Arguably, no curve in the world increases indefinitely—certainly no growth curve of human society. The quest for sustainable use of the planet involves estimating levels of activity, particularly resource use, that can continue indefinitely. Since the biosphere is dynamic, this continuation is not a stagnant, steady-state situation but rather a mutualistic interactive relationship between human society and the planet's ecological life support system. Human technology, creativity, and ingenuity may modify natural laws, but cannot be used to repeal them. Attempts to maintain the recent exponential growth of the human population, affluence, and artifacts cannot continue forever, or probably even for another century. At best, quality of life will be diminished, and, at worst, a substantial loss of human life will occur if both ethical and ecological issues are not freely and openly discussed. Sustainability may be visionary and unattainable, but it does offer an opportunity to improve the quality of life for future generations of humans and the other life forms, an opportunity that is far greater than possible with present unsustainable practices.

As a result of the initiative, ingenuity, and dedicated efforts of Steven Peterson and James Schubert, and the generous support of Alfred University, the Conference on Empirical Biopolitics was held from July 18 to July 22, 1990, on the campus of Alfred University. Six empirical studies were presented and extensively discussed at this small and intimate conference, with two or more hours devoted to each. Discussion focused not only on the specific research questions under investigation, but also on the ramifications for inquiry in the entire field of biopolitics. Odelia Funke and Fred Kort were the designated discussants, but all presenters took part in the stimulating discussions of each paper.

Due to the prevailing paradigms in the social sciences and humanities and due to some traditional reservations against biology in Germany, biopolitics is facing particular difficulties in German political science. At the University of Düsseldorf, the only place where biopolitics is taught in Germany, students take courses which deal explicitly with biopolitical topics or learn about biopolitics in seminars and lectures devoted to other aspects of political behavior. There are difficulties in teaching biopolitics; some will arise wherever biopolitics is taught, while some may be specific for Germany. These difficulties require special teching efforts in order to motivate the students; some experience in dealing with these problems has already been gained. As far as the desirable participation in research projects and the practical application of biopolitical knowledge in particular professions is concerned, there are some possibilities, but still too few. Besides working with students on biopolitical questions, there are useful opportunities of teaching biopolitics outside the university, especially in adult political education and in political consulting.

This article presents a discussion of neurocognitive hacking and its potential for use at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels of cyber conflict. Neurocognitive hacking refers to the ability to activate specific neural areas of the brain, via subliminal or supraliminal stimuli, to shape the behavioral outcomes of an adversary. Research suggests that awareness of mortality-related stimuli has neural correlates in the right amygdala and left anterior cingulate cortex and mediates negative behavior toward out-group members, including unconscious discriminatory behavior. Given its in-group/out-group dynamic, the phenomenon could be exploited for use in information operations toward target populations, specifically ones that are multiethnic, multicultural, or multireligious. Although development of the theoretical framework behind neurocognitive hacking is ongoing, mortality-related stimuli are proposed to activate one’s unconscious vigilance system to further evaluate the locus and viability of the suspect stimuli. Research suggests that the subsequent discriminatory affective reactions directed toward out-group members are representative of automatic heuristics evolved to protect the organism in the event a stimulus represents a more serious threat to survival. Therefore, presenting mortality-related stimuli over computer networks to targeted audiences may facilitate the ingestion of tailored propaganda or shaping of specific behavioral outcomes within a population, including sowing division in a target community or weakening support for a specific political regime.

North Carolina, a federally facilitated marketplace under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), stumbled in 2013 when opening its health-insurance exchange. Trouble was easy to foresee, as North Carolina had instituted a law barring any state agency from assisting enrollment in health-insurance plans made available through the ACA. Trained workers were needed to help citizens and legal immigrants “navigate” to these plans. Some of these “navigators” could be paid with federal funds, but many others had to work as volunteers. I was one of these volunteer navigators. Much went wrong in training, staffing, and operations, but much still was accomplished. Here I report observations, share assessments, and offer suggestions for similarly complex situations.

Risk is endemic to the political arena and influences citizen engagement. We explore this connection by suggesting that risk-taking may be biologically instantiated in sensory systems. With specific attention to gender and gender identity, we investigate the connections between self-reported bitter taste reception, risk tolerance, and both of their associations with political participation. In three U.S. samples collected in 2019 and 2020, participants were asked to rate their preferences from lists of foods as well as whether they detected the taste of the substance N-Propylthiouracil (PROP) and, if so, the strength of the taste. In this registered report, we find that self-reported bitter taste preference, but not PROP detection, is positively associated with higher levels of risk tolerance as well as political participation. The pattern with gender and gender identity is mixed across our samples, but interestingly, we find that sex-atypical gender identity positively predicts political participation.

The Human Genome Organisation (HUGO) is an international membership organization (with 965 current members in 50 countries) whose goal is to coordinate and enhance efforts in the Human Genome Project (HGP). Formally established in 1989 by a group of the world's leading scientists in order to promote genome activities internationally, HUGO operates as a global coordinating organization to create the networks and channels through which genome information, initiatives, and ideas can flow and be disseminated.

There is currently considerable investment in research aimed at producing transgenic farm animals with enhanced productive capacities. This article submits these prospective technologies to critical ethical evaluation. The analysis provided, focusing on issues relevant to public policy, suggests the need to introduce additional regulations governing the use of these technologies. Should their use be permitted in principle, specific legislation would seem to be required: (1) to protect the welfare of transgenic animals produced/kept in commercial enterprises; (2) to ensure the freedom of choice of purchasers of food and other products derived from transgenic animals by provision of adequate information on the source of the products; and (3) to provide a mechanism for limiting the use of transgenic technologies to those that are in the public interest.

Arms control is not about agreements, but rather deals with creating enhanced security and international stability. Such objectives are difficult to realize in the field of biological and toxin weapons. The 1972 convention which bans them contains neither enforcement nor verification mechanisms. Rapid advancements in the fields of biochemistry and genetic engineering provide enormous potential for developing novel toxin weapons that defy virtually all conventional verfication methodologies. Moreover, it is widely assumed that the 1972 agreement has been violated by the Soviet Union and its client states in various parts of the world. This undermines the agreement's credibility as an effective international tool to prevent the exploitation of science and technology for ever more egregious weapons. Despite the troubled past and uncertain future of arms control in this area, every moral government must attempt to make arms control a viable element in the fight against the proliferation and use of biological and toxin weapons.