Is Biohacking a Real Thing? What Does Science Have to Say

Biohacking, a term that has gained popularity over the past decade, is a concept that embodies the human desire to understand, control, and improve our biology. It represents a broad spectrum of practices and pursuits, ranging from DIY biology experiments and quantified self-movement to using various supplements, devices, and techniques intended to 'hack' one's biological systems to achieve desired outcomes like enhanced cognitive function, physical performance, or longevity. But is biohacking a real thing? And what does science have to say about it? Let's dive in.

At its core, biohacking merges the ethos of citizen science and participatory medicine with a dash of Silicon Valley entrepreneurial spirit. Biohackers believe in the potential of changing or improving their biology using various resources. These might include technological interventions, nutritional supplements, and lifestyle modifications, amongst other things (1).

The scientific community views biohacking from a few different lenses. Still, there is a consensus that while some aspects of biohacking are grounded in established science, others are less so.

Take, for example, the realm of 'nutrigenomics,' which investigates how individual genetic variation affects a person's response to nutrients and impacts the risk of nutrition-related chronic diseases (2). This scientific field aligns with some biohackers' practices of adjusting their diets based on their unique genetic makeup for optimal health. Although this is a legitimate and growing field of study, the application can be problematic when marketed as personalised nutrition solutions without rigorous scientific backing.

Similarly, biohacking tools such as wearable fitness trackers are well-grounded in science. They allow users to monitor their health and fitness aspects – heart rate, sleep patterns, and activity levels – and adjust their behaviours accordingly (3). However, a healthcare professional should guide the interpretation and application of such data for improving health or fitness outcomes.

Then there's the side of biohacking that ventures into more controversial and potentially risky territory. This includes practices like DIY genetic engineering, implanting devices, or self-experimentation with nootropics – substances that claim to enhance cognitive function. These are areas where the science is either not definitive or the practices are not regulated, posing potential health and ethical concerns (4).

As with many emerging trends, the science of biohacking isn't black and white. It's a mixed bag, with some aspects having solid scientific backing while others lacking rigorous evidence or oversight. Anyone interested in biohacking must approach it critically and sceptically. Before making significant lifestyle changes or embarking on new health interventions, consulting with healthcare professionals is always recommended.

Furthermore, as the biohacking movement continues to evolve and grow, so does the need for research to understand these practices' long-term effects and potential benefits or drawbacks. There is potential for positive change in empowering individuals to take an active role in their health. Still, it's essential to balance this with understanding the limitations and potential risks associated with some biohacking practices.

In conclusion, biohacking is indeed a 'real thing,' but it's a broad, complex, and nuanced field where science and anecdotal evidence often intertwine. As always, the keys are education, consultation with healthcare professionals, and a healthy dose of scepticism towards any 'quick fixes' or miracle cures.

References:

Laporte, L., et al. (2020). Biohackers: a journey into cyborg America. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 120346.

Ordovas, J. M., & Ferguson, L. R. (2018). Genetics and nutritional genomics of CVD. Public health nutrition, 7(6), 1155-1166.

Shcherbina, A., et al. (2017). Accuracy in wrist-worn, sensor-based measurements of heart rate and energy expenditure in a diverse cohort. Journal of personalised medicine, 7(2), 3.

Almeida, N. (2020). DIYbio and the rise of citizen biotech economists. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 16(1), 1-22.