The death of DIY Bio? Or the birth of a new cuisine....

11 views
Skip to first unread message

Christopher Kelty

unread,
May 27, 2009, 12:40:08 AM5/27/09
to diy...@googlegroups.com
How many people other than me on this list have a subscription to Gourmet magazine?

Just thought I'd ask, since diybio and "biohackers" made it into the June 2009 edition (p 24, not online yet). 
Is this a sign of success?  My only regret is that the article isn't about a gourmet version of glowing yogurt... molecular gastronomy meets home cooking, the possibilities are obviously endless...

ck

Mackenzie Cowell

unread,
May 27, 2009, 2:11:43 AM5/27/09
to diy...@googlegroups.com
Article attached.

The body of the little mini-article is... ok, but it doesn't address the fear-mongering title & subtitle at all!  It seems a little cheap to raise the spectre frankenstein without discussing how we're dealing with it.  Grrrr.  And it's even complete with semi-scary backyard photo.  

It's too bad.  And I think their audience would have been more interested in a "DNA & 151 rum" shot recipe, anyway. 

Mac


--
p: 231.313.9062
e: m...@diybio.org
tw: @macowell
Gourmet-June-2009-0-cover.jpg
Gourmet-June-2009-1-article.jpg

WMyers

unread,
May 27, 2009, 11:46:10 AM5/27/09
to DIYbio
Well, at least the last sentence in this Gourmet article touches on a
the fact that the pioneering DIY spirit has enourmous potential.
Here's an article posted online that expands on that theme:


"In Attics and Closets, ‘Biohackers’ Prove the Spirit of Thomas Edison
Endures"

link:
http://weekinideas.wordpress.com/2009/05/18/in-attics-and-closets-%e2%80%98biohackers%e2%80%99-prove-the-spirit-of-thomas-edison-endures/

Will
>  Gourmet-June-2009-0-cover.jpg
> 916KViewDownload
>
>  Gourmet-June-2009-1-article.jpg
> 1126KViewDownload

JonathanCline

unread,
Jun 15, 2009, 12:17:07 PM6/15/09
to DIYbio

On May 27, 1:11 am, Mackenzie Cowell <m...@diybio.org> wrote:
> Article attached.
> The body of the little mini-article is... ok, but it doesn't address the
> fear-mongering title & subtitle at all!  It seems a little cheap to raise
> the spectre frankenstein without discussing how we're dealing with it.
>  Grrrr.  And it's even complete with semi-scary backyard photo.
>
> It's too bad.  And I think their audience would have been more interested in
> a "DNA & 151 rum" shot recipe, anyway.
>
> Mac


One of the best contributions which biohackers could make to the food
industry is open source biosensing for the food supply - yet this is
not mentioned in the article! (Perhaps DIYBio needs some FAQ
improvement) That was the origin of the idea to detect melamine in
milk: my comparison of DIYBio to the open source software movement,
where the open source unix community was able to release a fix to a
major security problem with the Intel chipset (illegal instruction
errata) within 96 hours of it's discovery, while corporations like Sun
and Microsoft took months or over a year to address the problem in
their own software. Suppose the global food supply becomes
contaminated again: who will be able to respond fastest? If open
source projects have the tools (and the tools are complex), then open
source will win due to crowd-sourcing the problem, rather than small-
teaming the problem as done in corporate or government labs. This is
continually demonstrated in open source, where the projects can make
immediate security upgrades & provide a new download to users, while
corporate infrastructure hedges on whether or not the security issue
is large enough to warrant a new release compared to customer support
commitments, etc.

The FDA is continually increasing stringency on food imports & exports
-- this point is directly aimed at Gourmet Magazine -- and is able to
alert & isolate problems in the global food supply. The food chain is
intimately connected due to globalization, a connectedness that will
increase over time. This means "we" are increasingly at risk from
local sources of contamination which spread globally. All chefs
should be aware of this issue, especially gourmet chefs who might
acquire exotic ingredients: how do they know these ingredients are
safe, and what parties are checking the ingredients for safety? It's
not the FDA; they don't have the resources or the often the regulatory
approval; it's not the corporations, since checking is not a profit
incentive; it's not the governments, since it's not a legislative
priority. In this middle ground, the effort is left to the consumer
themselves, yet what consumer has the ability to check their own food
for contaminants? It's tough enough installing a water conditioner to
filter the government's own water, let alone testing each broccoli
sprout for bacteria. This is a big area where DIYBio could make
significant improvements (individuals publishing projects, for free or
for $$) and new companies can be created out of the innovation.



(At a minimum the magazine could have included a pudding recipe for
using extra Agar.)


## Jonathan Cline
## jcl...@ieee.org
## Mobile: +1-805-617-0223
########################



>
> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:40 AM, Christopher Kelty <cke...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > How many people other than me on this list have a subscription to Gourmet
> > magazine?
>
> > Just thought I'd ask, since diybio and "biohackers" made it into the June
> > 2009 edition (p 24, not online yet).
> > Is this a sign of success?  My only regret is that the article isn't about
> > a gourmet version of glowing yogurt... molecular gastronomy meets home
> > cooking, the possibilities are obviously endless...
>
> > ck
>
> --
> p: 231.313.9062
> e: m...@diybio.org
> tw: @macowell
>
>  Gourmet-June-2009-0-cover.jpg
> 916KViewDownload
>
>  Gourmet-June-2009-1-article.jpg
> 1126KViewDownload

Bryan Bishop

unread,
Jun 15, 2009, 12:56:39 PM6/15/09
to diy...@googlegroups.com, kan...@gmail.com
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:17 AM, JonathanCline<jnc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 27, 1:11 am, Mackenzie Cowell <m...@diybio.org> wrote:
>> Article attached.
>> The body of the little mini-article is... ok, but it doesn't address the
>> fear-mongering title & subtitle at all!  It seems a little cheap to raise
>> the spectre frankenstein without discussing how we're dealing with it.
>>  Grrrr.  And it's even complete with semi-scary backyard photo.
>>
>> It's too bad.  And I think their audience would have been more interested in
>> a "DNA & 151 rum" shot recipe, anyway.
>
> One of the best contributions which biohackers could make to the food
> industry is open source biosensing for the food supply - yet this is
> not mentioned in the article!   (Perhaps DIYBio needs some FAQ
> improvement)   That was the origin of the idea to detect melamine in
> milk: my comparison of DIYBio to the open source software movement,
> where the open source unix community was able to release a fix to a
> major security problem with the Intel chipset (illegal instruction
> errata) within 96 hours of it's discovery, while corporations like Sun
> and Microsoft took months or over a year to address the problem in
> their own software.   Suppose the global food supply becomes
> contaminated again: who will be able to respond fastest?  If open
> source projects have the tools (and the tools are complex), then open
> source will win due to crowd-sourcing the problem, rather than small-
> teaming the problem as done in corporate or government labs.   This is
> continually demonstrated in open source, where the projects can make
> immediate security upgrades & provide a new download to users, while
> corporate infrastructure hedges on whether or not the security issue
> is large enough to warrant a new release compared to customer support
> commitments, etc.

Please update the FAQ- I was the last person to update it and that was
almost a month ago. And before that it had been a month even before
that. So clearly you guys aren't using the FAQ enough :-).

http://openwetware.org/wiki/DIYbio/FAQ

In fact, other than myself, no one has updated it since way back in
April. The poor FAQ is just dying for more attention.

Re: consumers having to be the ones to do food testing, I've kind of
always wondered what the different conditions for throwing out food in
the refrigerator are. For some things it's rather obvious: milk starts
to smell funny, and the bread in the cabinet can grow little life
forms that you don't want to eat, etc., but it's just non-obvious when
things are definitely "spoiled". (This is why I drew the analogies to
cooking and lab protocols all those months ago).

- Bryan
http://heybryan.org/
1 512 203 0507

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages