BCI Implant Recipients Release Ethical Recommendations, Calling for Greater Control Over Neural Data and Device Ownership

Advocates with brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have released ethical recommendations urging greater control over neural data, informed consent, device ownership, and long-term care. Ian Burkhart, founder of the BCI Pioneers Coalition, released "OUR BCI: Recommendations for Ethical Implanted BCI Research," a 13-page document outlining ways to uphold ethical standards and participant autonomy. The recommendations will be reviewed every 24 months and will include additional participants from implanted BCI trials. The document emphasizes that consent should be an ongoing conversation, not a one-time signature, and that neural data should be treated as personal information with transparency about data collection.

The recommendations were developed over a year, involving researchers and education specialists from York University and the University of Ottawa. They address the entire research process, from recruitment and informed consent to researchers' responsibilities after a trial ends. The coalition advocates for fair compensation, clearer agreements on hardware and software ownership, and provisions for maintenance and support after clinical trials. The recommendations include treating consent as an ongoing conversation, limiting confidentiality agreements, and ensuring participants' intellectual contributions are recognized. The coalition aims to establish a binding code of practice that could be enforced worldwide.

The coalition includes Scott Imbrie and Galen Buckwalter, among others, who advocate for participant rights and neural-data governance. Imbrie uses neural signals to control virtual and robotic limbs while receiving artificial tactile feedback. Buckwalter, who joined an implanted BCI study in 2024, emphasizes that consent is a conversation that continues for as long as the device is part of someone’s life. The coalition aims to create a global code of practice for BCI research. On October 15, the United Nations warned that rapidly advancing neurotechnology could threaten individual privacy, freedom of thought, and the right to a fair trial. The UN urged clear, informed, and revocable consent, strict limits on data collection and use, and strong data security. The U.S. introduced the Management of Individuals’ Neural Data Act (MIND Act) in 2025, calling for federal guidelines to address ethical, safety, and privacy challenges of neurotechnology. The legislation has not become law, but several U.S. states and countries have explored neurotechnology regulations.

AI-generated summary of the original article — see the source for the full story.