Transhumanism is the philosophy that humans can and should become more than human - by removing our limits, be they mental, physical or social. Why accept a limited lifespan of around 100 years, a brain that cannot deal with more than seven things at once and being bound to one body which looks roughly the same throughout life? Why not start tinkering with ourselves?

BME: But is this stuff real, or is it just science fiction?

A bit of both. On transhumanist mailing lists people debate the relative merits of living as a digital lifeform in computer networks compared to physical existence as a spaceship, but also questions of nutrient supplements and current research in biotechnology. There is a surprising amount of work being done that could be used to change the human condition.

We already know enough to do simple genetic manipulation of our own genes, replace certain organs, to make (very crude) interfaces between neurons and electronics, cognition enhancing drugs already exist on the market, some methods appear to be able to slow ageing and people are developing intelligence-amplifying tools for the internet. By combining these results and already existing methods of enhancing human potential, it is already possible to become somewhat more than human. And the pace of evolution is quickening...

BME: With restricting ethics being applied to fields such as genetic research, assuming these possibilities come true, how will they happen?

A lot of these possibilities are simply re-use of existing technologies in ways they weren't originally intended - the neural interfaces under development are primarily intended to help handicapped people, but could also be used to create human-machine symbiosis. What was once basic research suddenly turns out to be very useful in unexpected ways.

Of course, many forces seek to restrict these applications. But in general technology and knowledge is spreading more and more, and even small groups can today do what just a few decades ago would have required huge research labs. A student friend of mine genetically manipulated bacteria to glow in the dark - in his own kitchen! I think it is unlikely that restrictions against self-transformations will be able to keep up with the spread of knowledge and the fact that doing many of these things are becoming cheaper and cheaper.

BME: Do you think that the mass acceptance of minor body modifications (piercing, tattooing, plastic surgery) will help in the acceptance of more radical transhuman modifications?

Yes, to some extent. Just the acceptance that the body can be modified for "frivolous" reasons is an important step forward. And it also establishes a kind of "self-transformation infrastructure" that in the future might encompass more radical possibilities.

I have always been interested in the future, and as a youngster I devoured science fiction. I once read P.C. Jersild's En Levande Sj�l ("A Living Soul"), a fictional autobiography of a disembodied brain named Ypsilon living in an aquarium and his adventures in the research lab. The story made me think about why we take our bodies for granted: do we really need bodies? What kinds of bodies could we create?

I started to read about these questions, and gradually I realized that there were very few limits to what could be done in principle; we can probably become something far more than humans.

BME: Is your interest purely academic, or is it active as well?

I am quite interested in bringing these ideas about, so to that end I am studying neuroscience, psychology, medical technology, computer science and everything else that might be useful. I hope that my research will be able to contribute a bit to our understanding of how the brain works and how to interface it with machines - or increase its intelligence.

On the more pragmatic level, I also try to use the methods I learn about to modify myself. Nothing drastic yet, since I'm mostly working on changing the ways I think, but I gradually plan to optimize my body to suit my goals. Physically I'm still quite normal.

BME: You run one of the most comprehensive web sites on the subject -- Tell me a bit about that.

It began when I realized there was no good way for me to find the transhumanist information I wanted, so I collected some myself. Then my information addiction took over, and it began to grow out of control...

Yes, although the usefulness of strong bones might be less than expected (after all, it is those squishy parts that usually get hurt). Titanium and ceramics are already in surgical use, and there are no practical reasons why individual bones can't be replaced (replacing the entire skeleton would of course by somewhat more complex and expensive). Another interesting possibility would be composite implants into the bones, making them more durable and perhaps easier to heal.

BME: Probably the most common modification ideas revolve around the hand. What's possible there, and what are the difficulties and advances in acheiving these goals?

The hand is awfully complex; changing it is probably one of the hardest problems in redesigning the body (except for possibly the brain). What I think most would like is increased dexterity and perhaps an extra opposable thumb. This might be achieved by some genetic tinkering, influencing how the hand develops. There are also interesting ideas for inserting various small sensors or tools into the hand.

BME: And the legs and joints?

Many people complain that the knees are easily damaged; they are actually quite optimal, but might profit from a few more ligaments.

The feet can be redesigned to prehensile feet, although that would limit our ability to walk long distances or run very fast in exchange for increased dexterity.

One radical possibility would be to add an extra pair of legs. This is complex, but one idea is to add an extra hinge point to the torso so that the arms and head could be raised (much like a centaur); we could walk on all fours while using our hands normally. This could be combined with widening the pelvic arc, and perhaps with making the first pair of feet prehensible (the arms are used for dextrous manipulation, the forefeet for manipulation requiring strength).

Altering the proportions of fast-twitch, slow-twitch muscle fibers might be desirable for some people; muscle cells do not divide, but can enlarge/shrink depending on use. It might be desirable to add the option of some regrowth, especially to deal with accidents and wounds.

BME: The torso?

The main problem with the torso is the spine - it is easily overloaded and damaged. One possibility would be to add a few short ribs to the lower back to attach tendons, improving overall strength and resilency, but decreasing the twisting ability. It is probably likely that it could be modified in other ways to work well with our new ecological niche as seat-dwellers (this could be combined with modifications of gluteus maximus).

One idea is to suspend internal organs from the skeletal system, perhaps using tendons, instead of letting them lie on diaphragm. This would prevent many forms of hernia.

BME: As far as basic aesthetic changes to the skin, what are the options of adding pigmetation and fur, like many animals have?

Humans already have a quite broad variety of pigmentation, and that is just due to one pigment. If we could introduce more pigments (and this is mainly a question of single genes), then the possibilities would grow tremendously. The same goes for eye and hair color, of course.

Fur is a bit more complex, but I expect that since we have had furry ancestors the old genes may still be in there somewhere, we just have to find them and brush them up a bit. Most likely patterning and texture are regulated by a comparatively small number of genes, so I think it is quite possible to get very interesting fur.

Of course, a more hands-on method might use xenografts - real fur implanted from modified animals (I guess some people would be rather upset at this idea), which would work in adults too. It might also be possible to use biotechnology to insert more advanced pigments into the skin in various ways, creating new skin colors or "high-tech tattoos".

BME: Looking farther into the future, what about the addition of extra limbs (arms, tentacles, whatever), extra senses, and any number of things?

Well, the possibilities are endless: ultraviolet vision, extra limbs, new senses, human-machine interfaces, an infinite variety of cosmetic changes, adaption to underwater environment, you name it.

To achieve this, we of course need powerful medical technologies, plenty of knowledge and the willingness to test out the changes. Especially important are the technologies being developed today in growing tissues and possibly organs outside the body for implantation, and the possibilities of nanotechnology (which would make many of the above-mentioned modifications much simpler).

The most radical ideas of course do away with the body altogether; the mind is uploaded into a computer, and then either downloaded into a customized artificial or biological body or uses a virtual body to live in a virtual environment. This would make us totally mercurial, and turn bodies into statements of syle just like clothes.

This is a tricky area, since there has to be a balance between the wishes of the parent and the future and unknown wishes of the child. "Just saying no" as some bioethicists suggests doesn't solve the problem - not doing anything is an action too, especially when the change can be beneficial.

I think the best solution would be to allow only changes that increase the potential and possibilities for the child, not limits it. If the changes can be reversed or inhibited according to the wishes of the child, then there are no problems in my opinion. For example, genes creating (say) a tigerlike fur could be controlled by a genetic switch, and the child could decide whether to turn it on or off by taking a nutrient supplement.

BME: Once genetic changes are made, is the individual still "human"? That is, can they still breed with unmodified humans? What would happen to their new traits?

It would depend on how radical the changes are. Just adding a few new genes or changing the old would not make them that much different from normal humans, and their children may or may not inhereit the new traits ("She has got her mother's tail!"). But some of the more radical ideas involve the creation of an extra chromosome just to keep track of all the changes, and then we would suddenly have a new species, unable to breed with unmodified humans. But by then, it would probably be quite trivial to do an in vitro fertilization with the desired number of chromosomes.

BME: Or would we be better off sticking to surgical modifications?

Surgery has the advantage of working on adults, who can give informed consent, but cannot create the profound changes of genetic engineering. Maybe the best solution would be to add genetic support for later surgical changes, so that insertion of new limbs or organs can be made much easier.

BME: Realistically, what do you see as a timeline for the modifications discussed above?

Surgical modifications are mostly a matter of experience and daring, and will develop gradually (as my teacher in medical technology said: "You have to pay billions and applease the FDA for years to change just one atom in a drug molecule - but if you have a new neat surgical technique, you can go right ahead").

Simple genetic modifications, like removing disease genes, can be done today. I expect to see the ability to insert new alleles in humans in a few years (like changing skin color). Later we will see the introduction of new traits, like fur or improved senses. The more drastic genetic changes that change the way the body works will take much longer, maybe 20 years or so, but much of the delay is more due to safety concerns than actual lack of knowledge. When genetic modifications become available is anybodys guess, political pressure could delay it indefinitely, or it could become explode into popularity.

Neurointerfacing systems will probably be developed in the next 10-15 years; prototypes already exist, but useful protheses will probably appear after the millennium. Developing useful applications for healthy people will probably remain a speciality market for a long time until a "killer application" appears that cannot be provided by external systems like wearable computers and "Body Area Networks".

Much depends on how soon (and if) nanotechnology can be developed, which would make most other methods much more powerful and cheap. Some enthusiasts claim we will have powerful nanotechnology able to change us on the cellullar level in less than ten years, while more conservative people predict the great breakthrough to sometime around 2015 or so.

Other technologies to look out for is biotechnology (the source of much basic knowledge), battery technology (how to power everything) and computer technology (to make them smarter).

So a simple timeline would look like this (this will definitely be wrong, like all those scenarios with steam-powered supersonic airplanes from last century):

The net contains a lot of information; my transhuman pages (shameless plug) contains some (possibly) useful links: http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Individual/Body

Ettinger's Man into Superman is a bit dated, but brings up many of these ideas. A more modern (and somewhat conservative when it comes to body modification) source is Our Medical Future by Jeffrey A. Fisher, M.D. (ISBN 0-671-73845-3).

Drexler's Engines of Creation describe how nanotechnology can help us achieve many of these goals; it is available on the net at http://www.asiapac.com/EnginesOfCreation/