The human brain is not end-user-modifiable.

Judge as of 2008, reading 'end-user-modifiable' as the ability of a person to deliberately and directly edit or reprogram their own brain's design or algorithms, as one would edit software. True: neuroscience at the time offered individuals no means of directly modifying their own neural architecture at will; learning, drugs and neuroplasticity are indirect and do not change the underlying design. Mostly true: true in substance, with minor caveats such as limited direct interventions (e.g. deep brain stimulation) that are not user-directed redesign. Mixed: substantial means of direct self-modification existed but were limited. Mostly false: ordinary people could meaningfully alter their own brain function in ways comparable to modifying software. False: the brain was directly modifiable by its owner in that sense.

Set before the research began.

1. E1 Special issue on cognitive enhancers - Psychopharmacology Psychopharmacology (Springer), editorial by T.W. Robbins · 11 November 2008

   “The theme of this Special Issue is critically to survey the objective evidence for cognitive enhancement via drugs affecting a range of different neurobiological mechanisms.”

2. E2 Special issue on cognitive enhancers - Psychopharmacology Psychopharmacology (Springer), editorial by T.W. Robbins · 11 November 2008

   “We have learned much about the molecular, cellular and neuropsychological bases of learning and memory over the intervening 30 years or so, and there is thus even more of a rationale for studies of memory-enhancing drugs”

3. E3 Why boost brains? | Practical Ethics Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford · 15 December 2008

   “The need for further studies on enhancement is actually very high. There are for example no studies showing that enhancers actually improve academic performance.”

4. E4 Non-Invasive Method Delivers Genes to the Central Nervous System Nationwide Children's Hospital (The Research Institute) · 22 December 2008

   “Previous gene therapy efforts to treat two of the most common motor neuron diseases, spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) and ALS (Lou Gehrigs disease), have either failed to bypass the BBB, or are clinically irrelevant”

A 2008 special issue surveys cognitive enhancement via drugs acting on neurobiological mechanisms [E1, E2], which the criteria treat as indirect. A December 2008 Oxford ethics post notes there was no evidence that enhancers even improved academic performance [E3]. Gene delivery to the central nervous system was still experimental medical research, and earlier attempts had largely failed [E4]. None of the evidence shows any means for individuals to directly edit their own brain's design, so the claim holds in substance, though the evidence is indirect.