It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Scientist: MRIs Can Serve As Lie Detectors

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 09:18 PM
link   
A scientist has discovered a new use for the magnetic resonance imaging machines that can be found in most major hospitals, lie detection. Dr. Mark George, of the Medical University of South Carolina, has reported that MRI machines are more than 90% accurate at detecting deception. The machine revealed that blood flow is increased to areas of the brain that control anxiety and impulse control when they lie.
 



news.yahoo.c om
CHARLESTON, S.C. - A scientist at the Medical University of South Carolina has found that magnetic resonance imaging machines also can serve as lie detectors.

The study found MRI machines, which are used to take images of the brain, are more than 90 percent accurate at detecting deception, said Dr. Mark George, a distinguished professor of psychiatry, radiology and neurosciences.

That compares with polygraphs that range from 80 percent to "no better than chance" at finding the truth, George said.

His results are to be published this week in the journal Biological Psychiatry.

Software expected to be on the market next year could make it easier to tell if someone is a liar, which has implications for law enforcement.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Its an interesting use for the machine and a conventional lie detector is not nearly as accurate. I can just see the new MRI building at Gitmo right now. While it may be proven to work, there is a medical / ethical issue with this. Do you subject people against thier will to a procedure that involves exposure to magnetic fields? For that matter, you could simply do an angiogram and get the same results, but with the same ethical dilemmas.

[edit on 9/28/05 by FredT]




posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 09:32 PM
link   
I saw this story earlier today. Apparently the accuracy is 90%+ as compared to current lie detector tests that hope to achieve 80% reliability.

You Can't Hide Your Lyin' Brain

Researchers at MUSC conducted the study using 60 healthy men. They offered some extra money if they could manage to trick the machine, but none could.

"We had some of our study group try to dupe us, and they were unable," George said.

The MRI images show that more blood flows to parts of the brain associated with anxiety and impulse control when people lie. More blood also flows to the part of the brain handling multitasking because it is hard for people to keep track of lies they have told.



Do you subject people against thier will to a procedure that involves exposure to radiation?
A bit mistaken here FredT. The process of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) DOES NOT subject the patient to radiation. MRIs utilize radiofrequency waves and a strong magnetic field rather than x-rays.

[edit on 9/28/2005 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Interesting info Fred! The exposure a patient receives during an MRI is essentially non existent as these scanners do not use radiation like a traditional X-ray but there could be other dangers. For instance, used in a setting, like Gitmo, if a prisoner would have any kind of shrapnel, etc. this could be a major problem. Would they use traditional X-ray methods to pre scan a prisoner before subjecting him to an MRI scan? This new procedure could come in handy but it definitely has its draw backs. Good find.



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Sorry guys I misspoke the story has been edited to magnetic fields


There are side effect from the contrast agents, and this study had cooperative patients. We routinely intubate and sedate infants for this procedure cause you cannot be moving at all during the scan. Hard to ask questions that way.

[edit on 9/28/05 by FredT]



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 09:58 PM
link   
FredT...

Edit to reflect magnetic fields rather than radiation noted.

Mr. Jones where were you on the night of ? . . . and please remain perfectly still.

Advancements in technology continue to provide amazing capabilities in regards to forensics and investigative procedures. However, when it comes down to it, the human body always seems to hold the answers. First indentification thru DNA and now the potential for "interrogation" thru the use of MRIs . . . what's next?



[edit on 9/28/2005 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 10:03 PM
link   
This was one of the potential developments Chief Justice Roberts was asked to comment on to help understand his views on privacy and fair testimony in the judicial system.

I don't think it would be appropriate for me to comment on his forthcoming response to the obstructionists that posed the question at this time.



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 11:11 PM
link   
My bet is that its use will be very limited. The expense alone will keep it from widespread commercial deployment...




Costs

The instruments cost well over $2 million. They require about $10,000 per month for upkeep, like the liquid helium. Plus, they generally take longer to acquire than do X-ray type scans. These costs are of course passed on to the patient -- depending on the length of the scan, the MRIs cost $2,000 - $4,000 in MRI time alone, not accounting for the time of the various technicians and doctors also involved.




However, the government on the other hand....
I can see this used as standard pre-employment practice for all security sensitive positions...

Spooky, really, when you think about it.

[edit on 28-9-2005 by loam]



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
There are side effect from the contrast agents, and this study had cooperative patients.


Reactions to MRI contrast is nearly nonexistent. The only bad actor in the bunch is ProHance (and it’s still nothing compared to iodine based contrasts used in X-Ray based modalities), the rest, Magnevist (the original and my contrast of choice), OmniScan, et al are solid performers, more people react to the stress of having a medical test, venipuncture, or the more frequent reaction to latex than the contrast itself. This report is based on fMRI (functional MRI) and is completely dependent on patient cooperation... It can be viewed as an exonerating test to the willing only, a subject that was uncooperative would only have to move during the test, which would render the images useless. The duration and specificity of the exam is limited as well, being a function of contrast perfusion throughout the brain.



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 11:17 PM
link   
I don't think this will catch on, because I don't think the courts will allow such evidence in a court of law. As it is, the polygraph is a mind game. Failing one doesn't make you guilty. Passing one does not exonerate you. The cops just hope they will scare a suspect into making a mistake. Even with a success rate of 90%, that's still too low to be considered evidence, under current standards. That standard is primitive compare to the probablity of a false positive or negative in DNA testing.

[edit on 2005/9/28 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Mirthful Me and Grady . . . while this will most likely not make it's way into a court of law, at least any time soon, I'd like to consider other possible uses/functions for this technology.

I see it as just another discovery into the workings of the human mind. By demonstrating, under controlled conditions at least, that there is increased blood flow into these areas of the brain during times of false representation, denial, lying, etc. . . . my question is could this prove to be a usefull means to detect, diagnose, or study certain psychiatric and psychological problems, illnesses, and diseases.

Is there increased/decreased blood flow to other sections of the brain during, or prior to, episodes of specific types of seizures? Could this technology possibly be used to detect/diagnose the onset of various mental disorders/conditions?

Aside from being able to determine that, "Yes lil' Mikey did stick his finger in the cake". It seems there would have to be other beneficial applications for this technology than just simply determining truth or ??.



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
I see it as just another discovery into the workings of the human mind. By demonstrating, under controlled conditions at least, that there is increased blood flow into these areas of the brain during times of false representation, denial, lying, etc. . . . my question is could this prove to be a usefull means to detect, diagnose, or study certain psychiatric and psychological problems, illnesses, and diseases.


fMRI was developed in part to pursue transient events, like seizures or episodic mental health issues. It isn't a standalone exam, but is merged with traditional MRI study, which I would best explain in terms of rainfall chart being superimposed upon a topographical map to discern the distribution of foiliage. I hope that helps.



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Mirthful Me,

It seemed to me there had to be more beneficial [preventative or diagnostic] medicinal uses, aside from being able to tell if Mrs. Peacock did takeout Col. Brown in the library with the candlestick.

Thanks!

[edit on 9/29/2005 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 04:14 PM
link   
I speculated in a thread earlier this year that, based on my own personal experiences, MRIs could enhance psychic abilities in those predisposed to ESP.

It didn't occur to me that the reverse could also be true with an objective test of veracity determined by blood flow to certain regions of the brain. Would it be possible, then, to test my hypothesis? Could concentrated bloodflow in the brain be tracked during AP, remote viewing, and other extra-sensory activities?

"Fascinating Captain," said Spock, "I'll have to look into it after we defeat the Klingons."

MRIs Enhance Psychic Abilities

[edit on 29-9-2005 by Icarus Rising]



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 04:56 PM
link   
That's rather odd. I just had an MRI. As a matter of fact i was feeling extremely clostrophobic and the nurse kept on asking me how i was and i said fine becuase i wanted to get it over with. I wonder if she saw that i was lieing. Or would she have only been able to see that at the end?(i'm not familiar at all with the MRI process).




top topics



 
7

log in

join