The Scientist Next Door
Anna Motýľová explores societal attitudes towards biohacking, stressing the importance of looking beyond the fear to recognise the potential benefits that these new technologies might bring.
SynBioBeta conference. The injection she gave herself contained instructions to disable the gene which limits muscle growth. Such a stunt is made possible thanks to the molecular tool CRISPR-Cas9, which simplified the requirements for performing GM to basic lab equipment, average motor skills, and a garage. Its discoverers Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 2020. Zayner’s self-experiment evokes images of ominous liquids floating around her muscle cells, CRISPR-Cas9 making its way into the nuclei and rampaging through her strings of DNA as a pair of rogue scissors. However, the cutting enzyme Cas9 is rather a careful collageist, carrying with it a guide RNA designed to tell it where exactly to cut and which letters to replace. A new version of this system called high-fidelity Cas9 makes the correct snip 85% of the time.
Illustration by Apple Chew
I
n 2017, Jo Zayner was the first person in history to perform genetic modification (GM) on themselves. She did so in front of a live audience at that year’s
“As with many fears in society, the one around biohacking likely stems from a disconnect between people and science.” Biohacking in its most controversial sense is genetically modifying living organisms outside of institutional laboratories. Biohackers’ backgrounds range from professional scientists to amateur enthusiasts. What unifies them is a movement for science accessibility and regular conventions throughout the US and Europe. CRISPR-Cas9 in biohackers’ hands has so far accelerated biotechnological innovation more than any other tool before. It holds the potential to eradicate malaria for good, cure genetic blindness or muscular
42 Spring 2024 | eusci.org.uk
dystrophy, and even control invasive mouse populations in isolated ecosystems. This is reflected in Zayner’s motivations as well. “Though this experiment was on me, I don't want it to be only about me,” Zayner writes in her blog. “I want it to be about how this technology is inexpensive and easy to use. I want it to be about helping people use this technology to better their lives.” She then proceeds to supply a link where you can order DIY engineering kits for making plant leaves turn red or genetically modify a sample of human cells floating in liquid.
Still, society’s first reaction to biohacking was fear. The Medical Board of California put Zayner under investigation and threatened her with three years of jail and a $10,000 fine for “unlicensed practice of medicine,” although she never claimed to sell treatment or kits to be used on humans. I spoke with Keira Tucker who manages ASCUS Art & Science, Scotland’s first open-access laboratory, which runs interdisciplinary workshops for the public in central Edinburgh and allows people to experiment on their own. In her opinion, “If you're