How Bluetooth could save your life

Posted on April 14, 2013 by thebrainbank

“The iPhone is great, but what if I wanted to put it in my brain?” John A Rogers from the University of Illinois asked this question at a recent talk about electronics that work inside our bodies. From stretchy electronic devices on the surface of our skin to implanted devices that “talk” to our smartphones; the future of medicine could be getting under your skin.

We are now able to produce silicone circuits which are as flexible as a rubber band and as thin as a temporary tattoo. This means that devices can be stuck on to our skin and left to measure signs of ill health such as temperature, hydration and heartbeat. These devices are particularly useful in neonatal care. But scientists are now taking this technology even further…

dissolvableElectronic devices that are safe enough to be implanted inside our bodies and simply dissolve away when they’ve done their job are becoming a reality. They are made from silicone and magnesium, which exist naturally in small concentrations inside the body and are safe enough to be implanted. The innovation that makes these dissolvable devices possible is the development of tiny silicone membranes with imprinted magnesium circuitry. These membranes can be less than 100 millionth of a meter thick and dissolve easily in the slightly alkali conditions of our blood. Scientists can control the amount of time these devices stick around inside the body by wrapping them in a thin layer of silk protein.

800px-Silkworms3000pxSilk is non-harmful and dissolvable, so makes an ideal covering material. Silk fibres (from silk worms) are broken down by boiling in salt water to create a kind of liquid silk that is then used to coat the devices. By altering the processing of the silk protein, it is possible to control how long it will take to dissolve in the body, hence controlling how long the device will last.

The first gadgets to be produced in this way simply heat up; these can be implanted into wounds or at the site of a bone fracture during surgery. Raising the temperature by just a few degrees at the site of a wound can be enough to kill bacteria and ensure the area remains sterile. Scientists have also made devices that can measure electrical activity within the brain, though so far these have only been tested in animals. The future of this disappearing technology is very exciting, for instance in allowing controlled drug delivery in a particular location.

Another new technology being developed in the world of medical electronics involves wireless communication from inside the body. Scientists have produced a wireless implant that can predict a heart attack. This small chip can be implanted under the skin to detect various substances circulating in the bloodstream, including a molecule called troponin. This is released by heart muscle when it is under the extreme strain that precedes a heart attack. The implant has a radio transmitter that sends signals to a patch outside the body. This can then transmit data to a smartphone via Bluetooth. The chip is currently being trialled in patients in intensive care, but in the future could be used by those who are at high risk of heart problems. In the future, chips like this one could also be used to detect other metabolites in the body, so could prove useful for monitoring a wide range of conditions. For instance, in diabetes accurate and simple monitoring of blood glucose could be extremely useful. The application of Bluetooth to medical devices that operate from inside the body could prove to be a significant step forward in the monitoring of a number of serious conditions.

The future of biomedical devices is looking positive; the application of developments in physics and materials sciences to medical problems is very exciting. From the prevention of infection to predicting a heart attack these devices are likely to save many lives.

Post by: Claire Scofield

Posted in Claire Scofield | Leave a comment

News and Views: The importance of vaccination

Posted on April 9, 2013 by lpwalker

NeedleThere has been a story in the news recently about a measles outbreak in Swansea and certain other areas of Wales. The cause of this outbreak is attributed to a lack of children being vaccinated with the controversial Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) jab. This measles outbreak highlights the troubled relationship between the general public and vaccination.

The drop in numbers of children receiving the MMR jab can probably be traced back to a 1998 news story. A paper was published in the journal The Lancet stating there was a link between the MMR jab and cases of autism and bowel disease. The study was led by Andrew Wakefield, a former surgeon. Wakefield claimed that instead of the single MMR jab, a vaccination should be administered in three single doses, one for each disease.

However, there were several major problems with the science in the paper. No other scientists could identify the link between the MMR jab and autism that Wakefield and his team claimed. Investigation by the journalist Brian Deer also revealed that Wakefield had a “conflict of interest”, in that he was being paid by a law firm trying to prove that the MMR jab was harmful. This should have been declared to the Lancet, but wasn’t. Therefore his motives appeared to be more financial than scientific1. Eventually after a large, long hearing Wakefield was struck off the medical register in 2010.

A greater problem has arisen from all this. However dishonestly Wakefield behaved, his original claim was never that “all vaccinations are bad”. He claimed that one particular vaccine had a (disproven) link to disease.  However, it appears that some people have become generally mistrustful of all vaccines and worry that they all cause serious disease.  For example Michele Bachmann, a US congresswoman contending for the Republican nomination for president in 2012, claimed that the HPV vaccine led to mental retardation. This statement was not based on scientific evidence or due to any research on the HPV vaccine; she was quoting a parent who had also made that claim without any actual evidence. Other people, including celebrities, both here and abroad, have begun to claim links between some vaccines and diseases which have never been scientifically proven. This had led to a multitude of preventable illnesses and deaths because people are unsure about whether to be vaccinated or not.

Can vaccines be harmful? They do sometimes contain “attenuated” or less virulent versions of the disease-causing microbe to stimulate the immune system. This could theoretically lead to a person who is vaccinated getting the disease instead if the virus reverts to virulence. However, vaccines are rigorously tested before being administered, so any side effects can be detected and assessed before it enters the general population. If the side effects are too bad or the vaccine is not effective enough, it will not be administered. Occasionally things can go wrong, but the prevention of these diseases generally outweighs the risks of using the vaccine.

The media has apparently made little attempt to rectify the public’s mistrust in vaccines. Whilst the original story about the link between MMR and autism was blasted across the front pages of the national papers, the subsequent retraction of the paper (in 2010) and Wakefield’s dismissal have not been as heavily reported. This means that people still have a vague remembrance that “vaccinations are bad” and are not being vaccinated because the story has been poorly clarified. Unfortunately, this has led to several outbreaks of measles, as well as other diseases such as whooping cough that can be prevented by vaccination.

It is important that as many people get vaccinated as possible. When enough of the population is vaccinated against a certain disease, the spread of that disease is limited. This protects people that have not, or cannot, be vaccinated. This concept is known as “herd immunity” but, for it to be successful, a large number of the population need to be vaccinated. This is called the “herd immunity threshold” and may need to be up to 95% of the population to be effective.

I’m not suggesting that you should get every vaccine which is available. However, if you or someone you know is due to have a vaccine and you’re worried, ask your doctor (and get second opinions) about potential side effects or the importance of the vaccine. It is important to make an informed decision about whether to be vaccinated or not based on scientific and medical evidence rather than hysterical celebrities or a retracted paper.

1 Reference: http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347 and references therein

Post by: Louise Walker

Posted in Louise Walker, News and Views | 3 Comments

The Superhuman Savants

Posted on April 5, 2013 by thebrainbank

Savant syndrome is an incredibly rare and extraordinary condition where individuals with neurological disorders acquire remarkable ‘islands of genius’. What’s more, these ‘superhuman’ savants may be crucial in understanding our own brains. ‘Savant’, derived from the French verb savoir meaning ‘to know’, is a term to describe those who suffer from a condition that often has an profound impact on their ability to perform simple tasks, like walking or talking, but show astonishing skills that far exceed the cognitive capacities of most of the people in the world. Autistic savants account for 50% of people with savant syndrome, while the other 50% have other forms of developmental disability or brain injury. Quite remarkably, as many as 1 in 10 autistic people show some degree of savant skill.

Kim Peek. Copyright Darold A. Treffert, M.D. and the Wisconsin Medical Society, from WikiCommons

The best known autistic savant was a character played by Dustin Hoffman in the 1988 film ‘Rain Man’’. What few people know is that this character was based around the unbelievable skills of a real-life savant called Kim Peek. Kim Peek suffered from developmental abnormalities that meant he was born with a malformed cerebellum – which lies at the back of the brain and is important for coordinating movement and thoughts – and without the corpus callosum, the sizable stalk of nerve tissue that connects the left and right hemispheres of the brain. Known by friends as ‘Kim-puter’, his astonishing powers of memory fascinated scientists for years. Quite literally, he had a phenomenal capacity to store extraordinary quantities of information in his mental ‘hard drive’. He also had a profound ability to recall information, close to the speed at which a search engine can scope the internet. In 2009, at the age of 54 he had read 9,000 books, all of which he could recite off by heart. He could simultaneously read the left page with his left eye, and the right page with his right eye. What seems quite unbelievable is that at the age of 58 he was still unable to perform everyday simple tasks such as buttoning his clothes. He could not comprehend simple proverbs and struggled greatly in social situations, yet is considered one of the most powerfully gifted savants of all time.

Considering the vast repertoire of human ability, it is fascinating that other savant skills mostly occur in a narrow range of just 5 specific categories:

  1. 1.     Music

Leslie Lemke was born with cerebral palsy and brain damage, and was diagnosed with a rare condition that forced doctors to remove his eyes. Leslie was severely disabled: throughout his childhood he could not talk or move. He had to be force-fed in order to teach him how to swallow and he did not learn to stand until he was 12. Then one night, when he was 16 years old, his mother woke up to the sound of Leslie playing Tchaikovsky’s Piano Concerto No. 1. Leslie, who had no classical music training, was playing the piece flawlessly after hearing it just once earlier on the television. Despite being blind and severely disabled, Leslie showcased his remarkable piano skills in concerts to sell-out crowds around the world for many years.

  1. 2.     Art

Stephen Wiltshire was diagnosed as mute and severely autistic at an early age. Despite having no language or communication skills, at the age of 7, he began the first of many masterful detailed architectural drawings of cityscapes that were remarkably accurate. Known as the ‘Human Camera’ Stephen can draw these landscapes after only observing them briefly.  In 2005, Stephen completed a 10m-long accurate drawing of a Tokyo skyscraper panorama from memory after just one short helicopter ride.

  1. 3.     Calendar calculating

George and Charles Finn, known as the ‘Bronx Calendar Twins’ were both autistic savants. Their particular skill was being able to calculate the day of any date in the past and the future. This talent extended so far that they could accurately calculate any day 40,000 years backwards and forward.

  1. 4.     Mathematics

The first documented savant in 1789 was Thomas Fuller, who was severely mentally handicapped but had unbelievably rapid mathematical calculating abilities. When asked how many seconds a man had lived who was 70 years, 17 days, and 12 hours old, he gave the correct answer of 2,210,500,800 in 90 seconds, even correcting for the 17 leap years included.

  1. 5.     Mechanical or Spatial Skills

Ellen Boudreaux, despite being blind and autistic, could navigate her way around without ever bumping into things. As she walks, Ellen moves around using echolocation:  - she makes chirping noises that bounce off objects in her path such that she can detect the reflected sound, a bit like human sonar.

Interestingly, savant syndrome is four times more likely to occur in men than women. This intriguing difference has sparked much interest in the scientific community, and subsequently the ‘right compensation theory’ of savant ability was established. It appears that during foetal development, the left hemisphere of the brain develops slightly slower than the right hemisphere, and is thus subject to detrimental influences at different stages. High levels of circulating testosterone makes the male foetus more susceptible to damage because this sex hormone can impair neuronal function and delay growth of the vulnerable hemisphere. It was proposed that the right hemisphere may then compensate for this impaired growth, by overdeveloping. So while savants may not be able to walk or talk, the skill development on the other side of the brain is highly advanced, and so may lead to these amazing ‘superhuman’ skills. Left hemisphere damage is often seen in autistic patients, so this theory of ‘left damage/right compensation’ may explain how the savant brain develops differently from others’. Although this theory seems credible, the highly diverse nature of savant syndrome means that no single hypothesis can explain every case.

What is important to consider is that not all savants have developmental neurological disorders. The syndrome does sometimes emerge as a consequence of severe brain injury. Orlando Serrell is an ‘acquired savant’ who at 10 years old, was violently struck on the left hand side of his head by a baseball. Following the incident, Orlando suddenly exhibited astonishing complex calendar calculating abilities and could accurately recall the weather of every day since the accident. Orlando’s case and others alike imply the intriguing possibility that a hidden potential for astonishing skills or prodigious memory exists within all of us, expressed as a consequence of complex and unknown triggers in our environment. The prospect of dormant ‘superhuman’ gifts is a much debated topic, and may have a whole range of implications for the future.

These examples are just few of the thousands of savants suffering from autism and other neurological disorders that exist in the world today. While all the anatomical and psychological evidence contests the development of such skills, the reality of such a syndrome questions our modern understanding of ‘normal’ brain functioning. Until we can establish how savant syndrome skills emerge, it is difficult to certify that any proposed models of human cognition and memory are reliable representations of neurological behaviour.

By Isabelle Abbey-Vital

Posted in Isabelle Abbey-Vital | 2 Comments

Fighting jet lag – a simple case of wearing more layers?

Posted on April 1, 2013 by biofluff

Pioneering research has found that one of the best ways to beat jet lag may be by wearing more layers, sitting by a fire and having plenty of cups of tea. Scientists have found that our biological clocks are driven not only by light, but also by our body heat.

fireImagine you’ve been on a relaxing holiday. You’ve done nothing more than catch some sun, top up your tan, and sip cocktails on the beach. Why, despite the relaxing nature of your holiday do you return feeling more tired and fatigued than when you went? It is all to do with jet lag.

After a long-haul flight that crosses over many time zones, you can feel excessively tired and nauseous, with poor concentration and memory. Usually the more time zones you cross, the more severe these symptoms.  It also takes longer to recover, the longer the flight.

So why do we get jet lag?

We suffer from jet lag because of disruptions to our internal body clock which regulates things called circadian rhythms. These rhythms control many of our bodily functions and behaviours such as body temperature, appetite, hormone release and sleep patterns. They are controlled by a part of the brain called the SCN – the suprachiasmatic nucleus, located just above the roof of our mouths.

Circadian_rhythm_labeledOur body clock is synchronised to our environment using light signals, which signal to our brain what time of day it is.  During long haul travel, the cells in the brain’s ‘body clock’ become confused by the change in the light and act out of sync with each other. This is the point where we experience symptoms associated with jet lag.

Scientists have known about jet lag for a long time, but we know little about how to treat it successfully.  If you look on the internet you can find numerous sites giving tips on how to beat jet lag- or at least improve the symptoms. From my own experience, every time I’ve travelled to America and tried some of these, they have rarely touched the surface.

If you want to avoid jet lag the advice is to establish a new routine so that you eat and sleep according to the time zone you’re in, avoid napping during the day, and making sure you get as much natural light as possible. Research has shown that experiencing light during the evening causes a delay in our body clock meaning our bodies rhythms move later in the day. If we are exposed to light during the early morning, our clock becomes advanced and our rhythms start earlier in the day.

This stuff is all pretty old news. The link between the circadian clock and temperature is, on the other hand, altogether remarkable.  Scientists have found lots of evidence that point towards our biological clocks being driven by our body heat. Fruit flies exposed to drastic changes in temperatures exhibited changes to their body clock. They found that cells in the back of the brain called ‘dorsal clock cells’ were important in synchronising the body clock at warmer temperatures. Cells at the front of the brain -‘ventral clock cells’, synchronised the clock at cooler temperatures.

These findings may be key in helping us defeat jet lag by easing our body clock back into its status quo. It may be as simple as piling on layers of chunky jumpers, scarves and hats if you come from somewhere blisteringly hot, to be plunged into a cold climate. Vice versa, stripping down to as little clothing as possible may help battle jet lag if returning from somewhere cold. It’s all about easing our bodies back into its normal routine; not plunging straight into the deep end.

Post by: Samantha Lawrence

Posted in Sam Lawrence | 1 Comment

NEWS AND VIEWS: Standing Up For Science – Improving the relationship between science and the media

Posted on March 26, 2013 by lpwalker

Historically, scientists and journalists have never really got along. In general, scientists tend to be a little … mistrustful of the ability of a journalist to accurately portray their research to a wider audience. In return, journalists may find that scientists can be difficult to work with. The research the scientists present can also be a bit confusing or complicated. But they need each other. Scientists need journalists to get the message about their research across, and newspapers like to print science stories  because their readers are interested in it.

Knowing that the science/media relationship can be somewhat antagonistic, the charity Sense About Science has set up a series of workshops as part of their “Voice of Young Science” section. The aim is to help foster a better relationship between early career scientists and the journalists that report scientific stories. These workshops encourage scientists to stand up for themselves and their subject by responding to misinformation or dubious claims in all kinds of media.

I was lucky enough to be able to attend the recent Voice of Young Science media workshop at The University of Manchester. The day was split into several panel discussions; the first involved scientists discussing their experiences with the media – both good and bad – and advising how to get the best out of their situation. Amongst the speakers was Professor Matthew Cobb, from the University of Manchester, one of the advisors on the BBC’s recent “Wonders of Life” series (this counted as one of his “good” experiences!). Professor Cobb’s main advice was to “Just say yes”, because nothing will happen if you say “No”. It may not turn out as well as you’d hoped, but the experience will still be valuable.

It’s easy for scientists to be scared about the way their results may be interpreted by the media. These fears are illustrated by a horror story from another panel member, the evolutionary biologist Dr Susanne Shultz. Dr Shultz had discovered an evolutionary link between social animals and increasing brain size over time, as opposed to solitary animals, whose brains had more or less remained the same size. A misunderstanding somewhere along the line meant it was reported that she had discovered that dogs (as a social animal) were more intelligent than cats (as a solitary one). These were not her results, meaning she had to repair quite a lot of damage. However, whilst Dr. Shultz had a horrible time dealing with misinterpretation of her research, she didn’t think it had done permanent damage to her scientific credentials, which was a relief to hear.

Another panel consisted of people on the media side of the equation, including the science journalist David Derbyshire, as well as Radio 5 Live producer Rebekah Erlam, and Morwenna Grills, the press officer for the Faculty of Life Sciences here in Manchester. There was a sharp intake of breath when Derbyshire admitted that he has written for certain tabloids which are not particularly well-regarded for their science reporting! However, he raised some very good points that I’ve never thought about before. The one that stuck with me was that the turnaround time for getting a story into a newspaper is incredibly short. You’ve got to investigate the story, track down those involved, write it and send it off, sometimes in the space of a few hours. This is not an ideal situation, as scientific stories in particular need proper research to make sure you thoroughly understand it, and this takes time. But what do you do if that time is not available to you? And if your piece is sub-edited into something different, is there a lot you can do about it?

The thing that struck me most about the workshop is that scientists and journalists really need to communicate with each other more effectively. Without journalists reporting on scientific matters, scientific research would never reach the public consciousness; and when you have an important message to get across that would be a very bad thing. Scientific breakthroughs are usually of great interest for the general public, whether it’s about a potential cure for cancer or horsemeat in our burgers. It should ideally be a trusting relationship for both sides to get the best out of the arrangement, and at the moment it is inherently the opposite. The good thing about workshops such as this one is that it helps each side see the situation from the other’s point of view; I certainly feel a bit more understanding towards science reporters. Hopefully the journalists on the panel feel more sympathy towards scientists and why they can be quite protective about their work. Perhaps more events like this can help to heal the rift between these two opposing factions.

For more information about the Voice of Young Science media workshops, please go to: http://www.senseaboutscience.org/pages/workshops.html

Posted in Louise Walker, News and Views | 3 Comments

Diabetes and Alzheimer’s: Could overeating lead to dementia?

Posted on March 25, 2013 by thebrainbank

The number of people suffering from diabetes is on the rise. This rise runs alongside a worldwide increase in obesity, with around 10 percent of the population suffering from diabetes, and 12 percent considered obese.

MH900431256Although we know bad eating habits increase our risk of developing diabetes, this doesn’t seem to be enough to make us ditch the junk! I know, despite having diabetes run in my family, that when the stress piles up I always crave comfort foods. But new research might soon encourage me to change these eating habits. Yes, if a long term risk of heart disease, blindness and nerve damage aren’t enough to make me snack less, the looming threat of Alzheimer’s may just do the trick.

Numerous studies have shown that people with type 2 diabetes are twice as likely to develop Alzheimer’s than the rest of the population. But why?

alzheimer_brainAlzheimer’s is a pretty complicated problem. In fact a confident diagnosis can still only be made following post-mortem. We know that in the late stages of the disease the brain is shrunken and riddled with clusters of mismanaged proteins called plaques and tangles. But what we don’t really understand is why these proteins start to misbehave in the first place.

The emerging picture is of a complex patchwork of many factors: all of which can initiate a downward cascade toward Alzheimer’s disease. Now, diabetes seems to be forming another patch on this causation quilt.

Type 2 diabetes, the kind that can develop later in life, is brought about by a number of factors: including obesity. This leads to an imbalance in insulin production. In non-diabetics insulin is produced at constant levels, causing cells around the body to absorb glucose from the blood; a process which is necessary for regulating carbohydrate and fat metabolism. Insulin can also cross into the brain and has been found to aid cognitive function.

Although it may seem counter-intuitive, the chronic high levels of blood insulin seen in many diabetics actually means less insulin crosses into the brain. This, combined with fluctuations in blood sugar, may explain why a number of diabetics report reduced cognitive function. But this is not the end of the story. Diabetes also has an effect on the metabolism of fat, leading to an overproduction of ceramides. These ‘waxy fats’ are released into the blood and cross into the brain. Once there, they cause brain insulin resistance and encourage inflammation.

It is believed that this mixture of insulin resistance and inflammation causes Alzheimer’s related proteins to collect in the brain and form plaques. In fact, scientists have recently discovered that inducing insulin resistance in the brains of mice and rats leads to both memory loss and accumulation of plaques.

This research certainly seems compelling, although within the scientific community the jury is still out on the exact role diabetes plays in the development of Alzheimer’s. I personally doubt that diabetes alone can be hailed as a causative factor for Alzheimer’s. However, if we connect the dots the two certainly seem to be linked, perhaps through overconsumption of fatty/sugary junk foods? Whatever the outcome, I know that this research will certainly make me think twice before reaching for the snacks in future!

Post by: Sarah Fox

Posted in Sarah Fox | 1 Comment

Your Brain on Lies, Damned Lies and ‘Truth Serums’

Posted on March 15, 2013 by thebrainbank

question the answerPork pies, fibs, whoppers, untruths, tall stories, fabrications, damned lies…not to mention statistics.

Apparently, every person lies an average of 1.65 times every day. However, since that average is self-reported, maybe take that figure with a pinch of salt. The truth is, most people are great at lying. The ability to conjure up a plausible alternative reality is, when you think about it, seriously impressive, but it takes practice. From about the age of 3 young children are able to make up false information, at a stunning rate of one lie every 2 hours – though admittedly the lies from a toddler’s wild imagination are relatively easy to identify.

When we lie, brain cells in the prefrontal cortex – the planning, ‘executive’ of the brain – work harder than when we tell the truth. This may be reflected in the physical structure of our brains as well: pathological liars have been shown to have more white ‘wiring’ matter and less grey matter in the prefrontal cortex of their brain than other people. But how can we tell if someone is telling a lie, or telling the truth?

Back in the day – 2000 years ago – in ancient India, people would use the rice test to spot liars. When someone is lying, their sympathetic (‘fight or flight’) nervous system goes into overdrive, leading to a dry mouth. If you could spit out a grain of rice, you were seen to be telling the truth. If your mouth was parched and you couldn’t spit the grain out, you were lying. Since then, several different methods of catching out liars have been used – to varying levels of success.

In several books and films (Harry Potter, True Lies, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy and many more), a ‘truth serum’ is used to elicit accurate information from the recipient.  In actual fact, however, truth serums don’t exist.  Apart from in fiction, their title is an ironic misnomer. Having said that, scientists have tried for decades to develop a failsafe ‘veritaserum’ in order to catch out liars.

wineAlcohol has been used as a sort of lie preventor for millennia, as the Latin phrase ‘in vino veritas’ (in wine [there is] truth) demonstrates. Alcohol acts in the brain by increasing the activity of GABA channels, leading to a general depression of brain activity. This has been thought to suppress complex inhibitions of thoughts and behaviours, loosening the drinker’s tongue. However, drinking alcohol doesn’t prevent people giving false information, and it by no means prompts people to tell ‘the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth’.

A drug called scopolamine was used to sedate women during childbirth in the early 20th century when a doctor noticed that the women taking the drug would answer questions candidly and accurately. Scopolamine acts on GABA receptors in a similar way to alcohol, and so a person intoxified with the drug is just as likely to give false information as someone who’s had a few stiff drinks.

Barbiturates are sedatives such as sodium amytal that work on the brain in a similar way to alcohol – by interfering with people’s inhibitions such that they spill the beans. Sodium amytal was used in several cases in the 1930s to interrogate suspected malingerers in the U.S. army, but the drug does not prevent lying and can even make the recipient more suggestible and prone to making inaccurate statements.

headIn the 1950s and 60s, the CIA’s Project ‘MK-ULTRA’ tested drugs such as LSD on unconsenting adults and children. If LSD proved a reliable truth serum, it would be an invaluable tool in the Cold War. The tests showed that LSD would be far too unreliable and unpredictable to use in interrogation.

Despite the repeated lack of success in the search for a ‘truth serum’, scientists have continued trying to develop alternative technologies for busting liars. The polygraph, used by respected institutions including the CIA , FBI and The Jeremy Kyle Show, measures changes in arousal – heart rate, blood pressure, sweating, and breathing rate – in order to detect deception. However, there is a lot of scepticism surrounding polygraphy. In particular, there are several hacks to avoid getting caught out by a polygraph – most notably biting your tongue, difficult mental arithmetic, or tensing your inner anal sphinchter without clenching your buttocks (thanks for that factual gem, QI).

The improvement of brain imaging methods – in particular functional magnetic resonance imaging or fMRI – has extended the scope of detecting liars. On the internet, one might stumble across ‘No Lie MRI’, an American firm that offers a lie detection service for individuals, lawyers, governments and corporations. They claim that this service could be used to “drastically alter/improve interpersonal relationships, risk definition, fraud detection, investor confidence [and] how wars are fought.”

court

Currently James Holmes, the man charged with injuring 70 and killing 12 at the Batman cinema shooting in Aurora, Colorado, is on trial. The judge has ruled his consent to a “medically appropriate” narcoanalytic interview and polygraph. That is, Holmes could be interviewed under the influence of sodium amytal or other similar drugs in order to determine whether or not he is feigning insanity. The use of these drugs may contravene the U.S. Constitution’s 5th Amendment ‘the right to remain silent’. Clinical psychiatrist Professor Hoge says, “The idea that sodium amytal is a truth serum is not correct.  It’s an invalid belief. It is unproven in its ability to produce reliable information and it’s not a standard procedure used by forensic psychiatrists in the assessment of the insanity defence, nor is polygraph.”

The potential benefits of a 100% reliable, valid method of lie-detection are obvious, although there are ethical grey areas that scientists and the legal/ethical community would need to tackle if the technology is ever found. For now I think the evidence for using current lie detection methods, especially for anything more serious than The Jeremy Kyle Show, is far too sparse.

Post by Natasha Bray

Posted in Natasha Bray, Uncategorized | 2 Comments