The phenomenon of cognitive enhancement is attracting attention in bioethics
literature and beyond, in public policy. In response, three bodies—the British Medical
Association (BMA); the Commission de l’éthique de la Science et de la technologie
(CEST) du Québec; the American Academy of Neurology (AAN)—have produced reports
and guidance on this topic. To gain insights into different public policy approaches,
rationales, and recommendations on the topic, we analyzed these reports in depth.
We found convergence on the definition (with the exception of the CEST) of cognitive
enhancement. However, we noted a lack of critical reflection with respect to the underly-
ing rationale for developing these reports, i.e., that cognitive enhancement practices are
rampant and represent major social changes. As it currently stands, cognitive enhance-
ment is constituted in a way that challenges the creation of coherent and effective policy
recommendations. However, policy makers should not simply wait for definitional con-
sensus and hope that on balance the benefits turn out to be greater than the risks. Some
components of cognitive enhancement could be reduced down to clearly identified policy
targets to be further examined. Then, if appropriate, policy should be created that is,
amongst other criteria, beneficial to the majority of the population.