Beyer Chad, Staunton Ciara, Moodley Keymanthri
Centre for Medical Ethics and Law, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Tygerberg Campus, Cape Town, South Africa.
BMC Med Ethics. 2014 Mar 4;15:20. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-15-20.
The use of medical stimulants to sustain attention, augment memory and enhance intellectual capacity is increasing in society. The use of Methylphenidate for cognitive enhancement is a subject that has received much attention in the literature and academic circles in recent times globally. Medical doctors and medical students appear to be equally involved in the off-label use of Methylphenidate. This presents a potential harm to society and the individual as the long-term side effect profile of this medication is unknown.
The implication of the use of Methylphenidate by medical students and doctors has not been fully explored. This article considers the impact of this use on the traditional role of medicine, society, the patient and suggests a way forward. We discuss the salient philosophy surrounding the use of cognitive enhancement. We query whether there are cognitive benefits to the use of Methylphenidate in healthy students and doctors and whether these benefits would outweigh the risks in taking the medication. Could these benefits lead to tangible outcomes for society and could the off label-use of Methylphenidate potentially undermine the medical profession and the treatment of patients? If cognitive benefits are proven then doctors may be coerced explicitly or implicitly to use the drug which may undermine their autonomy. The increased appeal of cognitive enhancement challenges the traditional role of medicine in society, and calls into question the role of a virtuous life as a contributing factor for achievement. In countries with vast economic disparity such as South Africa an enhancement of personal utility that can be bought may lead to greater inequities.
Under the status quo the distribution of methylphenidate is unjust. Regulatory governmental policy must seek to remedy this while minimising the potential for competitive advantage for the enhanced. Public debate on the use of cognitive enhancement is long overdue and must be stimulated. The use of Methylphenidate for cognitive enhancement is philosophically defendable if long-term research can prove that the risks are negligible and the outcomes tangible.
在社会上,使用医学兴奋剂来维持注意力、增强记忆力和提高智力的情况日益增多。使用哌醋甲酯进行认知增强是近年来全球文献和学术界备受关注的一个话题。医生和医学生似乎同样参与了哌醋甲酯的非标签使用。由于这种药物的长期副作用尚不明确,这对社会和个人都存在潜在危害。
医学生和医生使用哌醋甲酯的影响尚未得到充分探讨。本文考虑了这种使用对医学的传统角色、社会、患者的影响,并提出了前进的方向。我们讨论了围绕认知增强使用的突出理念。我们质疑在健康的学生和医生中使用哌醋甲酯是否有认知益处,以及这些益处是否会超过服用该药物的风险。这些益处能否为社会带来切实成果,哌醋甲酯的非标签使用是否会潜在地损害医学专业和患者治疗?如果认知益处得到证实,那么医生可能会受到明确或隐含的压力去使用该药物,这可能会损害他们的自主性。认知增强吸引力的增加挑战了医学在社会中的传统角色,并质疑了美好生活作为成就贡献因素的作用。在南非等经济差距巨大的国家,购买可实现的个人效用提升可能会导致更大的不平等。
在现状下,哌醋甲酯的分配是不公平的。政府监管政策必须寻求补救这一问题,同时尽量减少增强者获得竞争优势的可能性。关于认知增强使用的公开辩论早就应该进行,必须加以推动。如果长期研究能够证明风险可忽略不计且结果切实可行,那么使用哌醋甲酯进行认知增强在哲学上是可以辩护的。