WRITTEN QUESTION E-2398/02

by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission

(5 August 2002)

Subject: Neuroscience

Does the Commission not think that a public debate over the ethical limits to new developments in neuroscience is long overdue? Would the Commission not agree that there is a case for the creation of an advisory body similar to the one that has been set up to advise on genetics issues to advise the Commission and others in the field of neuroscience? If not why not?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2002)

The Commission agrees that new developments in Neuroscience do raise ethical questions. The Commission has already taken steps to address these issues by funding research projects on the ethical aspects of brain research and by organising symposia at international scientific conferences such as the symposium Ethics of psychiatric genetics at the World Congress on Psychiatric Genetics, Brussels 8 to 12 October 2002.

The Commission specifically recognises the need for open dialogue on the ethical and social impact of new technologies in both the Science and Society Action Plan(1) and in its communication on Life sciences and biotechnology A strategy for Europe(2).

The launching of a public debate regarding the advances in Neuroscience and its ethical and social implications is currently being discussed with the European Group on Life Sciences. This high level group of scientists was established in April 2000 by the Member of the Commission responsible for Research with the objective of contributing to the organisation and animation of a Life Science Discussion Platform. The Commission is willing to investigate the possibility of organising a public debate on this topic.

Providing advice on the ethical aspects of new developments in Neuroscience is clearly in the remits of the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. The Group is an independent, pluralist and multidisciplinary body with a wide range of expertise including science and medicine, informatics, law, philosophy and theology. Therefore, the Commission does not consider it necessary to create a new advisory body to give advice in the field of neuroscience.

(1) COM(2001) 714 final.

(2) OJ C 55, 2.3.2002.