Obama seeking to boost study of human brain
February 18, 2013
The Obama administration is planning a decade-long scientific effort to examine the workings of the human brain and build a comprehensive map of its activity, seeking to do for the brain what the Human Genome Project did for genetics, The New York Times reports.
The project, which the administration has been looking to unveil as early as March, will include federal agencies, private foundations, and teams of neuroscientists and nanoscientists in a concerted effort to advance the knowledge of the brain’s billions of neurons and gain greater insights into perception, actions and, ultimately, consciousness.
Scientists with the highest hopes for the project also see it as a way to develop the technology essential to understanding diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, as well as to find new therapies for a variety of mental illnesses.
Moreover, the project holds the potential of paving the way for advances in artificial intelligence.
The project, which could ultimately cost billions of dollars, is expected to be part of the president’s budget proposal next month. And, four scientists and representatives of research institutions said they had participated in planning for what is being called the Brain Activity Map project [apparently a planned but unannounced NIH project].
In his State of the Union address, President Obama cited brain research as an example of how the government should “invest in the best ideas.”
“Every dollar we invested to map the human genome returned $140 to our economy — every dollar,” he said. “Today our scientists are mapping the human brain to unlock the answers to Alzheimer’s. They’re developing drugs to regenerate damaged organs, devising new materials to make batteries 10 times more powerful. Now is not the time to gut these job-creating investments in science and innovation.”
Scientists involved in the planning said they hoped that federal financing for the project would be more than $300 million a year, which if approved by Congress would amount to at least $3 billion over the 10 years. The Human Genome Project cost $3.8 billion.
But a group of nanotechnologists and neuroscientists say they believe that technologies are at hand to make it possible to observe and gain a more complete understanding of the brain, and to do it less intrusively. In June in the journal Neuron,six leading scientists proposed pursuing a number of new approaches for mapping the brain.
One possibility is to build a complete model map of brain activity by creating fleets of molecule-size machines to noninvasively act as sensors to measure and store brain activity at the cellular level. The proposal envisions using synthetic DNA as a storage mechanism for brain activity.
“Not least, we might expect novel understanding and therapies for diseases such as schizophrenia and autism,” wrote the scientists, who include Dr. Church; Ralph J. Greenspan, the associate director of the Kavli Institute for Brain and Mind at the University of California, San Diego; A. Paul Alivisatos, the director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; Miyoung Chun, a molecular geneticist who is the vice president for science programs at the Kavli Foundation; Michael L. Roukes, a physicist at the California Institute of Technology; and Rafael Yuste, a neuroscientist at Columbia University.
The initiative will be organized by the Office of Science and Technology Policy, according to scientists who have participated in planning meetings.
The National Institutes of Health, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the National Science Foundation will also participate in the project, the scientists said, as will private foundations like the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Chevy Chase, Md., and the Allen Institute for Brain Science in Seattle.
A meeting held on Jan. 17 at the California Institute of Technology was attended by the three government agencies, as well as neuroscientists, nanoscientists and representatives from Google, Microsoft, and Qualcomm. According to a summary of the meeting, it was held to determine whether computing facilities existed to capture and analyze the vast amounts of data that would come from the project. The scientists and technologists concluded that they did.
They also said that a series of national brain “observatories” should be created as part of the project, like astronomical observatories.

Comments (53)
by Editor
Off-topic political comments removed.
by Klaatu
And no one consulted or invited Dr Kurzweil? No doubt
when Google is invited back in March he will deem it
necessary to attend & draw all the headlines. Very good
PR move by Google b4 the SOTU speech to appoint him
as a lead engineer. In fact spectacular move
by Gabriel
….Okay, this is one of those laugh-out-loud moments; that’s a very good point and I’m surprised nobody has brought that up yet.
Indeed, something like this, I imagine Kurzweil would want to be brought on board.
by The Thinking Robot
Eu accepted the human brain project and now the us is starting to do something similar , this is really some good news thanks for making my day !!!
by Editor
Comments on politics and religion are off-topic for this post (and most other ones), and may be deleted.
by Alex
it is clear that “state politics” in this article is the only in-topic discussion, all the rest is pointless dribles or “beating around the bush” Ms. Editor. as long as it expresses genuine concern and correct arguments I do not see why one should just keep it in. Having said that… i find no witty comments to add to what could be so wonderfull and hopefull about this initiative except that we shall see :) a little quote by M.Bakunin :By striving to do the impossible, man has always achieved what is possible. Those who have cautiously done no more than they believed possible have never taken a single step forward” and I am conscious of my inability to grasp, in all its details and positive developments, any very large portion of human knowledge.
M.B
by Editor
Thanks. The problem with these topics is that they lead to endless arguments and flames that disrupt meaningful discussion.
by smb12321
LOL – on my home planet it is bureaucrats who excel in short term thinking It’s folks like Ventner, Allen, the thousands working on AI, nanotech, alternative energies, IBM (a similar brain project), etc who look to the future. Basic research? Yes. But I am unconvinced that another massive bureaucratic-guided “program” will make more progress than what we have today. If this is so important, we should have a Manhattan Project-type approach.
by John
Manhattan style approach seems perfect to me!
by trakk
This project is to know about the brain (the most complex computer known to man) on a more fundamental level. Those projects you mentioned are on specific issues that the companies hope to profit from (i am not saying its a bad thing, the nature of business itself is for profit).
Except the EU one and this, nobody is working on a similar project.
by snake0
Hah, the second Europe funds the Human Brain Project, Obama starts shaking in his boots and funds a copycat project. Remember when the US used to lead the world in scientific advances? What went wrong.
by Mr.X
“Remember when the US used to lead the world in scientific advances?”
You didn’t steal patents and scientists from vanquished countries for quite some time.
The US is a bit like the China of the west, a rather big population compared to those societies who are similiar.Adjust for that and the myth of creativity etc goes away.
by asiwel
No, I don’t think so. In Germany and the EU, new models of academic/industry/government collaboration (for example, in textiles) in “directed” research and development initiatives have proven very successful. It is this inter-disciplinary, inter-sector model which is being “copied” … not some particular project like brain research. One potential trouble is that in the EU, these initiatives and the people pursuing them are being promised extended funding (for 10-15 years), whereas in the US we will be lucky to get funding commitments for 1 or 2 years at a time. The danger is that the “teams” will be dedicated to the promise of new knowledge in the EU, while in the US, the goal will simply be the low-hanging fruit of the grant dollars themselves without human passion and commitment to the long-term goals.
by Leonardo Arenas
These batteries of neurologists, nanoscientists, DNA experts must consider God – the creator of the first human brain to be their TOP CONSULTANT.
by toWit
Maybe the study will help figure out why people insist on building such huge houses for their imaginary friends?
by H.K. Fauskanger
Since the supposed deity cannot be “consulted” on anything as regards the inner workings on the brain, what other way to figure out the details of the design than to actually study it?
by Ken
I suspect the project will go something like this: For 9.9 years, we will argue about the appropriate approach, the distribution of funds, the inadequacy of equipment and facilities, the failure to advance the project, and the constant harangue about wasted money; then when ever thing is ready, we’ll push the button and -as Google tells me- we’ll get 14,000,000 answers in 0.8 seconds.
by Ken
Then, after that, the button will push itself.
(Crap! I hit ‘enter’ instead of ‘shift’. Does that disqualify me from the project?
by Daver73
This study will allow for great advances in the fields of torture and mind-control.
by Spikosauropod
It’s just talk…like Obama’s talk about going to Mars. Obama is only interested in social programs.
by Dr. Richard
Well, I’m one of those Repulicans someone here just HAD to make a coment about. Since I joined Mensa and two other High Test Score societies, years ago, at least one Republican has some brains. I think Obamas idea is great, and I don’t see the point, of making it political. This research, this study is greatly needed and will yield enormous benefits, for the Medical community and its patients. I doubt that it will have much effect on AI or computing in general.
by smb12321
I wish you would reread your post and notice the rampant generalizations, slurs and guilt by association. It’s as bad as “all blacks are lazy” “All Jews are greedy” “All Russians are drunks” Alas, it is a reflection of the times when for some, the only reality is a political one. As an atheist (and Southerner) I can assure you that this kind of chatter does not win friends nor influence people nor further any kind of scientific agenda. Have a nice day
by Gabriel
Not that I don’t necessarily agree with John, but your post sounds perilously close to a personal attack….I know you didn’t mean too, but you shouldn’t have kept saying “you”. Even “you people” denotes the sort of impression I doubt you were aiming for, which doesn’t make you look any more civil then the sort you are criticizing, even if you are more elaborate.
Irrational beliefs phase out and become antiquated properly with time, even if they didn’t look that way back then…their is no need to have any sort of vehement hatred for such things because they’ll eventually run up against the future. The Republican Party and the contemporary radicals that exemplify them will, sooner or later, face this moment and cease to exist…they will either adapt and adopt more rational viewpoints that still co-exist with conservative views, or perish….I understand having right frustration for the damage that can be done in the meantime, but you must realize that such things are ultimately a passing thing.
Relax, and remember that the future is something we create, not something that just spawns out of nothing…the Republican Party, or at least the contemporary radicals that propagate it, are going to reach this do-or-die moment simply because they are running up against a future where the sort of irrational beliefs they express simply won’t be tolerated anymore.
Arguably, you can say the only thing you have to do is sit back and watch,…and to watch irrational views crumble under the strain of their own nonsense, sounds pretty good.
by John
Well said!
by Gabriel
Really? I IMMEDIATELY regret posting everything but the first paragraph since anybody can plainly ask where is my evidence for any of the things I said.
Tact and maintaining objectivity are lessons I’m still learning.
by Mr.X
Hey gao, next time you should make clear that you are just kidding!
by melajara
This is obviously a strategic project. It will precipitate the cognitive computing paradigm shift.
Inasmuch as a better fundamental understanding of the brain itself, I think the expected boost on advancing cognitive computing and general purpose robotics (before natural intelligence enhancement) was a key driver for launching this project.
And of course it’s the U.S.A. answer to the same key motivation behind EU HBP.
It’s now up to China to announce its commitment for a similar high stakes project.
by GMoney
wonder what the republican congress will make ofthis?
by melajara
Just tell them the truth: the stakes for continued USA leadership are too high for not engaging in this.
by Jordan
Anyone know if it’s possible to make some sort of personal investment in such a study?
by Jordan
Anyone know of or how to make a personal investment in this project?
by AZryan
Pay your taxes and don’t vote for ignorant Politicians who hate science, fight against it, and act like it’s all a useless scam or outright fraud.
by GatorALLin
**** Lets hope they can fund this wonderful type of research for longevity and other great /big projects.
by John
Bravo, what a difference this administration has made over the Bush administration. Everything from acknowledging cyber warfare as a real threat to allowing for stem cell research, and of course, now an epic research effort to understand the mind. I just worry that the religious right will lobby Republicans against this type of research, because, as we all know, everything we will learn about how the mind works will point to naturalistic processes over the big boss man in the sky, something red state hucksters will never accept. In the end, such a project will give mankind technologies and powers inconceivable today, as well as the resulting advancements in our own cognitive processes and higher states of consciousness. Per Kurzweil’s predictions, we will be one step closer to the singularity and the inevitable “cosmic” consciousness. Exciting years ahead!
by melajara
Imagine where we would be now if Al Gore had reclaimed his win over Bush!
by Ian
Doesn’t really matter though in the end, does it? If America entered the dark ages, Europe or China or someone else would just get there instead. The US can either progress or be left behind.
by Bob Blum
Note: the proposal being discussed is freely accessible on-line (the June 2012 article in Neuron). But, I really recommend the much longer first draft of the article, which includes all the nanotech: diamonoids, Q-dots, RFIDs, etc. Links to those are in my article entitled: BAM: Brain Activity Map: Every Spike from Every Neuron on my website (bobblum.com). (When Neuron ran the article, they eliminated most of the nanotech.) Thanks to Giulio Prisco for sending me this article a few months ago.
This proposal is considerably different from the Human Brain Project (HBP), which seeks to create a simulation of the human brain. In contrast the BAM Project seeks to create a functional connectome by observing every spike from every neuron in a given region in real-time in a behaving organism. This is far more difficult than HBP’s goal (and is synergistic with it).
by asiwel
Seems to me, we just saw a “glimmer” of that in the recent report of observing full real-time neural action in the case of zebrafish larvae (recorded while spotting and pouncing on paramecia). And in the ability to record and play back any (and all) “motion” (at a resolution of 6 centimeters) seen by an observing 1.6 gigapixel camera hovering at 22,000 feet over a city. As these sorts of technologies combine, the scope and resolution of research possibilities explode .. ah, exponentially!
by Giulio Prisco
Great article Bob!
by Bri
This also heralds the begining of nanobots. They propose to use them for imaging. That tech will have huge payoff very quickly.
by Krish
Great, this means Technological Singularity is nearing!!!
by Heartland
If this happens, we’ll have two competing projects to map the brain, Human Brain Project in Europe and Brain Activity Map in US, both roughly equally funded for the next 10 years. Finally, it seems, the race toward understanding the brain is getting serious. This is fantastic.
by Giulio Prisco
And may the best team win!
by Renzo Canepari
But I wonder if it would not be faster, cheaper, etc., to accelerate what Markram is doing in Europe rather than have two projects going on at once.
by Heartland
I suppose both projects will publish their findings throughout the course of the research, as HBP has been, which will provide an unobstructed flow of ideas and insights between the two projects, adding to the pace of discovery. Plus, let’s not forget the motivational power of competition, with academic reputations, egos and unclaimed fame at stake. I think some incredible breakthroughs will come sooner than decade away as a result of this research; neuromorphic computing being one of them.
by Cauri
The odds are significantly better with 2 projects at the same time. Also we will learn a lot from results comparison from 2 Independant projects. Very exciting.
by trakk
More than trying to reach the finish line first, i think aiming for a more thorough understanding is important. And two independant projects backed by equally capable people behind it is a better way to achieve that goal.
Also having just one project could affect brain research more by the way of political interference ( in the form of spending cuts or ethical concerns and so on)
by asiwel
I recall that there were two Human Genome Projects — and the one that started a bit later won the race. Craig Venter is probably smiling …
by Andy
Three cheers for Obama…
“It’s a way we had over here for living with ourselves. We cut ‘em in half with a machine gun and give ‘em a Band-Aid. It was a lie. And the more I saw them, the more I hated lies.” ~ Captain Willard, Apocalpse Now
by notthe1st
Can’t say we’ve turned the corner just yet – but we are definitely AT the corner. The genome project laid the foundation for us to understand ourselves from the ground up. This brain mapping project will allow us to understand ourselves from the top down. Kurzweil et al have been saying this was coming. So far the time line towards the Big S is still on track.
Along with the race to the moon and the human genome project – a huge step forward for mankind.
by Bri
The returns from the human genome project are hard to estimate. Genetic medicine can potentially cure all diseases. The amount of money that we would save is staggering. Any investment in these fields results in untold returns.
by asiwel
Well, that rabbit wasn’t empowered by an exponential theory and engine! Actually, seriously, when you start a big project (like an electric grid, a telephone system, or the Human Genome project), you invest heavily in the theoretically inspired existing technology of the moment. This literally becomes a “weight” later because you are tied up in that large investment .. which needs to pay off. Meanwhile, progress goes on. Suddenly, just when your payoff appears near, somebody else comes along with new (exponentially more powerful) theories and technologies .. and “steals” your thunder. This happened with the Human Genome Project. This is a basic premise of the Singularity movement and what I think the idea and advice about “timing inventions” are meant to convey. Funny thing, but the Marshall Plan helped Europe to build brand new vibrant cities after the war, while the US has this “old infrastructure” problem. One sees this pattern over and over. Some even use it to justify doing nothing.
by asiwel
Ah, well .. you are correct that what goes around, comes around .. cyclic history depends on the choice of starting (view)point. (Ha, that could well end with a singularity!) I don’t think that Venter won because of the politicians, possibly but also quite the contrary I understood …. USA is big, for sure, but the critical mass for creativity seems more and more less of a geographic factor, possibly due to the Internet among other things. My main point was about Kurzweil’s idea of “properly timing” inventions … or innovation, more generally. And that is indeed only a possibility, not a guarantee, which more often than not may not work out. Anyway, just trying to have a bit of a sense of humor about the seriousness of all this stuff … vis rabbits and turtles. You, too, have a good day!