Chilean regulation on neuro rights has served as proof for those who promote it that it is possible to regulate emerging technologies. However, this effort suffers from a series of weaknesses, where perhaps the lack of evidence is the most important. In this work I argue that in addition to being a redundant regulation because the risks it is supposed to protect are covered by other fundamental rights, it has been designed with a defective regulatory technique that builds all its strength based on consent. This enabling circumstance can only be delivered by healthy people and people with some level of deterioration in mental or brain activity, who benefit most from neuro technologies, are in practice not only left out of the progress of science but will also experience lower levels of access to the benefits guaranteed by virtue of the right of access to health.