Biohackers: more than humans

You might have used a Thermomix. Depending on the food you put into this cooking robot and how you mix it, one dish or another will come out. Something similar could be said of DNA. Depending on how its elements are formed, you can get a human being, a dinosaur, a pig… Now, imagine that in the middle of running a recipe you decided to remove one of the ingredients because you don’t like its flavour and want to change it for another. Let’s think of a hypothetical robot that could even be programmed so that every time a dish in preparation required onions, it would detect them and eliminate them. In fact, what if some kind of super thermomix got rid of one that you just served and replaced, for example, with zucchini?

With this metaphor, we can get a somewhat rudimentary idea of how the CRISPR/Cas9 technique works, a genetic editing tool that essentially works like molecular scissors. With it, it is possible to remove any DNA sequence and change it to another, as if it were a cut-paste with which different fragments of information housed in the genome of any species could be combined. This process, quite simple and economical, has revolutionized the world of science in recent years; the CRISPR/Cas9 technology could be used for countless things, such as eliminating viruses, ending hereditary ailments, terminating the birth of babies with vision impairments etc. Ultimately, and if we dispensed with any ethical limits, it would give us the possibility to create superhumans, genetically designed at our whim, with new abilities and increased capabilities.

Nowadays, anyone can play God at home. In different online shops, it is possible to purchase a CRISPR kit with all the compounds needed to modify the DNA of a bacterium for about 150 euros; or to convert another into a bioluminescent organism for about 200. In fact, there are communities that defend the democratization of these tools and advocate that biotechnology be accessible to all and not only in the hands of large entities. Such a movement, known as biohacking, is based on the DIY (do it yourself) philosophy, applied to experimentation.

The Basque biologist Ricardo Mutuberria is the founder of BIOOK, an association that seeks to ensure that citizens enjoy scientific-cultural production in this way. “In reality, the aim of biohacking is to take science out of the institutional realm; it has been professionalized to such an extent that it has moved away from society. Your children can do ballet or play the violin as extracurricular activities, but not research, such as growing bacteria or yeasts, for example. That is what we want to popularize this”. Mutuberria is of the opinion that "to know things about your body or your environment through exploration and research should be a right".

How dangerous can it be?

The director of BIOOK argues that there are some biosafety parameters and ethical codes characteristics of the hacker world that are related to collaboration for social and individual improvement, especially through the use of what is known as open-source. Mutuberria assures that, in general, the behaviour of the community is quite good and that there are hardly any cases of people experimenting with themselves exceeding the limits of ethics.

One of the best-known figures in this regard is Aaron Traywick. This American biohacker ran the Ascendance Biomedical Company and, until his death, in 2018, he was found dead in a sensory isolation tank, and strongly argued that anyone should be able to access genetic treatments and use the CRISPR technique in humans to combat certain ailments, such as lung cancer. Traywick, who had no medical training, even injected himself during a biohacker convention held in Austin, Texas, an experimental substance against the herpes virus developed by his company.

Mutuberria understands that the possibility that any individual will be able to do genetic engineering in their home can generate a lot of restlessness. However, it believes that this is a reality that is already there and that this matter should be addressed without delay. “I think these experiments are already being done and cannot be avoided. That is why it is better to create community spaces where it is possible to practice collaboratively and to emphasize codes of ethics.”

In addition to biohackers, there are other groups that seek to transform their bodies artificially. Among the most striking and controversial are the so-called grinders. They apply the principles of ethical hacking to perfect their anatomy and equip themselves with new capabilities. To do so, electronic devices are actually implemented, which in essence makes them cybernetic organisms. This is not a new concept. Cyborgs have been present in our culture since Manfred E. Clynes and Nathan S. Kline coined the term in 1960 to refer to an improved human being to survive in space. In 1985, the philosopher and zoologist Donna Haraway wrote A Cyborg Manifesto, an essay in which she proposed the existence of beings fused with machines and not tied to social conventions. Although the work was conceived as a critique of the concept of gender, it has provided a theoretical basis for those who feel something more than human beings.

The point is, today, becoming a cyborg is quite simple. There are companies that market chips with NFC wireless connections that use electromagnetic fields to exchange information, designed to be placed under the skin. They are around 50 euros and can be used to store personal data, such as medical records, interact with mobile devices, vehicles or locks that make use of this technology or make payments.

One of the most active cyborgs' activists is Neil Harbisson. This British artist was the first person to implant an antenna in his head. Harbisson was born with achromatopsia, a disease that prevents the perception of colours; those who suffer from it see everything on a grayscale. However, for him, everything changed in 2003, when he developed together with the inventor Adam Montandon, the eyeborg, a special sensor that transforms the different tonalities into sound waves. Thanks to this appendix, Harbisson also possesses certain extra capabilities: it can capture invisible radiation to the human eye, such as infrared and ultraviolet, and receive calls, images or videos directly on its head, even from satellites. He claims to no longer be able to differentiate his brain activity from that of the software.

A little over a decade ago, he started a battle with the British authorities when he tried to renew his passport. They prevented him from appearing in the photo of the document with an electronic device on his head. However, the cyborg argued that he was not actually wearing the antenna, but that it was already part of his body and his identity. Finally, after weeks of discussions, the United Kingdom agreed to have him pose with it. This turned out to be the first cyborg officially recognized by a government.

One of his friends, the Catalan avant-garde artist Moon Ribas, with whom she shares concerns, implanted a seismic sensor with which it is possible to detect if an earthquake is occurring somewhere on the planet in real-time. Moon transmuted the signals into sounds or choreographies. Ribas and Harbisson founded the Cyborg Foundation in 2010, an international organization whose goal is to help people who want to become cybernetic beings, promote their art and defend their rights.

What are they?

At the 2016 SXSW conference in Austin, Texas, researcher and electronic civil rights activist Rich MacKinnon proposed five fundamentals, based on a new conception of what it means to be human: freedom of morphology, the right to bodily sovereignty, freedom of dismantling, equality for mutants and the right to organic naturalization.

In 2017, the Cyborg Foundation created the association Transpecies Society, in collaboration with another Catalan cyborg artist Manel Muñoz. Thousands of people have chips implanted under their skin with which they can interact remotely with different electronic devices. The superpower of the latter consists in the prediction of time. Muñoz can perceive the arrival of storms and anticyclones before they occur and even knows at what altitude they are. All of this is thanks to a cybernetic sensory organ that transmits changes in atmospheric pressure to his skull.

The goal of the Transpecies Society is to provide a voice for those who have non-human identities, for which it defends the right to self-design and organizes workshops focused on the development of new senses. Grindhouse Wetware is an American company that shares these objectives. Those responsible maintain that they are working for increased humanity, using safe and appropriate technology. In the eight years that it has been active, it has launched several initiatives, such as Circadia, an implant that sends different biometric data to mobile devices and can be recharged by induction. However, its most successful device is the Northstar, an invention dotted with led lights that are placed in the palm, under the skin. This helps the bearer to do several different things, such as controlling other compatible objects by gestural recognition, identifying the magnetic North Pole or imitating bioluminescence that is naturally produced by some animals, such as fireflies.

The Swedish firm DSruptive, founded by the computer engineer Juanjo Tara from Almería, Spain, helps other companies design the hardware that is used to increase human skills. It ́s modular SIID platform allows different implants to be accommodated and easily introduced into the body. 

There is plenty of room to improve the way it is configured. We believe that it is fundamentally right and desirable to increase our health, cognition, skills and ability to experiment with the help of technology. Additionally, at DSruptive morphological freedom is defended and it is argued that it is up to any individual to reject or apply any augmentation technology upon themselves, as they see fit, provided that this does not harm anyone. 

They are right regarding the last aspect. Experts on this issue argue that in the growing trend towards auto-modification, all types of new modifications have emerged, and some of them push these approaches to the limit. The collective Gynepunks, for example, argues that women should have their own gynaecological and diagnostic tests, as a way to move towards shared knowledge and radical empowerment of their bodies. Their idea is to have their own DIY laboratories, where they can perform fluid analyses, biopsies, synthesize hormones and carry out all kinds of tests, from vaginal cytologies to HIV testing. Its members claim that they are based on the science and knowledge that comes from the experience of everybody, which would combine the use of natural techniques. In essence, its aim is to bypass medical institutions and pharmaceutical multinationals that display "prohibited diagnostic technologies, patriarchal and conservative methodologies".

This passion for improving oneself and having the tools to do so puts health professionals in a difficult position. During the VI Formative Conference on Bioethics held in Madrid last April, Elena Postigo, Associate Professor of Anthropology and Bioethics at the Universidad Francisco de Vitoria and the Universidad CEU San Pablo, pointed out that “The number of biohackers is increasing and that’s going to be a problem because those who have to introduce these implants are going to be the doctors, and they will have to decide whether or not to do it as a way of improving human beings.” 

For now, many of those who agree with these interventions do so in private, to avoid possible consequences or judgements. No one knows, for example, who operated on Neil Harbisson to place his eyeborg. “A surgeon put the implant in him by skipping all the controls; we haven’t heard if he’s had any complications, because it is not talked about,'' stated Postigo.

This expert insists that it is not possible to speak of generalised ethics about this phenomenon, due to the fact that for each specific situation or intervention, all data should be analysed, such as its effects and implications, and because deliberation should take place before a decision is made. However, there are some basic principles that doctors should take into account. One of them is to do no harm. Up until now, it was based on healing and caring for the person. “In the realm of transhumanism, this paradigm is going to change. Over time, professionals will be asked for more and less healing interventions. The limits that are given to the autonomy of an individual with respect to the decision to be made by the doctors have to be contemplated.” 

Another fundamental principle is that is must be taken into account that is not to harm the physical or mental integrity of the person. Postigo also mentions ensuring dignity, acting with justice, caring for the vulnerable, maintaining the principle of prudence, precaution and respecting the environment. This last aspect is particularly important because if, for example, someone uses the CRISPR technique on plants or animals in an uncontrolled environment it could cause great damage to ecosystems, which would ultimately have repercussions for humanity.

Another added problem is that, in many cases, the aforementioned grinders do not turn to doctors for their improvements or modifications. They prefer to carry out the operations themselves when they often lack the knowledge to do so. To justify it, they argue that they are exercising their right to act on their own bodies, but, according to experts, they end up risking than they think.

Lepht Anonym is a biohacker who defends what is called practical transhumanism. In her blog Sapiens Anonym, she tells us what materials she uses to get the implants (which she has practised on herself more than half a hundred times) what the processes are like and what the results are. Amongst other things, Lepht has inserted magnets under the skin of her fingers and chips to make payments. Some of the operations that are done are for updates, that is to say, to replace those devices with other more modern or with newer features. For this biohacker, the pain that all of these interventions cause her - the painkillers needed to deal with them are not easy to get - it is better than sitting around waiting for someone to do them in a consultation or in a conventional laboratory. The first operation she went through was in 2007; she had the help of a friend who was studying medicine to introduce a chip she had acquired on the Internet.

Is there a law that forbids auto-modification?

Lex Abogacía, a law firm that specialises in health, explains that in the case of Spain, there is no specific regulation or provision on the regulation of self-operations. “If someone wants to injure himself, they are very free to do so, but the situation changes if a third party is involved. They can get into trouble, especially if they are a medical professional,” they stated. Additionally, the firm emphasised that actions in which a person acts as a doctor without actually being one as a criminal offence. The reason for this is the potential danger of exercising an activity such as this, which requires very specific training and experience since a fundamental right can be infringed on the right to health.

The whole issue of cyborgs is also about to be legislated, although last year there was a curious precedent in this regard. The Australian Meow-Ludo Gamma Meow-Meow Disc was fined for using public transport without carrying a valid user card. He pointed out, however, that he did have it since the chip had been implanted in his hand so that he could validate his access. His arguments were initially rejected, but a judge eventually annulled the punishment imposed on him for the unusual nature of the case. In the future, certain parts of our body may be replaced with cyber prostheses. However, some experts already warn that such devices could be pirated.

Moisés Barrio Andrés, the author of laws that surround drones and laws that surround robots, points out that the emergence of this fusion of the human and technological “effects constitutional rights, it calls into question the self-determination of the person and it makes us wonder if posthuman society can be democratic.” Barrio believes that this phenomenon will have to be regulated. In fact, as the number of people inserting devices to improve their capabilities increases, so will the need for regulation. Amongst many other things, this will serve to define a rather problematic issue: what part of itself belongs to the improved individual and what belongs to the companies that have manufactured their implants.