Category Archives: Transhuman News

Recent technology has been developed to precisely engineer genes for traits of interest. This approach is known as CRISPR gene editing. Gene editing is distinct from other forms of genetic engineering, such as transgenic technology, often colloquially referred to as GMO. With gene editing, the final product can match that obtained by conventional plant breeding, but in a much shorter timeframe. CRISPR has been applied in many agronomic crops and is poised to make contributions in strawberry. We anticipate that, over the next decade, CRISPR and other gene editing techniques will be used to rapidly develop elite strawberry varieties with improved disease resistance, fruit quality, and other valuable attributes.What is CRISPR gene editing?

One of the great disappointments in the pursuit of improved varieties is the discovery of a new advanced selection that would be valued by the industry except for one critical flaw. Gene editing technology can be used to almost surgically adjust the gene or genes behind that deleterious trait. CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) is one form of gene editing that can be used to precisely modify a gene of interest without otherwise compromising the favorable traits of an elite variety (Rani et al. 2016; Bortesi and Fischer 2015). For example, instead of breeding for many years to move a disease resistance gene from a wild strawberry into a modern strawberry, gene editing allows a direct introduction of the genetic information. Think of it as a cut and paste mechanism. This is particularly useful for cultivated strawberries because they are genetically complex, making conventional breeding difficult. The UF/IFAS strawberry breeding program has identified several important gene regions controlling disease resistance traits that are directly relevant to Florida growers. By using CRISPR technology, these genes or gene variants can be moved into desirable genetic backgrounds that can be further moved via conventional crossing in later generations. We can utilize established DNA marker-assisted breeding tools to track the edited genes in subsequent generations, adding to the speed of new variety development. Based on policy discussions, it is possible that the first-generation plants containing the edited genes will not require extensive regulation, and these tools will be extremely valuable in the long-term efforts of every strawberry breeding program.

Transgenic technology refers to the transfer of a genetic material from one species to another. CRISPR, on the other hand, can be used to precisely change DNA sequence, switching it from one naturally occurring variant to another naturally occurring variant. Using this new technique, we can cut a strawberrys genome at a desired location so that existing genes can be removed or added. Early indications suggest that gene editing should be regulated like conventionally bred crops, as the final product can simply match what may be done by conventional breeding. Recently, the USDA announced that it would not regulate a new mushroom developed using CRISPR (Waltz 2016). Countries like Sweden and Argentina have made similar proclamations, indicating that the finished CRISPR-edited varieties do not fall under certain regulations because they do not contain foreign DNA.

While the finished varieties do not contain DNA from other organisms, the process introduces genetic information that orchestrates the desired genetic change. The first step is to develop and optimize a tissue culture and transformation system (protocols to introduce foreign DNA to new plants) for UF strawberry lines, so that new plants can be regenerated from cells containing introduced DNA. However, just as each cultivar has different traits and qualities, they also behave differently with respect to introduction of new genes.

The recent cultivar Sweet Sensation Florida127 and advanced selection Florida Brilliance (FL 13.26-134) were used for tissue culture optimization. As shown in Figure 1, callus induction was tested with different strawberry tissues, and embryogenic callus growth was most vigorous on stolons (runners) and petioles. To identify the optimal conditions for shoot and root regeneration for Sweet Sensation Florida127 and Florida Brilliance (FL 13.26-134), explants were grown on a range of media with varying compositions of plant growth regulators.

About one inch of petiole or stolon from the leaf-end or shoot-end, respectively, were collected from greenhouse grown plants and used for the tissue culture process. Optimal conditions for tissue culture medium, nutrient, and hormone were tested for the UF accessions. The runner (stolon) produced calli more vigorously than petiole segments. It takes about 14 weeks for Sweet Sensation Florida127 and Florida Brilliance (FL 13.26-134) to develop from embryogenic callus to young plantlet in rooting media (Figure 2). Florida Brilliance (FL 13.26-134) produced more regenerated plants than Sweet Sensation Florida127.

Once the genetically engineered gene product is ready for CRISPR gene editing, transformation, where the new genetic material is delivered to a single strawberry cell, is the first step in the genetic engineering process. For DNA delivery, two major transformation methods, such as Agrobacterium tumefaciensmediated or biolistic (gene gun)mediated transformation, are widely used for CRISPR gene editing. Agrobacterium tumefaciens is a widespread, naturally occurring soil bacterium that causes crown gall in many plant species and has the ability to introduce new genetic material into plant cells (Gelvin 2003). This bacterium works as a natural genetic engineer and is used in labs for plant transformation. Gene-edited plants using Agrobacterium-mediated transformation will contain foreign bacterial DNA sequences. It is not an easy process to remove the bacterium-derived DNA sequences through breeding.

In contrast, we are currently using a biolistic particle bombardment method in which DNA-coated metal particles are delivered to the plant cells using a gene gun (Figure 3). This method can be applied to a wide range of cell and tissue types, and there is no need for bacterial DNA insertion. Later, the gene edited tissues can be regenerated to mature plants using the tissue culture protocol outlined above.

Recently, the development of gene editing using protoplasts and regeneration of plants from protoplasts has been demonstrated in other plant species (Woo et al. 2015; Kanchiswamy 2016; Dutt et al. 2015). This method is known as a completely DNA-free gene editing system. Briefly, the protein/genetic material complex for gene editing will be assembled in vitro and the complex mixed with strawberry protoplast isolated from embryogenic calli and polyethylene glycol, which allows direct transfer by endocytosis into protoplasts. The gene edited with protoplasts is cultured (cell suspension culture) into calli, and mature plants can be regenerated using the tissue culture protocol outlined above. We are currently developing this cell suspension culture protocol at UF.

The UF strawberry breeding program provides a direct commercialization path for disease-resistant varieties to reach Florida growers. New varieties with better resistance will bring increased profitability to the Florida strawberry industry. The Florida Strawberry Growers Association estimates that diseases cost the Florida industry at least $15 million each year. In the last two years, the UF strawberry breeding program has identified regions of strawberry chromosomes that control resistance to bacterial angular leaf spot (Roach et al. 2016) and Phytophthora crown rot (Mangandi et al. 2017), with more to come for other diseases such as Colletotrichum crown rot, charcoal rot, and anthracnose fruit rot. Efforts are ongoing to narrow these chromosomal regions down and identify the exact gene sequences that provide these disease resistances, with Phytophthora resistance as the first priority. Our goal is to add Phytophthora resistance to Florida Brilliance (FL 13.26-134) and Sweet Sensation Florida127, which are currently highly susceptible to this disease. Evaluations of the gene-edited lines will be performed in concert with crosses to integrate the changes into other major varieties and advanced selections with conventional hybridization.

Bortesi, L. and R. Fischer. 2015. The CRISPR/Cas9 system for plant genome editing and beyond. Biotechnol Adv. 33(1): 4152.

Dutt, M. et al. 2015. Transgenic Citrus Expressing an Arabidopsis NPR1 Gene Exhibit Enhanced Resistance against Huanglongbing (HLB; Citrus Greening). PLoS One 10(9):e0137134.

Gelvin, S.B. 2003. Agrobacterium-mediated plant trans-formation: the biology behind the gene-jockeying tool. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 67(1):1637.

Kanchiswamy, C.N. 2016. DNA-free genome editing meth-ods for targeted crop improvement. Plant Cell Rep. 35(7): 14691474.

Mangandi, J. et al. 2017. Pedigree-Based Analysis in a Mul-tiparental Population of Octoploid Strawberry Reveals QTL Alleles Conferring Resistance to Phytophthora cactorum. G3 7(6): 17071719.

Rani, R., et al. 2016. CRISPR/Cas9: a promising way to exploit genetic variation in plants. Biotechnol Lett.

Roach, J.A., et al. 2016. FaRXf1: a locus conferring resistance to angular leaf spot caused by Xanthomonas fragariae in octoploid strawberry. Theor Appl Genet.

129(6): 11911201.

Waltz, E. 2016. Gene-edited CRISPR mushroom escapes US regulation. Nature 532(7599): 293.

Woo, J.W., et al. 2015. DNA-free genome editing in plants with preassembled CRISPR-Cas9 ribonucleoproteins. Nat Biotechnol. 33(11): 11621164.

Read more here:
Tired of eating strawberries that taste like cardboard? CRISPR gene editing poised to improve 'fruit quality' and disease resistance of...

By Anne Petermann

On August 18, 2020, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) published a petition by researchers at the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry (ESF) seeking federal approval to release their genetically engineered (GE) Darling 58 (D58) American chestnut tree into U.S. forests. Researchers claim the transgenic D58 tree will resist the fungal blight that, coupled with rampant overlogging, decimated the American chestnut population in the early 20th century. In fact, the GE American chestnut is a Trojan horse meant to open the doors to commercial GE trees designed for industrial plantations.

The D58 would be the first GE forest tree approved in the U.S. and the first GMO intended to spread in the wild. (GE canola plants were discovered in the wild in 2010 but that was unplanned.) "This is a project to rapidly domesticate a wild species through genetic engineering and accelerated breeding, and then to put it back into ecosystems to form self-perpetuating populationsan intentional evolutionary intervention that has never been attempted before with any species," explain scientists at the Center for Food Safety (CFS) and International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA), which are nonprofits based in Washington, D.C.

"The Southern U.S. is global ground zero for the forest products industry and we see genetically engineered chestnut trees as this industry's sneaky way of opening the floodgates for 'frankentrees' that will harm forests, biodiversity and local communities across the region," explains Scot Quaranda of Dogwood Alliance, a nonprofit based in North Carolina that works to protect Southern U.S. forests. "Our natural forests that support wildlife and the economic sovereignty of rural communities will rapidly be replaced with tree plantations for wood pellets, paper and more, leaving environmental and climate injustice in their wake."

The GE American chestnut faces an uphill battle due to decades of opposition to GE trees by Indigenous peoples, scientists, students, activists, foresters and others, including a GE tree ban by the Forest Stewardship Council and a United Nations decision that warns countries of the dangers of GE trees and urges use of the precautionary principle while addressing the issue.

By October 19, 2020, the close of the public comment period on the petition, 109 organizations, representing millions of members, plus an additional 123,426 individuals had registered their opposition to the D58. The next step is the creation of a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) by the USDA recommending action on the petition. The American Chestnut Foundation (TACF) estimates this could take up to a year to complete. Following this, another public comment period will be undertaken to review the draft EIS, after which the agency will develop a final EIS with a decision on the petition.

While American chestnut trees are known to live hundreds of years, D58 trees have only been growing since 2017, calling into question the ESF petition assertion that "Darling 58 has been studied in detail and no plant pest or environmental risks have been observed."

In a report on the GE American chestnut she co-wrote, Dr. Rachel Smolker from Biofuelwatch explains, "Given the long lifespan of trees and varying environmental conditions they face, we cannot extrapolate from tests done on very young trees under controlled lab and field conditions. How GE trees might behave in the diverse and changing context of natural forests over long periods of time is unknown and likely to remain unknown even after they are released."

Scientists at CFS and ICTA warn of problems with the D58 safety studies, writing, "Given the young age of Darling 58 trees and corresponding dearth of tissue samples, conclusions from most of the animal experiments described in the Petition are too preliminary to depend upon."

In studying ESF's assessment of the impacts of inserting the blight-resistant oxalate oxidase (OxO) transgene into the chestnut genome, both CFS and ICTA further point out that some D58 studies did not, in fact, use material from transgenic D58 trees, rendering them invalid. "Petitioners did experiments to study how bumblebees might be affected by Darling 58, but did not have enough Darling 58 pollen for the experiments so used non-transgenic pollen instead, to which they added purified OxO from barley seeds. Other important initial studies on animals reported in the Petition are of limited use because they involved feeding leaves from the Darling 4 instead of Darling 58 even though Darling 4 has much lower levels of OxO in leaves again invalidating the conclusions for risk assessments." The Darling 4 was an earlier version of the American chestnut genetically engineered with the OxO transgene.

While researchers have argued that a strict regulatory process will ensure the safety of the D58 GE tree, a 2019 report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine titled, "Forest Health and Biotechnology: Possibilities and Considerations," raises flags: "Forest health is not accounted for in the regulations for the use of biotechnology or for other approaches to mitigating forest tree insect pests or pathogens. There are no specific regulations or policies that those agencies apply to biotech trees."

Proponents argue that there can be no downside to releasing a tree engineered to resist an introduced blight. But like fire suppression, which has led to devastating wildfires due to an unnatural buildup of flammable materials in the forest, the future impacts of even a well-meaning action can become catastrophic, especially in combination with the unpredictable effects of climate change and extreme weather. Yet, researchers are engineering trees with the conviction that because they can, they should.

In her book Can Science Make Sense of Life?, Dr. Sheila Jasanoff, Pforzheimer Professor of Science and Technology Studies at the Harvard Kennedy School, explains the implications of this arrogance. "For life scientists and their enthusiastic promoters, the arc of the technologically possible, often coincident with the promise of financial gain, increasingly defines the boundaries of the morally permissible."

Researcher William Powell, whose GE American chestnut research has received both financial and technical support from companies with a vested interest in the approval of the GE American chestnutincluding Monsanto, ArborGen and Duke Energydefends his approach. In an article in the Conversation, Powell says, "One of the key advantages of genetic engineering is that it's far less disruptive to the original chestnut genomeand thus to its ecologically important characteristics. The trees remain more true to form with less chance of unforeseen and unwanted side effects. Once these genes are inserted, they become a normal part of the tree's genome and are inherited just like any other gene."

However, in a briefing paper published by the Federation of German Scientists, Dr. Ricarda Steinbrecher, a molecular geneticist, and Antje Lorch, a biologist, counter that the genetic engineering process is inherently risky. The paper states, "It is well documented that the processes of plant transformation give rise to many mutations throughout the plant genome as well as at the insertion site of the transgene. Any robust risk assessment study needs to take several generations into account, for example to assess the stability and heritability of the transgene, unintended side effects and changes due to transformation impact."

The D58 American chestnut is the culmination of decades of effort to open the doors to GE trees in the U.S. by biotechnology and timber companies. In 1999, Monsanto joined with timber companies from the U.S. and New Zealand to form a "forestry biotechnology joint venture," which later became ArborGen, one of the world's leaders in GE tree research and development. GE tree research was originally focused on trees and traits valued by the forest products industry; trees like poplar, pine and eucalyptus, and traits like insect resistance, herbicide tolerance, faster growth or altered wood composition.

American chestnut seedling. Anne Petermann

Other early associationsincluding the Tree Genetic Engineering Research Cooperative at Oregon State University, launched in 1994brought together university researchers with timber and biotechnology giants as well as the U.S. Forest Service to develop genetically engineered trees for industrial timber plantations.

These efforts were met with widespread opposition and sabotage, leading the industry to conclude that they needed a charismatic "test tree" to try to win over the public opinion relating to GE trees.

A 2007 published paper explains, "There is opposition to commercial application of trees, engineered specifically for fast growth and increased yields, by those whose stance is that the value accrues only to 'big companies.' It will remain for traits that have broad societal benefits, such as conservation for acceptance to be gained."

The D58 is seen as a positive example for the beleaguered biotechnology industry of the benefits of 'biotechnology for conservation.' Duke Energy also sees the American chestnut for its value as a greenwashing tool. Duke Energy invested millions into the GE American chestnut through the Forest Health Initiative. Its hope was to use the American chestnut to help "green" its devastated mountaintop removal mining lands.

Naturalist and author Bernd Heinrich has one such grove growing on his land in Maine. In a New York Times op-ed in 2013, he wrote, "I have been enjoying American chestnuts for several years now, harvested from some trees that are now part of my forest of 600 acres in western Maine. I planted four seedlings in the spring of 1982. Beyond all my expectations, the trees thrived, and some are now 35 feet tall. In my small corner of western Maine, the American chestnut is now promising to again become a significant component of the ecosystem."

Once dominant in Eastern U.S. forests, the American chestnut was highly valued for its beautiful and rot-resistant wood, and abundant nuts. While few actually remember the tree, which largely disappeared from the landscape by the 1920s, a public relations effort was launched in the early 2010s with articles appearing in numerous major publications heralding the return of this "mighty giant" through the wonders of genetic engineering. Millions of American chestnut stumps, meanwhile, continue to send up shoots that occasionally grow into trees large enough to produce nuts, and in some locations, wild American chestnuts are spreading on their own, showing at least some evolving blight tolerance.

Another decades-long program by the American Chestnut Cooperators' Foundation is successfully breeding pure wild American chestnuts that are naturally blight-resistant.

In spite of examples like this, GE chestnut proponents have declared the American chestnut functionally extinct, and insist that its survival hinges on the release of unproven and risky genetic engineered American chestnut trees into forests. But Lois Breault-Melican, a former board member of the American Chestnut Foundation who publicly resigned from the TACF over the organization's support for the GE American chestnut, points out that this argument ignores the risks posed to organic and other chestnut growers: "These growers are concerned about the potential GMO contamination of their orchards caused by the unregulated and unmonitored planting of genetically engineered American chestnut trees. If the USDA approves these GE American chestnuts, the integrity of chestnut orchards would be forever compromised."

Indigenous peoples in the regions of proposed D58 releases have expressed concern that unregulated distribution of a GE tree would violate their sovereign right to keep their territories free from GMOs. They insist that Indigenous peoples be consulted in the process of reviewing the D58 American chestnut.

"Today, there remain large areas of traditional and treaty lands on which much is forested and managed as sovereign territory of many different Native American Peoples," explains BJ McManama of the Indigenous Environmental Network. "These forests are not only a source of economic self-determination but hold great cultural significance to include sacred sites where trees are an element of sustenance, knowledge and familial identity. Every living being within the forests [is] related in some form and nothing within these lands lives in isolation; therefore, changing or altering the original instructions of any one or any part of these elements threatens the natural order established over millennia."

The Eastern Band of Cherokee, members of the Lumbee Tribe of central North Carolina and Seminole Peoples from unceded Florida territory joined the Campaign to STOP GE Trees for an October 2014 gathering in the mountains of North Carolina to protest GE trees as a form of colonization. Their concerns were focused on the GE American chestnut trees.

Lisa Montelongo, a member of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee, explained, "I'm very concerned that GE trees would impact our future generations and their traditional uses of trees. Our basket makers, people that use wood for the natural colors of our clay workthere would be no natural life, no cycle of life in GE tree plantations."

Following the camp, the Band's Tribal Council passed a unanimous resolution prohibiting GE trees from their lands: Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians (EBCI) Tribal Council Resolution No. 31 (2015): "We commit to rejecting biomass, genetically engineering the natural world, carbon trading, carbon offsets and carbon sequestration schemes as they are false solutions to the climate change." Concerns were focused on the inability of the tribe to keep the GE American chestnut tree off of their lands if it were released into surrounding forests, which they describe as a violation of the Free, Prior and Informed Consent mandate under the UN's Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

In the end, the potential deregulation of the D58 is not about restoring a "mighty giant" to Eastern U.S. forests. Its approval is about paving the way for the deregulation of all GE trees, toward the creation of an oxymoronic future "bioeconomy" where biodiverse forests are replaced with specially engineered trees for the manufacture of fuels, chemicals, textiles, plastics and other goods in a "green" version of "business as usual." Implicit in this scheme is a massive increase in the consumption of wood. This in turn will drive accelerated conversion of carbon-rich native forests, critical for climate regulation, and other ecosystems for conversion to fast-growing plantations that include GE trees with traits to expedite their use as feedstocks. Existing non-native plantations of eucalyptus, the most common plantation tree, are already notorious for their devastating social, ecological and climate change impacts. But new research out of Oregon State University is attempting to "green" these plantations with claims that eucalyptus trees can be genetically engineered to be infertile, through a process to "knock out LEAFY," the gene believed to control flower formation. The research claims this would prevent eucalyptus trees from invading native ecosystems, though it does nothing to address the ability of eucalyptus to spread asexually through vegetative propagation.

American chestnut tree, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. Canadian Biotechnology Action Network

This new technology also does nothing to address the serious problems caused by industrial plantations of eucalyptus. These impacts, outlined in detail by the World Rainforest Movement, include depletion of fresh water; forced displacement of Indigenous groups, rural communities and subsistence farmers; and catastrophic wildfires. In fact, the addition of GE trees to these plantations could exacerbate known impacts and/or lead to new, unknown and potentially irreversible problems.

Another attempt to "green" GE trees for the bioeconomy involves the development of trees specially engineered to store extra carbon as a supposed climate change mitigation tool. But a new article in Yale Environment 360 challenges schemes like this that focus on tree planting for climate mitigation. Echoing the findings of the World Rainforest Movement and others, the article reports "a growing number of scientists and environmentalists are challenging this narrative on tree-planting. They say that planting programs, especially those based on large numerical targets, can wreck natural ecosystems, dry up water supplies, damage agriculture, push people off their landand even make global warming worse." In addition, they say, "Tree planting can distract from the greater priorities of protecting existing forests and reducing fossil fuel use."

The attempts to greenwash genetically engineered trees with their unpredictable and irreversible impacts are being opposed globally by a broad coalition of scientists, Indigenous peoples, agronomists, peasant farmers, foresters, teachers and others, as well as organizations focused on protecting forests, human rights and climate justice. GE trees have no place in an ecologically and socially just future.

Author's note: Following the initial publication of this article, Reuters reported that a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed on April 21 between the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians (EBCI) and the American Chestnut Foundation. The MOU, described by EBCI members as highly controversial, would allow the planting of GE American chestnuts on Cherokee land.

Anne Petermann is the executive director of Global Justice Ecology Project. She has been working on issues related to protecting forests and defending the rights of Indigenous peoples since 1990 and co-founded the first global campaign against genetically engineered trees in 2000. In the years since, she has presented the social and ecological dangers of genetically engineered trees at conferences, with community groups, and at the United Nations and other international fora on five continents. She currently coordinates the Campaign to STOP GE Trees, which she co-founded in 2014. Follow her on Twitter: @AnneGJEP.

This article first appeared on Truthout and was produced in partnership with Earth | Food | Life, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

Related Articles Around the Web

Follow this link:
USDA May Allow Genetically Modified Trees to Be Released Into the Wild - EcoWatch

The Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC) has worked in partnership with the German Bundeswehr Office for Defence Planning to understand the future implications of human augmentation (HA), setting the foundation for more detailed Defence research and development.

The project incorporates research from German, Swedish, Finnish and UK Defence specialists to understand how emerging technologies such as genetic engineering, bioinformatics and the possibility of brain-computer interfaces could affect the future of society, security and Defence. The ethical, moral and legal challenges are complex and must be thoroughly considered, but HA could signal the coming of a new era of strategic advantage with possible implications across the force development spectrum.

HA technologies provides a broad sense of opportunities for today and in the future. There are mature technologies that could be integrated today with manageable policy considerations, such as personalised nutrition, wearables and exoskeletons. There are other technologies in the future with promises of bigger potential such as genetic engineering and brain-computer interfaces. The ethical, moral and legal implications of HA are hard to foresee but early and regular engagement with these issues lie at the heart of success.

HA will become increasingly relevant in the future because it is the binding agent between the unique skills of humans and machines. The winners of future wars will not be those with the most advanced technology, but those who can most effectively integrate the unique skills of both human and machine.

The growing significance of human-machine teaming is already widely acknowledged but this has so far been discussed from a technology-centric perspective. This HA project represents the missing part of the puzzle.

The content of this publication does not represent the official policy or strategy of the UK government or that of the UKs Ministry of Defence (MOD).

Furthermore, the analysis and findings do not represent the official policy or strategy of the countries contributing to the project.

It does, however, represent the view of the Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC), a department within the UK MOD, and Bundeswehr Office for Defence Planning (BODP), a department within the German Federal Ministry of Defence. It is based on combining current knowledge and wisdom from subject matter experts with assessments of potential progress in technologies 30 years out supporting deliberations and deductions for future humans and society.

Read the original here:
Human Augmentation The Dawn of a New Paradigm - GOV.UK

Image: Milad B Fakurian / Unsplash

Twitter founder Jack Dorsey does it (he only eats once a day and never on a weekend); so does Elon Musk (hes developing a microchip that can be inserted straight into the brain); and even the half-naked guy shivering in the frigid tide-pool at 7am biohacking.

In its most rudimentary form, the practice of biohacking can be described as doing things that optimise your body and minds function. Essentially, having a regular sleeping schedule or cutting out sugar could be considered a biohack (though most of us would just call that healthy living). American entrepreneur and founder of Bulletproof nootropics Dave Asprey who has been boisterously claiming that he is the father of biohacking, provides a second definition: biohacking is the art and science of becoming superhuman.

In fact, biohacking personalities like Asprey, Josiah Zayner, Elon Musk and Jack Dorsey are doing all that they can to transcend what we have come to think of as regular humanness. Often claiming to be at the forefront of life-hacking technology and theory, they are constantly experimenting with the human body in attempts to make it stronger, faster, smarter, younger, more efficient. Some of their fellow biohackers around the world painstakingly track every bodily consumption and function in order to reach optimum performance, or implant chips into their hands for maximum technological efficiency, or engage in the vampire-like practice of replacing ones blood with that of young donors in an attempt to find the fountain of youth.

There is a reason these biohacking celebs have become people of intrigue: they often take things to the extreme, further than most of us would be comfortable. And indeed, using science and technology as a sort of shortcut to enhancing your body and mind, as well as potentially increasing your lifespan, is arguably appealing to most people.

But luckily there are also ways to biohack that dont involve endless hours of tracking, calculating and inserting foreign objects into your body, methods much closer to the realm of comfortable that are purported to actually help with things like boosting the metabolism, the immune system and concentration without going all the way cyborg.

All the way to extreme wellness

Remember the guy, semi-naked, frigid in the tidepool at 7am? This practice, a combination of cold therapy (diving into very cold water), dynamic stretching and breathing techniques is part of the Wim Hof method, which is said to help you realise your full potential.

As per the many deep breathing, scantily clad bodies on the beaches and in the tide pools early in the morning, the method is seemingly popular in Cape Town (perhaps because of the accessible ice water that is the ocean) and is thought to do a wealth of awesome things, including burn fat, reduce stress and boost the immune system.

The Wim Hof method is named after its founder, a self-proclaimed crazy Dutchman from the Netherlands. Also known as the ice-man for the varied but equally death-defying feats he has accomplished in exceedingly cold climates, including (but not limited to) climbing Kilimanjaro in shorts, running a half-marathon above the arctic circle barefoot, and finishing a full marathon in the Namib desert without drinking a single drop of water, Hof has made it his mission to spread his superhuman, cold-enduring abilities to those of us lesser beings who struggle to get our noodle arms out of bed in the winter.

According to Hof, all noodle arms can get out of bed and tap into happiness, strength and health by following his simple three-tier method. The tiers breathing exercises, gradual exposure to cold and training of concentration and commitment must be done in parallel with one another to feel the full effects.

The practice, usually done in the morning before breakfast, should look like some iteration of this: The first step, the breathing exercises, are surprisingly simple. They include breathing in and out purposefully (but without forcing anything) for a couple of minutes. The idea is that there is no pause between the inhale and exhale, like a cycle Hof explains in a tutorial video, like a wave. At the end of this short but intense breathing period, Hof asks you to exhale and hold your breath the tutorial starts with holding for one minute, but the idea is to hold for as long as you feel comfortable (which will get longer and longer with practice), after which you release and start all over again.

In simplified terms, the breathing technique has been developed over time by Hof to expand the diffusion surface of your lungs, thereby increasing oxygen and decreasing carbon dioxide levels in your blood. The altered ratio of oxygen/carbon dioxide allegedly raises the PH of your blood, alkalising your body and lowering the number of acids (like lactic acids) produced by your cells that are often responsible for feelings of pain. Oxygen, while not always essential, is a pretty central aspect of energy production on a cellular level, so the heightened levels of it in your blood should said Hof energise your entire body.

Next, Hof recommends push-ups and yoga-based stretching. To get your body warmed up, of course, but also to flex just how much energy the breathing exercises give you.

The last physical step of the process is the cold exposure. This can take the form of an ice bath, a very cold shower, or floating around in a freezing tide pool for a significant amount of time. Significant here, means at least one minute when you are starting out with the method, but for as long as you can once you have been practising for a while.

It is believed that the shock that your body experiences when suddenly exposed to the cold water triggers a release of norepinephrine, which, similar to adrenaline, mobilises the brain and body into action. This represses the immune system, which decreases the number of inflammatory proteins (which cause swelling and aches and pains of all sorts) produced and catalyses the cardiovascular system to redirect blood around the body in order to warm itself up. It also supposedly causes the body to burn browned fats which are energy-rich fats that burn immediately for the sake of providing the body with heat and energy. If practised regularly, the physiological systems learn and become more efficient (your veins are strengthened and white blood cell count increased) and you may even become (somewhat) cold resistant. A more in-depth explanation of the biological details (how exactly the mitochondria break down the fats into energy) can be found here.

The third tier, the training of concentration and commitment, is a little less concrete. The idea is that you have to commit and concentrate while going through the steps of the Wim Hof method, but also that, through the practice of doing the method, you will strengthen your powers of concentration and commitment. A winning cycle.

Some studies, like the one published in 2018 and dubbed Brain over body A study on the wilful regulation of autonomic function during cold exposure, raves about the positive effects of the Wim Hof method, especially those pertaining to a decrease in inflammation, an increase in metabolism and a strengthened immune system.

In fact an experiment was done on Hof himself in 2010 by scientists from UMC St Radboud, in which he was injected with components of E.coli that, while harmless, would make a normal person pretty sick with flu-like symptoms. Hof believed that through his method he could regulate the autonomic nervous system (the system that regulates breathing, internal organs, digestion, heartbeat and all the other things we do subconsciously) and thereby directly influence his immune system. Hof not only did not feel any symptoms from the E.coli, but also produced fewer than half of the inflammatory proteins that usual test subjects produce.

In 2014 a follow-up study titled Voluntary activation of the sympathetic nervous system and attenuation of the innate immune response in humans, was done to determine whether Hof was an innately superior human being who could control his own immune system, or whether other people could learn how to do it, too.

Twenty-four volunteers were involved half of them trained with Hof beforehand and half were controls. Incredibly, the 12 that were trained in the Wim Hof method showed significantly fewer flu-like symptoms, lower body temperatures and fewer inflammatory proteins in the blood. They too had benefited from Hofs teachings.

What would it mean to be able to control our immune systems? Imagine being capable of out-concentrating a disease! In the context of todays Covid-riddled world, it sounds like an incredible promise.

However, the studies only proved that Hof and his trainees were able to suppress the immune system by stimulating cortisol, a stress hormone. A suppressed immune system means fewer inflammatory proteins in the blood, which means fewer symptoms. But the E.coli components injected into Hof and co were dead, they were harmless; the symptoms they should have felt because of the injection would have been the bodys reaction to a trick, a reflex. When it comes to active and harmful diseases, there is a reason our immune system flares up. These studies did not prove that Hof could by any means avoid a real illness at all.

On that note, its important to point out that some of the more complex alleged benefits, like fibromyalgia relief, autoimmune disease relief, COPD management, and the ever-expansive and ambiguous umbrella of health improvements are not well researched enough to be considered as conclusive.

In addition, as with any method or experiment on ones body, one should be cautious about practising the method without the supervision of a medical expert or advice. In 2017, it was reported that two people had died while trying a breathing technique called controlled hyperventilation; they allegedly drowned from doing these yoga relaxation exercises in the water; the method is one promoted by Hof, although his website warns not to practise it before or during diving, driving, swimming, taking a bath or any other environment/place where it might be dangerous to faint.

Yet, Hof, having once been thought of as a fringe character a freak of nature if you will, capable of unbelievable and inhuman accomplishments is beginning to make waves in more mainstream science: from appearing in 2008, on EenVandaag, a Dutch television programme, saying, I want to take it from circus act to scientist, my body is my laboratory, to being part of a 2020 episode of Gwyneth Paltrows Goop Lab series.

The episode in question features the Goop ladies on a trip to Lake Tahoe, California, to do a workshop with Hof himself. After jumping into a dangerously cold body of water, Goop executive editor Kate Wolfson, twitching in her chunky knit sweater with tears in her eyes, tells Hof: Like I dont mean to sound cheesy. But that was like a turning point in my life. Her vocal fry touches Hof in a way that the ice never could.

To do the Wim Hof method safely and effectively one needs an instructor, or to buy a subscription to Hofs video series, starting at $300 (about R4,280), for the fundamentals course.

In the realm of biohacking products, and for something a little less extreme, there are Dave Aspreys Bulletproof products, called nootropics and known to some as smart drugs.

Avowing cognitive enhancement, these little nuggets of (alleged) genius come in the form of prescription drugs, like Adderall and Ritalin, as well as less-regulated alternatives. Aspreys brand Bulletproof falls into the latter category. The brand is most famous for its coffee, a mixture of coffee beans, MCT oil and butter which the website maintains helps you feel full while increasing your focus and metabolism. Other nootropics that the site offers include supplements that aid your mood, memory, gut health, performance, immunity and sleep. With Bulletproof, the idea, as mentioned by Jenna Wortham in a New York Times article from 2015, is that you can outsource that work. That fundamental laziness, where I want everything to be easier, is part of what drives me, he (Asprey) told me that first day. I dont want to do more work than is necessary to do great things. I dont see why anyone should do more work than is necessary to do great things.

But, as Wortham also pointed out in this article, there are more than a few nutritionists who are dubious about Aspreys bold claims. Its hard not to be theres little research outside his own that backs them up [] We all want to live forever, and if changing one thing in our diets can do that, we can all hope. The success of the dietary-supplement industry is best explained by wish-fulfilment fantasies. Thats not to say that other nootropics do not work, just make sure to do your due diligence before spending any significant amount of money on them.

Apart from his own products, Asprey is also an advocate for intermittent fasting, an increasingly popular diet that calls for extended periods of not eating. There are a few different ways to do it, the most popular being the 16/8 method, in which one fasts for 16 hours and has an eight-hour feeding window. Within the feeding window (usually falling between 12pm and 8pm), an intermittent faster may eat what they want. Other approaches include the Eat-Stop-Eat (a 24-hour fast two times a week), and alternate-day fasting (fast for a day, eat normally for the next, and so on.)

Intermittent fasting is reportedly highly effective in weight-loss endeavours, though its up for debate as to whether it is superior or similar to other calorie-restrictive diets. The reason for its alleged effectiveness has to do with metabolic switching the idea is that after 10 to 12 hours the body depletes its glycogen (stored glucose) and starts burning ketones (energy made in the liver by breaking down fat.) Ostensibly, the presence of ketone bodies also has some influence over glucose regulation, blood pressure, heart rate and abdominal fat loss.

In 1988, a study called Retardation of ageing and disease by dietary restriction showed that intermittent fasting has a direct correlation to extended life span in rodents, although it is still highly debated as to whether this translates to humans. It has become clear that a number of variables, like sex, genetic composition and age, also determine whether or not intermittent fasting works for you.

Still, as mentioned before, Dorsey eats one simple meal (usually salmon or chicken) on weekdays, and on the weekend he fasts from Friday to Sunday. The man is, one could say, robotic in his discipline, but his method also raised concerns, drawing parallels with diets that can sometimes trigger more obsessive behaviours around food, such as eating disorders.

The Wim Hof method, nootropics and intermittent fasting are really just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to hacking life. Some biohackers, like Asprey, believe that the first person who will live to be 1,000 years old is already alive today. The question becomes, if you lived to 1,000 years old, what would you look like?

As Mark Grief, co-founder of literary magazine N+1, aptly puts it in his book Against Everything, the haste to live mortal life diminishes. The temptation towards perpetual preservation grows. We preserve the living corpse in an optimal state, not so we may do something with it, but for its own good feelings of eternal fitness, confidence and safety. We hoard our capital to earn interest and subsist each day on crusts of bread. But no one will inherit our good health after weve gone. DM/ML

In part two of our series Back to the Future: Smart drugs and smart eating, we take a deep dive into the world of intermittent fasting as a way to optimise bodily functions, and smart drugs as a way to enhance ones mental capabilities.

More here:
Are we humans or are we hackers? (Part One of Four) - Daily Maverick

Bloomberg

(Bloomberg) -- First they struck California, then Texas. Now blackouts are threatening the entire U.S. West as nearly a dozen states head into summer with too little electricity.From New Mexico to Washington, power grids are being strained by forces years in the making some of them fueled by climate change, others by the fight against it. If a heat wave strikes the whole region at once, the rolling outages that darkened Southern California and Silicon Valley last August will have been previews, not flukes.Its really the same case in different parts of the West, said Elliot Mainzer, chief executive officer of the California Independent System Operator, which runs most of the states grid. Its revealed competition for scarce resources that we havent seen for some time.The specter of blackouts highlights a paradox of the clean-energy transition: Extreme weather fueled by climate change is exposing cracks in societys move away from fossil fuels, even as that shift is supposed to rein in the worst of global warming. States shuttering coal and gas-fired power plants simply arent replacing them fast enough to keep pace with the vagaries of an unstable climate, and the regions existing power infrastructure is woefully vulnerable to wildfires (which threaten transmission lines), drought (which saps once-abundant hydropower resources) and heat waves (which play havoc with demand).On Wednesday, California's grid managers warned that while they're better positioned than last summer, the risk of power shortages during extreme heat remains a clear possibility. Wildfires, already getting started after a dry winter, could compound the danger if they threaten transmission lines. We are headed to yet another very dangerous fire year, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said during a briefing Thursday. We're seeing a higher level of risk and an earlier level risk. For many, Californias power crisis in 2020 was the first indication of how serious the regional power shortfall had become. While the blackouts highlighted the states reliance on solar power a resource that ebbs in the evening just as demand picks up an equally significant problem was Californias dependence on imported electricity. Utilities routinely source power supplies from out of state, drawing electricity across high-voltage transmission lines to wherever its needed. But last summer, neighboring states coping with the same heat wave as California were straining to keep their own lights on, and imports were hard to come by.This year, that dynamic is playing out on a larger scale. Across the West, states have grown dependent on importing power from one another. That works fine in temperate weather, when electricity demand is relatively low. But it's a problem when a widespread heatwave blankets the entire region. The Western Electricity Coordinating Council, which oversees electricity grids throughout the western U.S. and Canada, estimates that without imports, Nevada, Utah and Colorado could be short of power during hundreds of hours this year, or the equivalent of 34 days. Arizona and New Mexico could be short for enough hours to total 17 days, according to a report by the organization that looked at worst-case scenarios to help states develop plans to head off potential outages.Its no longer necessarily a California problem or a Phoenix problem, said Jordan White, vice president of strategic engagement for the group, known as WECC. Everyone is chasing the same number of megawatts. While blackouts arent a guarantee in any region, traders are already betting on supply shortages and sending power prices soaring throughout the West. At the heavily traded Palo Verde hub in Arizona, prices have nearly quadrupled since last summers outages, while the Pacific Northwests Mid-Columbia hub has tripled.We are already seeing record-breaking prices across the West, some of which can be attributed to a fear factor being priced in, said JP McMahon, a market associate for Wood Mackenzie. Last year was a bit of a wake-up call.The reasons behind the shortfall are two-fold: Climate change is making it harder to forecast demand for electricity while the shift to clean energy is straining power supplies.Where utilities and grid managers were once able to rely on predictable consumption patterns season to season more air conditioner use in August, less in October theyre now reckoning with record-hot summers and historic winter storms that cause great, unexpected surges in demand.Its becoming challenging to take out the crystal ball to know with any level of certainty how hot it its going to be, White said.At the same time, older coal and gas plants capable of providing power 24 hours a day are being pushed out by climate change regulations and their own dwindling profitability. In the West, power generation from such plants slipped 6% from 2010 through 2018, according to WECC. While wind and solar capacity have more than tripled in the region, the output from those resources varies by the hour, making them harder to rely on during an unexpected demand crunch. Massive batteries can help make up the difference, but their installation is just beginning.Its a global phenomenon. Sweden this summer is bracing for power outages and curbing electricity exports after nuclear retirements have left the country with too little spare capacity to balance big swings in demand. In China last winter, even a surplus of coal plants couldnt keep the lights on during a severe cold blast.At this point, no subregion in WECCs coverage area generates enough electricity to meet its own needs during periods of high demand; they all rely on imports to avoid outages.In the aftermath of the California crisis, utilities have been signing up contracts for more emergency power supplies and are trying to make sure they arent relying on the same suppliers as everyone else. Some entities, including the Imperial Irrigation District of Southern California are working to curb their reliance on imports. But its not clear that all utilities in the highest-risk areas plan to do much differently. The situation is, if not dire, getting close. Temperatures in the West are expected to be above average through the summer, with the worst heat slamming the Southwest. More than 84% of land in the 11 Western states is gripped by drought.Following last summers outages, California is among the best positioned going into summer. The state is plugging roughly 1,500 megawatts of batteries into the grid, has postponed the retirement of several aging gas plants and raised the price cap on power trades to incentivize imports if outside supplies are necessary and available. Even if imports are readily available for those that need them, theres no guarantee that transmission lines will be able to carry those electrons where they need to go. Extreme weather can take out the high-voltage conduits that stitch the Western states together, and wildfires are notorious for knocking out transmission lines. Although it received little attention at the time, a major transmission line in the Pacific Northwest that suffered damage in a storm last spring limited power flows into California throughout the summer energy crisis.Energy consultant Mike Florio, who used to sit on the board of Californias grid operator, said other states can learn from the Wests dilemma. They should keep a variety of resources as they decarbonize, learning how to balance the daily rhythms of solar and wind, and not move too quickly to shutter old gas-burning plants that can provide power in a pinch.We forget that were still learning a lot about how to run a system like this, Florio said. We probably want to keep our existing gas capacity, at least in reserve. It may be used less, but something thats already built is cheap insurance.(Adds quote from U.S. agriculture secretary in sixth paragraph. )For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.2021 Bloomberg L.P.

View post:
Oxitec Released a Cloud of Gene-edited Mosquitoes to Study how to Control Reproduction and Stop the Spread of Diseases - Yahoo Finance

Google Ads clarified in its speculative and experimental medical treatment policy that cell therapies and gene therapies are therapies not allowed on the Google Ad network. This includes prohibiting stem cell therapy, cellular (non-stem) therapy, gene therapy and similar forms of regenerative medicine, platelet rich plasma and others.

Google said that violations of this policy do not lead to immediate account suspension without prior warning. Google said a warning will be issued, at least 7 days, prior to any suspension of your account. So you have time to make changes before your account is suspended for use of these ads.

Google said the following are not allowed to be advertised on Google Ads:

(1) Promotion of speculative and/or experimental medical treatments. Some examples include biohacking, do-it-yourself (DIY) genetic engineering products, gene therapy kits and so on.

(2) Promotion of cell or gene therapies, regardless of regulatory approval status. Examples include stem cell therapy, cellular (non-stem) therapy, gene therapy and similar forms of regenerative medicine, platelet rich plasma and so on.

Personally, I have no clue on the science, I am just reporting the news on this Google Ads announcement.

Forum discussion at Twitter.

Continue reading here:
Google Ads: Cell Therapies and Gene Therapies Are Not Allowed - Search Engine Roundtable