Biological Engineering Application My Idea: Lumi-Listeria A Rapid, Paper-Based Biosensor for Food Safety.
Why I want to build this During my previous internship, I did research on the 2017 Listeria outbreak, I realized that the biggest bottleneck in preventing foodborne illness is speed. Currently, if a food factory wants to test for pathogens, they have to send samples to a lab and wait days. By the time results come back, the contaminated food might already be in supermarkets, putting public health at risk.
Subsections of Homework
Week 1 HW: Principles and Practices
1. Biological Engineering Application
My Idea: Lumi-Listeria
A Rapid, Paper-Based Biosensor for Food Safety.
Why I want to build this
During my previous internship, I did research on the 2017 Listeria outbreak, I realized that the biggest bottleneck in preventing foodborne illness is speed. Currently, if a food factory wants to test for pathogens, they have to send samples to a lab and wait days. By the time results come back, the contaminated food might already be in supermarkets, putting public health at risk.
My goal: I want to develop a cell-free biosensor printed on paper. It uses RNA toehold switches that detect Listeria gene sequences. If the bacteria is present, the paper glows. It’s cheap, fast, and can be used directly in factories to stop outbreaks before they reach people.
2. Governance Goals
To ensure this tool actually improves public health without causing new problems, I have two main policy goals:
Guaranteed Non-Malfeasance: Since this tool will be used outside of a contained lab (e.g., in food processing plants), we must ensure the synthetic DNA cannot “escape” and contaminate the natural environment.
Biosecurity: We need to make sure that the specific “detection code” (the RNA sequence) cannot be reverse-engineered by bad actors to create Listeria strains that are invisible to the test.
3. Governance Actions & Scoring
Here are three ways we could regulate this, scored based on how well they protect health and safety.
1. Screening: DNA synthesis companies must use AI to screen all orders. If someone orders a sequence related to a pathogen, they get flagged.
2. Technical Containment: Designing the tool as “Cell-Free” (no living bacteria) and adding a “kill switch” so the DNA degrades after use.
3. Licensing: Requiring a “Bio-Safety License” for anyone buying the kit.
4. Scoring Matrix
(1 = Best option, 3 = Worst/Hardest to implement)
Does the option:
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Enhance Biosecurity
• By preventing incidents
1
2
3
• By helping respond
2
3
2
Foster Lab Safety
• By preventing incident
3
1
2
• By helping respond
3
3
2
Protect the environment
• By preventing incidents
2
1
3
• By helping respond
3
2
3
Other considerations
• Minimizing costs and burdens to stakeholders
3
2
3
• Feasibility?
1
2
2
• Not impede research
3
2
2
• Promote constructive applications
2
1
2
5. Recommendation & Reflection
My Priority: Option 2 (Technical Containment)
I believe the most effective way to protect public health is through Safety by Design. I would prioritize Option 2.
Why?
If we rely on licenses (Option 3), people can cheat. If we rely on screening (Option 1), it might block legitimate research. But if I build the tool using cell-free systems that physically cannot replicate in nature, the risk of environmental contamination drops to near zero. This makes it safe to use in the real world, which is critical for a public health tool.
Proposed Action: To address this, I propose that when we publish our findings, we use Redacted Publishing. We share the mechanism of how the sensor works, but we keep the specific ‘key’ sequences in a secure database accessible only to verified researchers, rather than posting them on the open web.