Programming DNA: How Citizen Innovators Are Democratizing Biotechnology

In the era of digital innovation, a parallel revolution is unfolding in biology. Companies like Scispot are providing advanced technology stacks to life science labs, essentially an AI-powered Lab Operating System (LabOS) that integrates lab information management system, electronic lab notebook, data management, and automation into one unified platform. This foundation is enabling scientists to treat DNA as code, programming living cells with the same confidence once reserved for software.

A recent episode of the "talk is biotech!" podcast (hosted by Guru Singh, CEO of Scispot) delved into this theme, exploring how programming DNA like computers and citizen-driven biotech innovation are converging. In that interview, Kevin Chen, co-founder of Hyasynth Bio, shared insights from his journey as a biotech entrepreneur inspired by grassroots science.

From iGEM to Industry: Kevin Chen's Journey in Synthetic Biology

Kevin Chen's foray into biotechnology began in an unconventional way, not in a corporate lab, but through a student competition. He participated in the International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) competition, a worldwide contest that trains thousands of young people in synthetic biology. iGEM's mission isn't just education; its broader goals include "enabling the systematic engineering of biology" and building an open, collaborative community.

In many ways, iGEM treats genetic material like LEGO bricks or modular code. Teams receive a kit of standard DNA parts (BioBricks) and are challenged to assemble new biological systems. This experience of "programming" living cells gave Kevin and countless others a glimpse of biology's future: one where DNA can be engineered systematically, much like writing software.

Through iGEM, Kevin Chen not only gained technical skills but also an entrepreneurial mindset. "There wasn't a synthetic biology company to work for in Canada, so I decided to start one," he noted in the interview, echoing a sentiment common among iGEM alumni.

In 2014, fresh out of university and brimming with ideas, Kevin co-founded Hyasynth Bio in Montreal, which has been described as Canada's first dedicated synthetic biology startup. Hyasynth's vision was to apply the coding mindset to an interesting challenge: producing cannabis compounds using engineered yeast instead of fields of plants. In essence, Kevin's team "programmed" yeast cells to manufacture cannabinoids (like CBD) via fermentation.

Today, Hyasynth Bio is a precision fermentation company that uses microbes to sustainably produce cannabinoids and other natural products. By rewriting yeast DNA, they can create the active ingredients of cannabis in stainless-steel bioreactors rather than greenhouses, an approach faster and more scalable than traditional cultivation.

Kevin's journey from iGEM competitor to biotech CEO highlights a broader trend: the line from academic curiosity to startup innovation in synthetic biology is shortening. Just as many tech founders emerged from hackathons and student projects, many biotech founders are emerging from iGEM and similar experiences. The competition instills not only science knowledge but also a belief that with the right tools, biology can be hacked and built upon like a coding project. This belief was a driving force for Kevin and is spreading among a new generation of "biohackers"-turned-entrepreneurs.

The DIY Bio Movement: Making Biology Programmable (2013-2014)

Around the same time Kevin was cutting his teeth in iGEM, a broader DIY biohacking movement was blossoming (circa 2013-2014). Its core idea was boldly simple: make biology as programmable and accessible as computing. Enthusiasts envisioned a world where tinkering with DNA in a garage could be as feasible as coding a web app in a dorm room.

This movement was a grassroots response to the rapid advances in synthetic biology. PCR machines were becoming affordable, DNA sequencing costs were plummeting, and knowledge was being shared online. It was the biological equivalent of the Homebrew Computer Club in the 1970s, but instead of soldering circuits, these "biohackers" were pipetting DNA.

At the heart of DIY bio was the principle of open access. Community laboratories began popping up in major cities, providing shared lab space and equipment for the public. For example, BioCurious in Sunnyvale (California) and Genspace in New York City were among the first such community biotech labs, opening their doors in the early 2010s. In these labs, often compared to makerspaces, hobbyists, students, and entrepreneurs could conduct experiments outside of formal institutions.

As PBS NewsHour described in 2014, "Biohacking... takes place in small labs, mostly non-university, where all sorts of people get together to explore biology.". The goal was to democratize science, allowing "all sorts of people" (not just PhDs) to play with genetic engineering and molecular biology.

The biohackers of 2013-2014 often explicitly framed their work as programming. They borrowed software terminology, referring to genetic constructs as "circuits" and bacterial DNA as an "operating system." Their rallying cry was that DNA is the code of life, and anyone can learn to write this code with the right toolkit. Just as early computer hobbyists envisioned PCs in every home, biohackers spoke of "a PCR machine in every home lab" and genetic engineering kits for enthusiasts.

In fact, during this period, kits began to emerge: one could buy at-home CRISPR kits or DNA amplifiers on the internet. The ethos was captured by biohacker Ron Shigeta, who co-founded a DIY bio incubator: biohacking is "a freedom to explore biology, kind of like you would explore good fiction", following one's curiosity wherever it leads.

One landmark event symbolizing the movement's ambition was the Glowing Plant Project of 2013. A team of citizen scientists and entrepreneurs launched a Kickstarter campaign to create a plant that glows in the dark by inserting bioluminescent genes. Remarkably, the project raised nearly $500,000 from the public, promising backers a packet of glowing plant seeds as a reward. It was the first crowdfunded synthetic biology effort and demonstrated intense public interest in biotechnology innovation outside traditional channels.

The Glowing Plant team, essentially a DIY synthetic biology startup, epitomized the "programming DNA like computers" spirit. They treated a plant's genome as editable code, aiming to literally "turn on the lights" in a new way. While the project faced technical and regulatory hurdles (Kickstarter even banned GMO rewards afterward due to this case), it proved that a DIY bio project could capture the world's imagination.

Another important facet of the 2013-2014 movement was community and knowledge-sharing. Online forums (like DIYbio.org) and meetups connected enthusiasts globally. The result was a rapid spread of ideas and projects: from brewing glowing beer with engineered yeast to at-home genetic testing. Citizen science became more than collecting bird sightings or weather data, it now included splicing genes.

This era also saw the birth of open-source biotech hardware: people built their own centrifuges from old hard drives and shared blueprints for cheap PCR machines. The analogy often used was that biology was having its "personal computer" moment, moving from mainframe labs into garages and hackerspaces. And much like the early days of personal computing, a wave of startups and new ventures would soon emerge from this ferment of hobbyist innovation.

Citizen Science Catalyzing Biotech Innovation

The DIY bio movement did more than just engage hobbyists, it laid the groundwork for tangible scientific advancements and even new companies. Citizen science initiatives during this period actively blurred the lines between "amateur" and "professional" science. Non-experts, guided by a supportive community, tackled meaningful research problems. These grassroots projects often succeeded in areas overlooked by traditional institutions, proving the value of broadening who can do science.

One compelling example is the Open Insulin Project, started around 2015 by a group of biohackers at Counter Culture Labs in Oakland. Insulin, a life-saving drug for diabetics, had remained expensive and monopolized for years. The Open Insulin volunteers set out to create an open-source protocol to produce insulin in a lab, essentially trying to "brew" insulin with engineered microbes and share the recipe freely. Their aim was "to make the recombinant protein insulin more accessible by creating an open source protocol for expression and purification."

In a small community lab, working part-time, these citizen scientists made significant progress toward a cheaper insulin production method. The project drew global attention as a humanitarian innovation born outside of big pharma. It highlighted how democratizing biotech could address public health needs that were unmet by industry.

Meanwhile, initiatives like iGEM's entrepreneurship division and community lab programs were encouraging participants to take their ideas beyond the prototype stage. We saw iGEM student teams turn into startup companies (a trajectory Kevin Chen followed). In some cases, individuals with no formal biology education became biotech entrepreneurs thanks to the skills and network they developed via citizen science communities.

For instance, some early members of BioCurious later founded startups in bioprinting and low-cost DNA equipment. The culture of mentorship and openness in these citizen science spaces meant that a motivated amateur could quickly learn techniques like gene cloning or cell culture, design an experiment, and even file a patent or launch a product.

Crucially, the DIY movement inspired confidence that small teams can do serious biotech. After seeing a group of volunteers attempt to solve insulin production or a tiny startup create a glowing plant, others were emboldened to pursue audacious biotech ideas. Traditional gatekeepers, university labs, big companies, were no longer the sole originators of biotech innovation.

As a result, by the late 2010s, a number of notable biotech companies and projects had roots in the DIY bio and citizen science scene. The below highlights some prominent examples of companies or movements born from this grassroots biotech revolution, along with their origins and focus areas:

From Biohackers to Biotech Founders: Notable DIY Bio Spawned Ventures

Hyasynth Bio (Montreal, Canada)

• Origin & Year: Co-founded 2014 by Kevin Chen (iGEM alumnus)

• DIY/Citizen Science Roots: Born from iGEM; launched when no synbio startups existed locally. Kevin decided to "fill the gap" in Canada's biotech scene.

• Focus / Achievement: Yeast-engineered cannabinoids – programming yeast cells to produce cannabis compounds (CBD, etc.) without plants. Pioneering Canada's synthetic biology industry.

  
  

Ginkgo Bioworks (Boston, USA)

• Origin & Year: Founded 2008 by MIT researchers (iGEM pioneers)

• DIY/Citizen Science Roots: Roots in MIT's early iGEM community; founders like Reshma Shetty were part of the first generation of synthetic biologists. Started in a DIY spirit when "synthetic biology" was just emerging.

• Focus / Achievement: Synthetic biology platform – dubbed the "organism factory," it programs cells to manufacture chemicals, food ingredients, etc. Now a multi-billion-dollar public company leading the synbio revolution.

  
  

BioCurious (Sunnyvale, USA)

• Origin & Year: Opened 2011 as a community lab (via Kickstarter funding)

• DIY/Citizen Science Roots: One of the first DIYbio hackerspaces for biology. Founded by enthusiasts (incl. Eri Gentry) to give the public a place to learn and conduct biotech projects.

• Focus / Achievement: Community laboratory (nonprofit) – democratized access to lab equipment and training. Incubator for citizen projects (e.g., biofuel experiments, DIY bio classes) and a model copied by dozens of biohacker spaces globally.

  
  

Glowing Plant Project (a.k.a. Taxa Biotechnologies)

• Origin & Year: Launched 2013 via Kickstarter campaign

• DIY/Citizen Science Roots: Initiated by citizen scientists and entrepreneurs outside academia. Crowdfunded $484k from the public, showing massive citizen backing for biotech innovation.

• Focus / Achievement: Engineered Arabidopsis plant that glows in the dark – a symbolic project aiming to "program a plant like software." Triggered discussions on GMO regulations (Kickstarter banned GMO rewards after this). Although it faced technical challenges, it proved the power of public engagement in biotech.

  
  

Open Insulin Project (Oakland, USA & global)

• Origin & Year: Started ~2015 at a community lab (Counter Culture Labs)

• DIY/Citizen Science Roots: Formed by a collective of biohackers/DIY biologists concerned about insulin costs. A purely citizen-driven R&D effort, collaborating internationally online.

• Focus / Achievement: Open-source insulin production – developing protocols to produce insulin affordably in small labs. Showcases how non-professionals can tackle complex healthcare challenges, potentially disrupting pharmaceutical monopolies.

  
  

As above suggests, grassroots biotech efforts have translated into real-world impact. From Hyasynth's engineered cannabinoids to Ginkgo's organism engineering platform, what began as student or hobby projects matured into companies attracting mainstream investment. Even non-commercial initiatives like Open Insulin have spurred change; for example, they put pressure on industry and regulators to address drug pricing.

A common thread in these stories is the empowerment that the DIY movement provided: founders and innovators didn't wait for permission, they started in garages and community labs, proved their concepts, and then scaled up.

Opportunities and Challenges in Democratizing Biotechnology

The rise of citizen-driven biotech presents enormous opportunities as well as significant challenges for the industry and society. On the upside, democratization can accelerate innovation; on the downside, it raises concerns about safety and ethics. Below we break down the key opportunities and challenges:

Opportunities

Accelerated Innovation through Diversity: Opening up biotech to citizens means more minds tackling problems. People from diverse backgrounds can contribute fresh perspectives. We've seen novel solutions (like open-source insulin) arise because outsiders weren't bound by "industry thinking." This bottom-up innovation can complement traditional R&D and drive breakthroughs faster. Just as open-source software spurred rapid tech growth, an open-science approach in biotech could yield a richer pipeline of ideas.

Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Growth: Grassroots labs and competitions are effectively training grounds for entrepreneurs. They lower barriers to entry – someone with an idea can prototype in a community lab or via iGEM, without millions in funding. This creates a larger pool of biotech startups, fueling economic growth and job creation. Countries that embrace DIY bio (such as via community lab networks or contests) may cultivate the next Ginkgo or Hyasynth locally instead of losing talent to established hubs.

Public Engagement and Literacy: Citizen science in biotech demystifies genetics and lab work for the general public. Increased participation leads to a more informed citizenry conversant in biotechnology. In the long run, this can translate to greater public support for science and more nuanced policy discussions. It can also inspire young students to pursue STEM careers, seeing that biology is not an ivory-tower field but an accessible playground.

Solving Niche or Neglected Problems: Democratized biotech often targets issues that big players overlook (e.g., niche diseases, low-profit vaccines, or environmental hacks). Community-driven projects can afford to focus on local or humanitarian needs without the pressure of immediate profit. This fills gaps in innovation – for instance, biohackers working on open-source medical devices for rare conditions, or environmental bio-remediation at the community level. Such efforts, if successful, directly benefit groups that were otherwise left out.

Challenges

Safety and Biosecurity Risks: The flip side of widely accessible biotech is the concern that unregulated experiments could lead to accidents or misuse. Working with pathogens or DNA modification carries inherent risks – a well-meaning amateur could unintentionally create a harmful microbe, or protocols might not meet biosafety standards. Detractors argue that DIY biologists need supervision to prevent "bio-errors" or potential "bioterror". Ensuring that citizen labs follow safety guidelines and that there's transparency in their work is vital to mitigate these risks. The community has responded by developing ethics codes and peer monitoring, but as the movement grows, keeping everyone accountable is an ongoing challenge.

Regulatory and Legal Hurdles: Biotechnology is heavily regulated (for good reason), but regulations have not fully caught up with the DIY trend. Government oversight on genetic engineering typically targets universities and companies, not a network of kitchen labs. Questions arise: How do we approve a therapy or product that came from a community lab? How to handle lab waste disposal from a home experiment? The regulatory framework needs adaptation to handle decentralized innovation without stifling it. The Kickstarter GMO ban in 2013 is one example of institutions reacting cautiously. Navigating these legal grey zones can be daunting for citizen innovators and may slow down or block promising DIY projects.

Scaling and Sustaining Projects: While citizen projects are great at prototyping, many struggle with scaling up to real-world deployment. Resource constraints (limited funding, lack of access to industrial-grade facilities) can stall a project's transition from lab bench to market or broader use. For instance, a biohacker group might develop a clever bio-process, but producing it at pharmaceutical grade or large volume might require partnership with established players or significant capital. Ensuring that the pipeline exists to support the best citizen innovations – through incubators, grants, or corporate alliances – is a challenge that needs to be addressed to fully realize the movement's potential.

Ethical and Public Perception Issues: Democratizing biotech also stirs up ethical debates. Who gets to alter life, and should there be limits on self-experimentation? Cases of self-administered gene therapy by biohackers, or citizen projects editing ecosystems (e.g., releasing engineered organisms), have made headlines and raised ethical questions. Moreover, public perception can swing negatively with one bad incident, jeopardizing the entire citizen science enterprise. The community must continue to be transparent and engage with ethicists and policymakers to maintain public trust. Balancing openness with responsibility is an ongoing tightrope walk.

Despite these challenges, the general consensus among enthusiasts is that the genie is out of the bottle – much like personal computing in the '80s, democratized biotech is here to stay. The task now is to maximize the positive outcomes (innovation, inclusion, education) while minimizing the risks through sensible oversight and community norms.

Conclusion

The stories of Kevin Chen and the DIY bio movement illustrate a powerful truth: innovation in biotechnology can come from anywhere – a dorm room, a community lab, or a hackathon – not solely from big pharma or academia. Grassroots bio-innovators have already shown they can push the boundaries of biotech, from programming yeast to brew rare drugs, to biohacking plants to glow, to mobilizing citizens in solving medical challenges. This bottom-up revolution is expanding the possibilities of what biotech can achieve, much as the PC revolution expanded computing.

Moving forward, the most exciting developments may lie at the intersection of citizen science and traditional biotech. We are likely to see more partnerships where large research institutions collaborate with community labs (for example, companies providing DIY groups with resources in exchange for fresh ideas), or where citizen-developed innovations get picked up for mainstream development. Blending these worlds leverages the creative energy of amateurs with the rigor and scale of professionals.

It's a future where a cure for a disease might begin as a high school student's iGEM project, or the next sustainable material might be invented by a tinkerer at a bio-makerspace – and then refined with support from investors or universities.

In summary, programming DNA like we program computers is no longer just a futuristic slogan; it's happening now at both elite labs and community basements. The democratization of biotechnology is fostering a new ecosystem of innovation that could profoundly shape our world – making biotech more inclusive, more inventive, and ultimately, more impactful. The key will be nurturing this ecosystem responsibly, so that the passion of citizen scientists continues to complement the expertise of seasoned researchers. If we succeed, the result will be a biotechnology landscape that is as dynamic and transformative as the digital world has been in the past few decades.