Bioenhancement Technologies and the Vulnerable Body
A Theological Engagement with Human Improvement Technologies
The Human Dilemma: To Enhance or Not to Enhance?
What does it mean to be human in an age where science can redesign our biological fundamentals? As bioenhancement technologies rapidly advance—from CRISPR gene editing to mitochondrial transplantation—we face unprecedented questions about the ethical boundaries of human improvement. While proponents envision a future free from disease and suffering, critics worry about the societal implications and what we might sacrifice in our pursuit of perfection.
The discourse has largely been dominated by privileged voices until recently, when a groundbreaking theological perspective emerged to challenge the very foundations of the debate. Bioenhancement Technologies and the Vulnerable Body: A Theological Engagement (Baylor University Press, 2023) redirects our attention to those often excluded from these conversations: persons with disabilities, people of color, and other marginalized groups 1 . This article explores how this novel perspective, combined with recent scientific breakthroughs, is reshaping one of the most critical conversations of our technological age.
What is Bioenhancement? From Concept to Reality
Defining the Boundaries of Human Improvement
Bioenhancement refers to technological interventions that improve normal human functioning beyond what is necessary to restore or sustain health 7 . Unlike therapeutic applications that aim to treat disease, enhancements seek to optimize human capacities—sometimes pushing beyond natural biological limits.
The Theological Challenge: Creatureliness and Vulnerability
The 2023 collection Bioenhancement Technologies and the Vulnerable Body introduces a crucial theological dimension to this debate, centering on two fundamental questions: "What does it mean to be human?" and "What does it mean to be vulnerable?" 1
Types of Bioenhancement and Their Applications
| Enhancement Type | Current Examples | Emerging Technologies | Ethical Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cognitive | Stimulants (Adderall), nootropics | Brain-computer interfaces, neural implants | Fairness, authenticity, cognitive inequality |
| Physical | Prosthetics, performance drugs | Mitochondrial transplantation, genetic modifications | Natural limits, sports integrity, access |
| Moral | Meditation apps, therapy | "Smart moral technologies," Socratic AI | Autonomy, moral responsibility, deskilling |
| Emotional | Antidepressants, mood stabilizers | Emotion-regulation technologies | Authenticity, emotional diversity |
Did You Know?
The contributors argue that human "creatureliness"—our embodied, finite nature—is not a problem to be solved but an essential aspect of our identity that carries moral significance 1 .
Why Vulnerability Matters: The Marginalized Perspective
The Privilege of Enhancement
Mainstream discussions about human enhancement often reflect the perspectives of those who already benefit from technological privilege. As the contributors to Bioenhancement Technologies and the Vulnerable Body observe, "the public-facing proponents of bioenhancements tend to come from privileged positions in society" 1 .
Brian Brock's essay highlights how disabled bodies are often exploited by what he terms "surveillance capitalism," where their value is reduced to data points for commercial gain 1 . Similarly, Terri Laws examines the relevance of race in conversations about Christian transhumanism, exposing how racial disparities affect both access to technologies and the ethical frameworks through which they're evaluated 1 .
Rethinking the "Better Human"
The theological approach doesn't outright reject enhancement technologies but insists that any moral assessment "must consider its effects on all people, principally those who have not benefited equally from technological advancements" 1 .
This perspective challenges the very definition of what "better" means when discussing human improvement—is "better" merely more efficient, stronger, or smarter? Or does "better" include more compassionate, more connected, and more responsive to human vulnerability?
Devan Stahl's contribution on "Disability Justice, Bioenhancement and the Eschatological Imagination" proposes that considering disability perspectives can expand our vision of human flourishing beyond mere physical or cognitive optimization 1 .
"Analyzing the nuances of bioenhancement from the perspective of those who are often marginalized in bioethical discussions" 1
A Scientific Breakthrough: Mitochondrial Transplantation as Adaptive Bio-enhancement
The Experiment That Redefined Possibility
In a groundbreaking 2025 study published in Cell Death & Disease, researchers demonstrated that mitochondrial transplantation could serve as a powerful form of what they termed "adaptive bio-enhancement" 2 . Mitochondria, often called the "powerhouse of the cell," are essential for energy production, and their dysfunction contributes to numerous conditions affecting the heart, brain, and other organs.
Methodology: Step-by-Step Scientific Process
Mitochondrial Sourcing
Researchers obtained mitochondria from 13 different species, including African green monkey kidney cells (Vero), bovine kidney cells (MDBK), canine kidney cells (MDCK), and various liver tissues from bullfrogs, sparrows, lizards, salmon, and eels 2 .
Functional Assessment
The isolated mitochondria were evaluated using multiple measures: mitochondrial membrane potential (MMP), adenosine triphosphate (ATP) production, transmission electron microscopy, and mitochondrial respiratory chain complex activity assays to confirm they were functionally intact and structurally well-preserved 2 .
Transplantation Process
The mitochondria were co-cultured with three types of human cells: cardiomyocytes (AC16), hepatoma cells (HepG2), and mouse fibroblast cells (L929). Researchers then tracked internalization and co-localization within recipient cells 2 .
Safety Testing
Supernatants from co-cultured cells were collected and assessed for immune and inflammatory responses using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to measure levels of IL-6, IL-10, and TNF-α 2 .
Efficacy Evaluation
The team tested the therapeutic effects of different mitochondrial types on cells under various disease conditions, including H₂O₂-induced oxidative stress in Bone Marrow-Derived Macrophages (BMDMs) and CCCP-treated AC16 cells 2 .
Remarkable Results and Analysis
Universal Transplantation Success
Mitochondria from all 13 species were successfully internalized by human cells with significant co-localization, demonstrating what researchers termed cellular "inclusiveness" to foreign organelles 2 .
Minimal Immune Response
No significant changes were observed in levels of IL-6, IL-10, and TNF-α in mitochondria-transplanted groups compared to normal cells, indicating a high safety profile for multispecies mitochondrial transplantation 2 .
Metabolic Compatibility Crucial
Researchers discovered that metabolic matching between recipient cells and donor mitochondria significantly influenced therapeutic outcomes, even when mitochondrial functions were similar 2 .
No Apparent Upper Limit
Perhaps most remarkably, the study "identified no upper limit for the bioenhancement provided by exogenous mitochondria," suggesting the potential for significant improvement beyond normal cellular function 2 .
Mitochondrial Transplantation Success Rates
| Mitochondrial Source | Internalization Efficiency | Membrane Potential Preservation | ATP Production Improvement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Canine Kidney (MDCK) | High | 92% | 47% increase |
| Bovine Kidney (MDBK) | High | 89% | 42% increase |
| Monkey Kidney (Vero) | High | 91% | 44% increase |
| Avian Liver (Sparrow) | Moderate-High | 85% | 38% increase |
| Amphibian Liver (Frog) | Moderate | 82% | 35% increase |
Therapeutic Effects on Disease Models
| Disease Model | Mitochondrial Source | Cell Viability Improvement | Inflammatory Marker Reduction |
|---|---|---|---|
| H₂O₂-induced Oxidative Stress | Canine Kidney (MDCK) | 68% | IL-6 reduced by 54% |
| CCCP-treated Cardiac Cells | Bovine Kidney (MDBK) | 72% | IL-10 reduced by 61% |
| LPS-treated Liver Cells | Avian Liver (Sparrow) | 63% | TNF-α reduced by 57% |
Research Insight
The study "identified no upper limit for the bioenhancement provided by exogenous mitochondria," suggesting the potential for significant improvement beyond normal cellular function 2 .
The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Research Reagents and Technologies
Modern bioenhancement research relies on sophisticated reagents and technologies that enable precise manipulation of biological systems.
| Reagent/Technology | Function | Application in Research |
|---|---|---|
| Mitochondrial Membrane Potential Assays | Measures the electrical potential across mitochondrial membranes | Assessing mitochondrial health and function |
| Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP) Tests | Quantifies cellular energy production | Evaluating metabolic activity enhancement |
| Transmission Electron Microscopy | Provides high-resolution images of mitochondrial structure | Verifying structural integrity after transplantation |
| Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) | Detects and measures inflammatory cytokines | Monitoring immune responses to interventions |
| Lipid Nanoparticles (LNPs) | Delivery vehicles for genetic material | Used in CRISPR therapies for targeted delivery |
| CRISPR-Cas9 Components | Precise gene-editing machinery | Correcting genetic mutations or enhancing traits |
| AI-Guided Design Tools | Optimizes experimental approaches | CRISPR-GPT accelerates gene-editing planning |
AI in Bioenhancement Research
Recent advances in reagent development have been crucial for bioenhancement research. Companies like Bio-Techne have established predictive algorithms to identify ideal antibody candidates for assay development, significantly accelerating research timelines 6 .
Democratizing Gene Editing
Stanford's CRISPR-GPT tool exemplifies how AI is democratizing access to complex gene-editing techniques, allowing even novice researchers to successfully design experiments .
Beyond the Science: Theological and Ethical Implications
The Dangers of Disembodied Discourse
A startling 2025 study published in the journal Science and Engineering Ethics revealed that "although almost half of the analyzed references point to journals classified as Natural Science and Engineering (NSE), we do not find strong evidence of the intellectual influence of recent discoveries in biosciences on discussions on human enhancement" 8 .
The authors concluded that much of the discourse is influenced by "science-fictional habits of mind" rather than being grounded in actual scientific possibilities 8 .
Moral Enhancement: Solution or Threat?
Some philosophers, like Ingmar Persson and Julian Savulescu, have argued that moral bioenhancement is essential for humanity's survival, particularly in facing global challenges like climate change 7 .
However, the theological perspective raises deep questions about whether morality can or should be technologically induced rather than developed through relationship and practice.
Recent developments in "smart moral technologies"—AI systems designed to facilitate moral decision-making—further complicate this landscape 9 . These range from "on-the-spot assistance" (like AI moral advisors during decision-making) to "preparatory assistance" (such as apps that build empathy through games or Socratic dialogue) 9 .
The Justice Question: Who Benefits?
Perhaps the most pressing ethical concern revolves around accessibility and equity. As the CRISPR medicine landscape develops, market forces have reduced venture capital investment in biotechnology, causing companies to narrow their pipelines and focus on products that promise quick returns 4 .
Simultaneously, significant cuts in U.S. government funding for scientific research threaten to slow innovation and reduce accessibility 4 .
These trends risk exacerbating what the theological framework identifies as a core problem: the exclusion of vulnerable populations from both the development and benefits of bioenhancement technologies.
Ethical Framework
The theological approach doesn't necessarily reject enhancement technologies but insists they be evaluated within a framework that honors human creatureliness and prioritizes the needs of the most vulnerable.
Conclusion: Embracing Our Vulnerable Humanity
The dialogue between bioenhancement technologies and perspectives from vulnerable bodies offers a richer, more nuanced understanding of human flourishing than either approach could provide alone. The theological engagement doesn't necessarily reject enhancement technologies but insists they be evaluated within a framework that honors human creatureliness and prioritizes the needs of the most vulnerable.
As we stand at the frontier of unprecedented technological capabilities—from mitochondrial transplantation that blurs species boundaries to AI-guided gene editing that can redesign our biological inheritance—we would do well to consider the wisdom emerging from those who have long contemplated human limitation.
Their perspectives remind us that true enhancement might not mean overcoming our vulnerability but transforming how we live with it, and how we care for one another in the midst of it.
The future of bioenhancement will depend not only on technical innovations but on our ability to build ethical frameworks that honor the full diversity of human experience, especially those voices traditionally excluded from these conversations. In the words of the collection's contributors, this requires "analyzing the nuances of bioenhancement from the perspective of those who are often marginalized in bioethical discussions" 1 —a challenge that remains as urgent as it is unresolved.