Some call it bodyhacking, others refer to it as biohacking, and some don't know what to call it. Operating outside the realm of medical labs or research facilities, their methods seem unconventional and sometimes nerve-racking. But, they may just be the pioneers that create the next wave of human augmentation. After all, tech staples like Apple, Google, and Amazon all started somewhere.
What about you?
Here are some of the answers we got when we asked survey participants, "Would you ever consider getting technology implanted or added to your body?"
​
Of course, it would hopefully improve myself and my limitations as a person. Also you could stick it to Darwin and really speed up evolution.
Yes. Having an RFID chip to scan in and out of buildings, pay for things, use as a drivers license/passport would make life so easy.
I would like to be able to microchip my kids. I know it sounds weird but it would make finding them if they were ever taken easier.
Sure. I think that stuff like lasik and plastic surgery is not much different from a tech implant. As long as the tech implant does not invade my privacy or anything like that.
I want to say no but I am basically attached to my phone so I may as well be.
A friend of mine knows someone who implanted a chip in his finger that lets him detect magnetic fields, so something like that I would definitely consider.
Is biohacking medicine?
Click on each person to find out their perspective on this question.
What does it mean to be human?
Is it our brains? Our consciousness and our personalities? Our memories and ability to feel emotions?
Enabling technology to be on or in our bodies (aka, becoming a cyborg) completely redefines preconceived ideas around what it means to evolve as a human. This technology forces us to question whether it is our physical biology, our arms and lungs, that makes us human, or if it's something else.
​
“Is there some reason that a meat computer makes you human, and a silicone one won’t?” Tim Cannon questions this idea of what makes us human by asserting that it is our brains and intelligence that makes us human. After all, we are higher on the evolutionary chain than many other species simply because of our intelligence.
​
But even still, what percent of your body would need to be technology for you to no longer consider yourself a human? If someone is 90% cyborg technology and 10% human biology, are they still a citizen? Are they still worthy of protection under the law and ethical treatment in the workplace? These are questions we need to grapple with in order to be proactive and self-aware.
Who's in Charge?
The field of biohacking has the potential for danger. Many of the augmentations that biohackers perform today still fall under the category of "body modification" rather than "surgery." Because of this, they do not have to apply for FDA approval for the devices or the implant procedures.
This lack of regulation is good in some ways, because it makes the research accessible - you don't need to have thousands of dollars and lab equipment to create and test technology. The maker revolution of the 21st-century encourages people to invent and innovate, then share their results with the world.
But as you can imagine, there is still a lot that can go wrong if there's no procedure or system in place to set standards. While regulation may feel bureaucratic to some, the pros of a lengthy process of oversight is that it incorporates a lot of time for reflection, improvement, and consideration of safety and ethics. This is why biohackers are beginning to develop self-governing institutions of ethics.
BACKLASH
Many people in the biohacking community receive a lot of criticism for what they do. Below are a few of the top categories where biohackers have encountered backlash. Click to listen to how they respond to it.
R E L I G I O U S
E T H I C A L
