Precursors Biohackers – Mr Gregor Mendel and Mr Robert Koch

Certainly, there will be people who dispute the idea of considering these two geniuses and current giants of science as ancient biohackers. However, when studying the techniques, methods, concepts, logic and methodologies for the performance of modern biohacking, it does not differ much from the initial action of these giants of science. Therefore, we can at least say that these are concrete models to the biohacking movement. The DIY and handmade technique is common in many segments, including for biology, to which many researchers and amateurs have made random discoveries and through logical methods of research.

The biohacking movement is the practice that fuses conceptual biology with the hacker movement. Although it is considered an amateur movement, the same, as in computing is on the way to professionalization, and even commercial uses and standardization of methods, such as a creation of a Hello World for biosciences and the biohacking movement, as a method for beginners. When one thinks that the biohacking movement is amateur, we must remember that the great computer hackers, for the most part, did not even have a university degree, and much of it came close to overthrowing large corporations with all their professionalism. The world changes and concepts must be rethought about what in fact is professionalization. In World War II, the elite force called the SS was considered an amateur grouping by allies, including historians specializing in tactics and war operations. When we observe the reason, we realize that they were right to consider them amateurs, not having rigid training, heavy weapons logistics, strategic tactics of mass annihilation as an army possesses. With this comparison we can realize that it is not equal to call the amateur biohacking movement, although in some cases it really is, compared to computer hackers, although they have been classified as amateurs, the damage and at the same time technological progress they brought is gigantic We may, in this case, consider that the biohacking movement is in this environment.

“We are at a time to understand more to fearless.” Marie Curie.

The reality is that the biohacking movement is having its spectrum of action and possibilities expanded. From Mendel with the peas, the discovery of the genes, the genetic sequencing, to date there has been much progress, but still incompatible with the needs, such complexity in biosciences. And the biohacking movement emerges as a third way, far beyond a world-wide brainstorm.

However, it is important to understand that at the beginning it is important to think of the alternative and low-cost tools for biohackers, and at the same time understand that this is not the focus of the biohacking movement. Pondering this detail carefully. Conform was exposed by Edsger Dijkstra: “computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes”.

The movement of scientific progress, new tools and new means and methods of generating science and technology at lower costs is in progress. Who could even imagine someone doing genetic sequencing on the desk in their home, and even analytical software to study the results? This non-institutional movement, as a third way, equally as occurred in the progress brought by hackers in computing! The biohacking movement is an integral part of the concept of transhumanism. It is not the purpose of this article to list the possibilities of biohacking. We talk about new techniques, tools and access to high-level information in open mode, for more access. In short, more people and more brains are working and thinking in pursuit of the same and innovative goals and discoveries.

The popularization and new alternative methods for complex science is the strength of the biohacking movement. It will be through the dissemination of techniques, cost reduction of alternative equipment, materials and inputs, with methods of easy and moderate application. As include methods such as CRISPR, production of artificial bioreactors, a popularization of PCR, use of tools, such as centrifuges to separate components from blood or DNA material use of PDMS and works with tissues, cells, stem cells, serum and chemicals. Also, other diverse methods and techniques that the biohacking movement will grow.

Parallel to the biohacking movement, there are several advances and new concepts parallel to the biohacking movement. We can consider that high-definition, high-cost electronic and atomic microscopy already has the optical version, which resulted in a Nobel Prize. It will not be surprising that this equipment will soon have its cost and popularization spread throughout the land. What would Robert Koch be without the microscope?

A microscope or rather, a nanoscope capable of taking the micro/nanoworld to anyone’s access. By linking this power to computing, we will have widespread access through the earth of something that until then was restricted only to large laboratories. The biohacking movement is not amateurish! Be sure of this, things are getting messy and old concepts will soon be reviewed.

In addition to nanotechnology, and various other terms, the transhumanism refers to the forced evolution of the human body using science and technology, with biohacking techniques, nanotechnology for better handling, material control and organization of matter. By forced evolution, understand to make people see in the dark, feel the magnetism of the earth, sharpen their noses to incredible levels, etc. Some consider transhumanism as post-humanism, human bodies after biology, as an artificial being of high technological advancement. As you can see, progress is exponential, it is where we are now. As an example, there is a growing movement to generate the first global method version for biohacking. It is not so current so, the biohacking techniques and methods have already been successful There are two giants of science who started their work as real biohackers, being: Gregor Johann Mendel and Robert Koch.

Gregor Johann Mendel: His works and curiosity in a garden led him to inevitably use biohacking techniques in understanding botanical biological functioning. Many experts say that their work was critical to the progress of today’s genetics.

Robert Koch – Today is known as the largest bacteriologist ever to go around the world. The precursor of the in vitro studies by Mr Petri. He was a farmer and doctor with the limitations of the time, however, his apex was possible by his performances like a biohacker, realizing experiments in his property. About to become the first specialist in Anthrax spores. However, its name today belongs to the greats of science due to its persistence and professionalization in the field.

The purest science is based on observation, deduction, and analysis. The Austrian monk Gregor Johann Mendel, always observed the plants during his free time in the monastery, in the Order of St. Augustine, around 1844. It was his position the supervision of the gardens of the monastery in the Czech Republic. As a professor of natural sciences, specializing in studies of crosses of plant and animal species, his great achievement came from his analytical observations with the peas. Analysed the results mathematically. At present, he is considered the father of genetics, by his precise observations in changes of colour, variations, mechanism of the flowers, soon the mechanism of the heredity, that today we know like the genes. His masterpiece dealt with; hybrid plant trials and artificial fertilization. It was practically the forerunner of the treatise on the laws of heredity, now known as Mendel’s Laws, which govern the transmission of hereditary characteristics, hence genes.

What the greats of science have done in the past, in the brief actuality, is possible to accomplish in a much deeper way, at reduced costs, in the domain of the subject. It is on this path that the biohacking movement and other disciplines of advanced science and technology are walking.

Home Science Courses in India

Home Science is both an art and science that deals with various aspects of modern housekeeping. This field of study deals with many disciplines such as chemistry, physics, physiology, biology, hygiene, economics, rural development, child development, sociology and family relations, community living, art, food, nutrition, clothing, textiles and home management. If you have a logical mind and a balanced attitude with realistic approach, then you can opt for a career in Home Science. Creativity with artistic visualization can be an added advantage. Growing awareness of health, diet, and lifestyle has augmented preference towards this field.

As this subject is scientific in nature, one must possess a practical approach, aesthetic, creative and rational attitude an analytical mind and scientific insight in this field. Separate courses in various branches of Home Science are available which include food, nutrition and dietetics, rural community extension, child development, family relation, textiles and clothing, home management, home science education and extension.

Course Details:

Eligibility to pursue a career in this field is a pass in 10+2 or graduation. Various under graduate as well as post graduate level programs are available in this field. Minimum qualification required to pursue Bachelors program in home science is 10+2 with biology or home science as a subject of study. One must have a graduation degree in any field to opt for a post graduate degree/diploma program. So, after completing B.Sc. degree course, you can continue further with the 2-year M.Sc course and opt for specialization.

Institutes offering Home Science Courses in India:

  • D.K Government College for Women (Andhra Pradesh)
  • Assam Agricultural University (Assam)
  • Lady Irwin College (New Delhi)
  • Institute of Home Science (New Delhi)
  • S.M Patel College (Gujarat)
  • Nirma Niketan College (Maharashtra)
  • Ginni Devi Modi Girls (P.G) College (Uttar Pradesh)
  • Viharilal College (West Bengal)
  • Jwari Devi Birla Institute (West Bengal)
  • Sri Vithalbhai Thackersey Collegee (Maharashtra)
  • Seth P.T. Mahila College (Gujarat)
  • Holy Cross (Tamil Nadu)

The study of Home Science offers openings for Careers related to:

  • Production
  • Technical jobs
  • Teaching jobs
  • Sales jobs
  • Service jobs

Career Prospects:

Professionals can work in the field of production, tourism or service. Postgraduates in this field can opt for teaching. Scholars can work as nutrition consultants, research assistants, food scientists, demonstrators or food analysts. One can get employed in food preservation production unit of any hotel, tourist resort, restaurant, food industry or take up a career in sales promotion of food products, baby foods and ready to cook foodstuffs. Thus, to get successfully self employed, one must update the applications of the discipline and anticipate emerging demands.


Professional can expect a salary ranging from 10, 000 to Rs15000 per month in the beginning. Added experience can bring a hike in the salary. Thus, more people are opting for building a career in this field as it aims at accomplishing and maintaining the welfare and well being of both home and family life.

Critique Of Arthur Peacocke’s Book: "God And Science"

In Preface, Peacocke states an expectation in his premise: “… the scientific panorama of the evolution of the cosmos from matter-energy into life and consciousness should surely afford a new and fruitful context for understanding any genuinely true insights that the Christian tradition might claim to possess.”

Peacocke’s work is not dumbed-down for the masses, but rather is allowed full range of expression. Written in a style both challenging and elucidative, the author attempts to establish a connection between biological science and metaphysical appreciation in his rather unique study. Former Fellow at St. Peter’s College and an Anglican priest, the author is no commoner, linguistically, and those wishing a refreshing experience in word usage are invited to read his unrestricted and creative use of the English language.

Thus, we detect direction and philosophical approach in Peacocke ministrations, and though he does miscalculate the Reality impact in definition, as does most of the world, he does indeed substitute Actuality’s semantic intent with Reality historicity. Again, he mistakenly uses Reality in an accommodative language to exogenous evidence in causality: proposing the philosophy of science to have virtue of the implicit, though not often articulated, and the working philosophy of practicing scientists who plan to depict reality but knowing only too well their fallibility in doing so: for example, in the fields of geology, cell biology and chemistry, during the last two centuries, they, progressively, continuously discover hidden structures in the natural world entities accounting causally for observed phenomena. Theology, the intellectual formulation of religious experience and belief, also employs models similarly described and should be regarded as partial, inadequate, and revisable but necessary and, indeed, the only way referring to the reality named as God and to God relation with humanity. Here, Reality is correctly used in the God instance– but mistakenly as extension to Tribal finiteness. Correctly, Reality can be used only in historical context.

Peacocke ascribes homo sapiens uniqueness to ‘sheer happenstance,’ as the original fluctuation in a ‘quantum field,’ to an exchange in atoms from progressive intellectual development – in the likes of early outstanding primitives and evolved to Shakespeare, Mozart, Descartes, Einstein, et cetera.

If, by critique, a lesser intellect might add to Peacocke’s mediations: In any field of development, anomalous incident must occur and with natural attraction in such like occurrence. We see such in Oriental physiognomy, Black physiognomics, Caucasian features, Native American diverseness. Now, there is an attempt to ameliorate these differences in DNA origination; such focus is against nature and can only lead to degeneracy in the whole, not an upgrade from synecdochical infusions. If we breed a stallion and donkey, all we can get is an ass. Peacocke did indirectly and perhaps more discretely allege such behavior when he suggested the notion of causality, when applied to systems, has usually been assumed to be ‘bottom-up’ to the effect on its properties and behavior of constituent units: recognizing influence of the system state as a whole on the behavior of its components, a constraint exercised by the whole on its parts.

Again, in critique, we inject a reasonable parallel to Peacocke’s theory: Atoms behave differently in different environs. Different catalysts produce different results. Therefore, can we say man is impervious to evolutionary encouragements? I think not! Sentience, our only quality measuring device, confirms observation accounting such diversity, and apparent to the most casual enquiry.

Stepping outside the bounds of common understanding, Peacocke introduces The ‘anthropic principle’ to affirm a world finely tuned with respect to the many physical features conducive to the emergence of carbon-based life and so of human beings.

Peacocke expounds on the ‘anthropic principle’ and ‘scientific immediacy’ in a fecundity of natural occurrence, supra-personal direction, and scientific confirmation, when he suggests ‘existence of the whole tapestry of created order, in its warp and woof, and in the very heterogeneity and multiplicity of forms must be taken as the Creator’s intention.’ Thus, he affirms the very principle he would at the first deny as having relativity. In trying to serve two masters, religion and science, Peacock errs as does Wilder-Smith, Glynn, Chopra, Scheler and other religionist-scientist ameliorationists. They cannot, of course, ameliorate the two disciplines; the one depends on syllogistic affirmation and the other on speculation; never, can one be made to affirm the other.

Peacocke pretty well sums up his philosophy when he proposes: ‘within a relatively short time after our biological death, our bodies will lose their identity as atomic and molecular constituents begin to disperse through the earth and its atmosphere, often becoming a part of other human anatomy – to that perennial task of refurbishing our images of God – and humanity.’

If this critique might add further insight: We come full circle; God and Science would propose a dimension not normal in one-self-sure-be dedication: that is, after all, God makes humanity from humanity, from atomic reaction, from nature catalysts. While Peacocke offers synecdochical composition for the scientific basis, he declines to venture into reductionist metaphysics nor assign metaphysical particularities to the cause juxtaposed in exposition. Even so, this book furnishes cause to think.

Is Apologia Science Rigorous Enough for the College-Bound?

Are Apologia science textbooks rigorous enough for college-bound students?  Sure, they are popular with homeschoolers, but how GOOD are they as science books?

Apologia is a very rigorous college prep series.  I do not usually recommend specific curriculum, because I know it is all about “fit” more than a textbook.  When it comes to science, though, I had such success with the curriculum we used, that I really do recommend it – even to my clients that are not Christian.

I know it for a fact that Apologia is a great college preparation because Alex (my non-scientist son) was able to pass a CLEP in Biology 3 years after taking Apologia Biology at home.  He earned a 4.0 in Engineering Physics in college after taking Apologia Physics. Remember, he is NOT my science major.  I made him take that engineering physics at community college with his brother, because he was too young to take a class by himself.  So he learned well from the books even though he did not “love” science. Apologia is GREAT stuff.

I know for a fact that Apologia is great college preparation because my son Kevin is an electrical engineering major in college.  He still refers to his Apologia Physics book now and then.  He used Apologia chemistry over the summer, to review for a class he was taking.  He has reviewed his physics book frequently.  It is been one of my “best buys” for curriculum, because they have literally used them for 5 years. Kevin has a fabulous GPA in engineering, and I believe it is in part because he was so well prepared with Apologia Biology, Chemistry, and Physics.

If you want to make Apologia even MORE rigorous, it is possible.  You can go through a book in a semester instead of a year, and make it an AP course if you want, but it is not necessary at all, just an option.  I have heard of some “college prep” AP classes, like through Pennsylvania Homeschoolers for example, that actually take a child 5 hours a day to complete.  That would be so frustrating to spend 5 hours a day on one class!  One mother was letting core subjects in reading, writing and math slide, just so her child could get an AP Chemistry credit.  That is a lot of work for not a lot of benefit.  It is easier to keep your subjects at the level of your children when they do it at home with a homeschool curriculum.

Apologia is a self-teaching homeschool curriculum, so kids can learn it on their own, and moms do not have to know what they are doing in order to be successful.  That is a big deal, because I did not have a clue about physics, and barely was able to keep up with the chemistry.

Yes, absolutely Apologia is college prep.  It is not perfect, because no curriculum is perfect.  All textbooks have typos- ALL of them – and I am sure someone could find a flaw in these books like you can find a flaw in every book.  Still it is great preparation, and I recommend it even for my clients that are not Christian.