China's Ministry of Science and Technology recently released an ethical guideline for human-related neurotechnology medical research, establishing dynamic and practical ethical requirements to standardize this discipline.

As a global cutting-edge research field and focal for technological transformation, advancements in neurotechnology promise new methods for preventing, treating and rehabilitating neuropsychiatric disorders. They also open novel research pathways to explore fundamental scientific questions about human mental process and the essence of consciousness.

"Neurotechnology can interact with the human brain directly. Particularly when integrated with AI, its ability to decode thoughts and interpret emotions and motivations is redefining the boundaries and paradigms of human privacy," said Zhai Xiaomei, a member of the National Science and Technology Ethics Committee and professor at Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College.

She emphasized that neuroregulatory interventions — capable of altering cognition, behavior or personality — may threaten essential human traits such as free will, personal identity and mental integrity.

To address these concerns, the guideline outlines seven specific ethical requirements for neural data collection, analysis and neuromodulation medical research, including privacy protection and data security, balancing benefits and risks, mitigating multiple risks. These provisions offer clear ethical guidance for responsible medical research.

"While advancing technology, we must establish robust ethical frameworks to safeguard human dignity and autonomy," Zhai said.

The guideline prioritizes preserving human dignity as a core principle, directly responding to neurotechnology's nature of deep intervention into fundamental human characteristics.

Zhai emphasized that improving health and well-being should be the primary motivation for neurotechnology medical research. From a social justice perspective, the guideline stresses limiting non-medical enhancements and cautions against attributing sociocultural phenomena solely to psychological "defects"— a bias that could medicalize complex societal issues.

Additionally, the guideline calls for standardized information feedback mechanisms, compliance with administrative licensing requirements, rigorous oversight of medical devices, strict adherence to ethical review processes, and clear accountability for all stakeholders.

"Technological feasibility does not equate to ethical justification. Responsible innovation in neurotechnology requires collaborative governance among researchers, regulators, ethicists and the public," Zhai said. She also revealed that the guideline will undergo periodic evaluation and updates to ensure they remain aligned with evolving scientific and ethical standards.