychologically speaking.  

If you have a link to this case, I would like to read more about it. So far, I am just assuming the reasons why she preferred to die. I would like to know the facts behind it.

A cure for cancer might come in the form of nanobots implanted into the patient, which could destroy the first cancerigenous cells as soon as they appear, not allowing them to expand to vital organs. Medicine doesn't seem to have advanced too much in cancer treatments. 

-Susan  
David Wagner
50%
50%
David Wagner,
User Rank: Strategist
1/14/2015 | 11:02:22 AM
Re: The end of crime?
There were treatments left. That's the problem. But the horrible thing about cancer drugs is sometimes in the moment they feel worse than the disease. A lot of people suffering from cancer feel better (in the short term) without their medicine. It is just an awful disease and I suspect we can always assume some tragedy around it until we find a a true cure.
Susan Fourtané
50%
50%
Susan Fourtané,
User Rank: Author
1/14/2015 | 1:59:44 AM
Re: The end of crime?
David, 

Yes, yes. I see your point. I agree that courts are on a weird position. But I still think they should have respected the teenage girl. I am assuming there were no more treatments for trying, and/or everything was just too much for her. I read another story recently about a child being hit by a car. Is that the same case? 

-Susan
David Wagner
50%
50%
David Wagner,
User Rank: Strategist
1/14/2015 | 1:42:57 AM
Re: The end of crime?
@Susan- To be honest, I don't know enough of the details to have an opinion. But courts ar ein a weird spot. If a parent doesn't do everything to keep their child alive, they could be shunned or even imprisoned. Imagine if a toddler walked into the street and all a parent did was say, "hey, maybe you should come back here" and the child was hit by a car.

Now imagine a parent tried three cancer drugs and there were three more. 

I don't know. But I think that's the problem courts are under. If a parent still has a shot to save their child, society usually says thay should try.
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
How Enterprises Are Attacking the IT Security Enterprise
How Enterprises Are Attacking the IT Security Enterprise
To learn more about what organizations are doing to tackle attacks and threats we surveyed a group of 300 IT and infosec professionals to find out what their biggest IT security challenges are and what they're doing to defend against today's threats. Download the report to see what they're saying.
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
Digital Transformation Myths & Truths
Transformation is on every IT organization's to-do list, but effectively transforming IT means a major shift in technology as well as business models and culture. In this IT Trend Report, we examine some of the misconceptions of digital transformation and look at steps you can take to succeed technically and culturally.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.
Flash Poll