States pass privacy laws to protect brain data collected by devices

With advancements in technology, more states are taking steps to protect the sensitive information generated by a person’s brain and nervous system. This includes data related to health, mental states, emotions, and cognitive functioning. States like Colorado, California, and Montana have recently passed laws requiring the safeguarding of brain data collected by devices outside of medical settings, such as headphones, earbuds, and wearable consumer products.

A report by the Neurorights Foundation found that many companies with neurotechnology products have access to brain data and share it with third parties without meaningful limitations. Concerns about the misuse of neural data have led to calls for greater regulation from organizations like the American Medical Association and the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

While current devices primarily collect basic information like sleep states, there are concerns that future technologies, including artificial intelligence, could extract more personal and sensitive information from brain data. Democratic state Sen. Cathy Kipp, who sponsored Colorado’s neural data protection bill, emphasized the need to consider the long-term implications of collecting such data.

AI regulation is also gaining attention, with 28 states and the U.S. Virgin Islands enacting some form of AI regulation. The debate around protecting neural data focuses on safeguarding the data itself, rather than regulating the algorithms or AI systems that may use it.

Experts like Sean Pauzauskie and Cristin Welle stress the importance of voluntary consent for using neural data in AI training sets. Chile became the first country to adopt a constitutional amendment for neurorights, prioritizing human rights in neurotechnology development. Concerns have been raised about the potential threats to human identity and autonomy posed by neurotechnology and AI.

Neurotechnology has the potential to benefit individuals with paralysis, speech disabilities, and brain disorders, but the blurring line between clinical and consumer use of neural data raises ethical concerns. Companies like Neuralink and Synchron are conducting clinical trials for brain-implanted devices, prompting calls for comprehensive regulations to protect brain data.

Neural data protection laws in states like Colorado, California, and Montana require consent for collecting and using brain data, as well as mechanisms for consumers to delete their data. Lawmakers across party lines have supported these laws, emphasizing the need for federal regulations to complement state efforts.

As the debate around neural data protection continues, experts like Welle advocate for national laws to enshrine people’s neural rights. The evolving landscape of neurotechnology and AI underscores the importance of balancing innovation with ethical considerations.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF – the independent source for health policy research, polling