Collected Links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_engineering
This link has a lot of information about the basics of human genetic engineering. The source will help me describe each type of human genetic engineering and how it works. The source is reliable as the information on this website is found on many other sites.
http://human-genetic-engineering.blogspot.com/
This blog can provide a lot of different information about human genetic engineering. It talks about different methods and different uses of human genetic engineering. The history of human genetic engineering can also be found on the website. Also found on the blog is the controversy of the topic, and the background of human genetic engineering. The source is reliable its information is similar to most other websites.
http://www.brighthub.com/science/genetics/articles/15678.aspx
This article talks a lot about the pros and cons of human genetic engineering. The article is actually divided into two different parts one being the pros and the other the cons. The information provided in the article will be extremely helpful because it talks the pros and cons of each type of genetic engineering. It also talks about what society could be like if genetic engineering does end up becoming a huge thing in the future.
http://www.genengnews.com/
This website is really for people active in the field or people who understand cellular sciences. It has a lot of good information, but the information is too advanced for a simple research paper for an English class. I will not be incorporating this information in my paper but some of it is awesome to read.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Live essay
Genetic Engineering
When hearing about genetic engineering and research the first thing to pop into someone’s mind is probably about human genetic engineering. There are different types of genetic engineering and they are not all human related. Some genetic researchers work on altering food genetics to be more resistant to pests, create their own bioinsecticides, and have higher amount of vitamins. Human genetic researchers work on many aspects of the human body.
Gene therapy is the insertion of genetic code into a cell and biological tissue to treat a specific disease. There are two different types of gene therapy, germ line gene therapy, also known as negative genetic engineering, and somatic gene therapy. Germ line gene therapy is modifying a germ cell, (sperm or eggs), by introducing functional genes. This makes it so the resistance to disease is passed onto the later generations and not just the one child(Wikipedia). Somatic gene therapy is transferring therapeutic genes into the somatic cell, meaning only the patient will be affected not his or her offspring(Wikipedia). Genetic engineers typically look at about ten years of schooling, four years of undergraduate school, three years graduate school, and three years of doing research on the subject for a PhD.
Positive genetic engineering, which is seen as enhancing the human body, is genetic engineering aimed toward curing medical conditions instead of genetic disorders or congenital malformations. Most of this type of genetic engineering is theoretically because we are only beginning to toy with it. Because ‘medical conditions’ are seen in different aspects by people, it leaves it open for question what a medical condition actually is. For instance some people see aging as a medical condition because it is leading to their inevitable death, and because of this they may want to be genetic altered so they could live longer. Now the question is, is this actually a cure or an enhancement to life? This sort of genetic engineering could not only slow down the aging process but make us faster, stronger, or even smarter.
Human genetic engineering is probably one of the most controversial issues of this generation. The controversy of human genetic engineering lies in the fact that yes, we can probably cure diseases and enhance the human body and life experience with genetic engineering, but to reach that point how much experimentation would have to be done on live human subjects? Is it ok to be altering what has already been created with a set genetic code? If we begin to alter the unseen genetic code of mankind are we ascending to a higher power and reaching the limits of a god by altering mankind? People are afraid that if we delve deeper into human genetic engineering that we are designing the human race as we see fit.
I agree with certain aspects of human genetic engineering and others not so much. I believe that with the help of genetic engineering we can make the world a better place for future generations and even our own. Although the path to a future without disease and illness will be one that is on the fine line of morally and ethically right. But if children are able to be born without congenital malformations and genetically, life threatening diseases I think that we took the right path. Pursuing human genetic engineering is an extremely positive thing. We would unlock a world with relatively no pain.
One thing I do disagree on is the idea of chimeras; humans or animals genetically altered with the DNA of a different species.
For instance the sphinx is a chimera the head of a human and the body of lion. I do not believe a human chimera would be like the sphinx but more like a human with cells from maybe a whale to be able to breathe longer underwater, or the muscles of a gorilla for enhanced strength. Cloning is also another aspect of genetic engineering I have a problem with. Replicating a human is an atrocity, and should not happen there should never be two of the same person. Some people would say cloning is okay because a human can be cloned for its organs, but then a life has just been created and taken at the expense for someone else. It is sort of like abortion in that aspect (Gert).
Someone arguing against the future of human genetic engineering might say that even though disease has been cured, once that has been taken care of what is next? Will it be the enhancing of the human body? Splicing human genetics with the genetics of animals creating chimera? The main and best argument opposing human genetic engineering is if it is safe. The risks of implanting the gene could be higher than the risk of the disease. Will the gene added infect the patient if it is deemed ineffective? If we are all genetically altered what happens when a new diseases surfaces and everyone genetically altered is susceptible, will the process restart? We do not know the long term effects of genetically engineering human beings the effects could be harmful. Society will be divided into two separate groups one being the genetically altered and the other being the natural human beings (Arnold). One thing many people overlook while researching human genetic engineering is the fact that like many products in the world this form of science will not be tested on animals. It would have to be tested on live human subjects to get any effective experimental data back.
Enhancing the human body would not be a bad thing it could make a working day less than twelve hours making more time for family and friends. Like all science, human genetic engineering may not be safe at first, but a safe method will be discovered eventually. If a new disease mutated to bypass the new defenses created by genetic alteration a new alteration may take time to create and unfortunately people may have to receive another operation. Genetic engineering would not become a worldwide phenomenon until all short and long term effects are discovered. Unfortunately society would probably become separated, but becoming genetically altered would be a choice and people who chose to not become genetically altered and people who do should not look at each other as inferiors or superior either way the base genetics are the same. Human experimentation is inevitable if people want human genetic engineering to have a future. Some people would probably have to sacrifice their lives for the sake of the future, but people do this all the time just in different more physical ways. Like the soldier fighting in Iraq to protect our freedom and future for the generations to come. Law enforcement is protecting us every day by putting their lives on the line to eliminate crime and detain people who are committing crime. People all around us are putting their lives on the line to protect the future, why should people being experimented on for the sake of a healthy future be turned down?
In conclusion, I believe that although human genetic research can be perceived as playing God, I think we would have to be the ones to take it to that level and just because we have the technology and skills to do so does not mean we have to begin prolonging life. Enhancing life and the human body is an entirely different issue in my eyes and I believe making humans comfortable in the short lives they live is an okay thing to do. Although people think that it would be a horrible thing to incorporate human genetic engineering into society, it would be the very opposite, people would be overall healthier. The only time someone would ever really be seen in a hospital would be for an injury, receiving a genetic operation, or a pregnancy. If a world where technology for people to have a relatively pain free life exists, and it is not being utilized I would not want to be a part of it.
When hearing about genetic engineering and research the first thing to pop into someone’s mind is probably about human genetic engineering. There are different types of genetic engineering and they are not all human related. Some genetic researchers work on altering food genetics to be more resistant to pests, create their own bioinsecticides, and have higher amount of vitamins. Human genetic researchers work on many aspects of the human body.
Gene therapy is the insertion of genetic code into a cell and biological tissue to treat a specific disease. There are two different types of gene therapy, germ line gene therapy, also known as negative genetic engineering, and somatic gene therapy. Germ line gene therapy is modifying a germ cell, (sperm or eggs), by introducing functional genes. This makes it so the resistance to disease is passed onto the later generations and not just the one child(Wikipedia). Somatic gene therapy is transferring therapeutic genes into the somatic cell, meaning only the patient will be affected not his or her offspring(Wikipedia). Genetic engineers typically look at about ten years of schooling, four years of undergraduate school, three years graduate school, and three years of doing research on the subject for a PhD. Positive genetic engineering, which is seen as enhancing the human body, is genetic engineering aimed toward curing medical conditions instead of genetic disorders or congenital malformations. Most of this type of genetic engineering is theoretically because we are only beginning to toy with it. Because ‘medical conditions’ are seen in different aspects by people, it leaves it open for question what a medical condition actually is. For instance some people see aging as a medical condition because it is leading to their inevitable death, and because of this they may want to be genetic altered so they could live longer. Now the question is, is this actually a cure or an enhancement to life? This sort of genetic engineering could not only slow down the aging process but make us faster, stronger, or even smarter.
Human genetic engineering is probably one of the most controversial issues of this generation. The controversy of human genetic engineering lies in the fact that yes, we can probably cure diseases and enhance the human body and life experience with genetic engineering, but to reach that point how much experimentation would have to be done on live human subjects? Is it ok to be altering what has already been created with a set genetic code? If we begin to alter the unseen genetic code of mankind are we ascending to a higher power and reaching the limits of a god by altering mankind? People are afraid that if we delve deeper into human genetic engineering that we are designing the human race as we see fit.
I agree with certain aspects of human genetic engineering and others not so much. I believe that with the help of genetic engineering we can make the world a better place for future generations and even our own. Although the path to a future without disease and illness will be one that is on the fine line of morally and ethically right. But if children are able to be born without congenital malformations and genetically, life threatening diseases I think that we took the right path. Pursuing human genetic engineering is an extremely positive thing. We would unlock a world with relatively no pain.
One thing I do disagree on is the idea of chimeras; humans or animals genetically altered with the DNA of a different species.
For instance the sphinx is a chimera the head of a human and the body of lion. I do not believe a human chimera would be like the sphinx but more like a human with cells from maybe a whale to be able to breathe longer underwater, or the muscles of a gorilla for enhanced strength. Cloning is also another aspect of genetic engineering I have a problem with. Replicating a human is an atrocity, and should not happen there should never be two of the same person. Some people would say cloning is okay because a human can be cloned for its organs, but then a life has just been created and taken at the expense for someone else. It is sort of like abortion in that aspect (Gert).Someone arguing against the future of human genetic engineering might say that even though disease has been cured, once that has been taken care of what is next? Will it be the enhancing of the human body? Splicing human genetics with the genetics of animals creating chimera? The main and best argument opposing human genetic engineering is if it is safe. The risks of implanting the gene could be higher than the risk of the disease. Will the gene added infect the patient if it is deemed ineffective? If we are all genetically altered what happens when a new diseases surfaces and everyone genetically altered is susceptible, will the process restart? We do not know the long term effects of genetically engineering human beings the effects could be harmful. Society will be divided into two separate groups one being the genetically altered and the other being the natural human beings (Arnold). One thing many people overlook while researching human genetic engineering is the fact that like many products in the world this form of science will not be tested on animals. It would have to be tested on live human subjects to get any effective experimental data back.
Enhancing the human body would not be a bad thing it could make a working day less than twelve hours making more time for family and friends. Like all science, human genetic engineering may not be safe at first, but a safe method will be discovered eventually. If a new disease mutated to bypass the new defenses created by genetic alteration a new alteration may take time to create and unfortunately people may have to receive another operation. Genetic engineering would not become a worldwide phenomenon until all short and long term effects are discovered. Unfortunately society would probably become separated, but becoming genetically altered would be a choice and people who chose to not become genetically altered and people who do should not look at each other as inferiors or superior either way the base genetics are the same. Human experimentation is inevitable if people want human genetic engineering to have a future. Some people would probably have to sacrifice their lives for the sake of the future, but people do this all the time just in different more physical ways. Like the soldier fighting in Iraq to protect our freedom and future for the generations to come. Law enforcement is protecting us every day by putting their lives on the line to eliminate crime and detain people who are committing crime. People all around us are putting their lives on the line to protect the future, why should people being experimented on for the sake of a healthy future be turned down?
In conclusion, I believe that although human genetic research can be perceived as playing God, I think we would have to be the ones to take it to that level and just because we have the technology and skills to do so does not mean we have to begin prolonging life. Enhancing life and the human body is an entirely different issue in my eyes and I believe making humans comfortable in the short lives they live is an okay thing to do. Although people think that it would be a horrible thing to incorporate human genetic engineering into society, it would be the very opposite, people would be overall healthier. The only time someone would ever really be seen in a hospital would be for an injury, receiving a genetic operation, or a pregnancy. If a world where technology for people to have a relatively pain free life exists, and it is not being utilized I would not want to be a part of it.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Interview
1. What is the most difficult part about being a surgeon?
Taking care of a patient that is not doing well. Not knowing whether your interventions will make a difference in their outcome is stressful.
2. What are some specific skills required to be/become a surgeon?
First brains, second hard work.
3. Is there any controversy in the surgical field?
There are multiple opinions, it is an evolving field. You have to stay on top of the most current interventions. The fact about cardiology is that it is driven by controversy; therefore you have to be aware of what is being attempted, discussed and considered best practice.
4. Which surgical specialization do you find the most interesting, regardless of what you're working in?
Of course cardiology because it encompasses multiple different specialties…Cardiology; cardio-thoracic; vascular; thoracic; and interventional radiology.
5. How many years of schooling did it take for you to become a successful surgeon?
You have to finish 4 years of undergrad, 4 years of medical school and then 6-7 years of residency. About 17 years after high school.
1. What is the most difficult part about being a surgeon?
Taking care of a patient that is not doing well. Not knowing whether your interventions will make a difference in their outcome is stressful.
2. What are some specific skills required to be/become a surgeon?
First brains, second hard work.
3. Is there any controversy in the surgical field?
There are multiple opinions, it is an evolving field. You have to stay on top of the most current interventions. The fact about cardiology is that it is driven by controversy; therefore you have to be aware of what is being attempted, discussed and considered best practice.
4. Which surgical specialization do you find the most interesting, regardless of what you're working in?
Of course cardiology because it encompasses multiple different specialties…Cardiology; cardio-thoracic; vascular; thoracic; and interventional radiology.
5. How many years of schooling did it take for you to become a successful surgeon?
You have to finish 4 years of undergrad, 4 years of medical school and then 6-7 years of residency. About 17 years after high school.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Annotated Bibliography
Annotated Bibliography
Glorioso Joseph, and Jenny Jacoby. "Interview with David Scadden. " Gene Therapy 12.23 (2005): 1663. Health Module, ProQuest. Web. 5 Apr. 2010.
The source contains information on how stem cell research is controversial but could provide possibilities in regenerative medicine. It talks about how adult stem cells are less effective than embryonic stem cells. The interview covers information on cell cloning and how the genetic code is affected during the process. There are cells that they once thought had no purpose but discovered they did. America is losing the lead on genetic research because of the controversy holding it back. I will be incorporating this source in my essay by covering some of the points mentioned in the interview.
Unknown, Unknown. "HumanGeneticResearch." AllAboutPopularIssues. Unknown, n.d. Web. 6 Apr 2010..
This source talks briefly about how stem cells are obtained. It also points out what the benefits and consequences of extracting stem cells are. It states that there would be a possibility of segregation, the genetically enhanced, the possible chimera type people, and the people unaltered. The Source talks about the goals of gene therapy and that they are to cure possible diseases found in people without altering their inherited traits. I will be using this in my essay to point out some controversy in genetic engineering.
Unknown, . "Genetic Engineering Debates." library.thinkquest.org. Oracle, unknown. Web. 7 Apr 2010..
This website just briefly talks about some of the basic views people have for genetic engineering. It covers gene therapy, cloning, genetically modifying foods, and germ-line therapy. Many see it as okay if it’s helping to make disease almost non-existent but are against it when it comes to cloning humans. It talks about how germ-line therapy could remove all diseases and defects from mankind if we did not allow children to be born with them. Many people see it as a way to eliminate human suffering caused by illness. Other people see this as playing God even though it is helping humanity. I will use this source to talk about the different types of genetic engineering.
King, David. "The Threat of Human Genetic Engineering." Human Genetics Alert. DavidKing, 2008. Web. 7 Apr 2010..
This article is about more controversy surrounding human genetic engineering. It talks about how people who would receive genetic treatment could become discriminated against because of it. It talks about how genetic engineering is only applied to non reproductive cells meaning it will only help the patient and not the offspring in the future. It also talks about how they say genetic engineering will be purely medical; eventually people will want to use it for ‘enhancing’ the human body. I will use this source by addressing the enhancing humans instead of just using genetic engineering as purely medical.
Glorioso Joseph, and Jenny Jacoby. "Interview with David Scadden. " Gene Therapy 12.23 (2005): 1663. Health Module, ProQuest. Web. 5 Apr. 2010.
The source contains information on how stem cell research is controversial but could provide possibilities in regenerative medicine. It talks about how adult stem cells are less effective than embryonic stem cells. The interview covers information on cell cloning and how the genetic code is affected during the process. There are cells that they once thought had no purpose but discovered they did. America is losing the lead on genetic research because of the controversy holding it back. I will be incorporating this source in my essay by covering some of the points mentioned in the interview.
Unknown, Unknown. "HumanGeneticResearch." AllAboutPopularIssues. Unknown, n.d. Web. 6 Apr 2010.
This source talks briefly about how stem cells are obtained. It also points out what the benefits and consequences of extracting stem cells are. It states that there would be a possibility of segregation, the genetically enhanced, the possible chimera type people, and the people unaltered. The Source talks about the goals of gene therapy and that they are to cure possible diseases found in people without altering their inherited traits. I will be using this in my essay to point out some controversy in genetic engineering.
Unknown, . "Genetic Engineering Debates." library.thinkquest.org. Oracle, unknown. Web. 7 Apr 2010.
This website just briefly talks about some of the basic views people have for genetic engineering. It covers gene therapy, cloning, genetically modifying foods, and germ-line therapy. Many see it as okay if it’s helping to make disease almost non-existent but are against it when it comes to cloning humans. It talks about how germ-line therapy could remove all diseases and defects from mankind if we did not allow children to be born with them. Many people see it as a way to eliminate human suffering caused by illness. Other people see this as playing God even though it is helping humanity. I will use this source to talk about the different types of genetic engineering.
King, David. "The Threat of Human Genetic Engineering." Human Genetics Alert. DavidKing, 2008. Web. 7 Apr 2010.
This article is about more controversy surrounding human genetic engineering. It talks about how people who would receive genetic treatment could become discriminated against because of it. It talks about how genetic engineering is only applied to non reproductive cells meaning it will only help the patient and not the offspring in the future. It also talks about how they say genetic engineering will be purely medical; eventually people will want to use it for ‘enhancing’ the human body. I will use this source by addressing the enhancing humans instead of just using genetic engineering as purely medical.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Topic proposal
Human Genetic Engineering
I am going to be researching human genetic engineering. This field of expertise is looked down upon by many, but also held in high regard because of the possibilities it allows. The reason it is so looked down upon is that it is an altering of what is natural and unique, to becoming something molded by someone else’s image and not by the original genetics. The reason I am so drawn to this area of expertise is because of the obstacles mankind could overcome with such knowledge. It could be possible to one day remove all harmful genes located in a fetus so the baby is born perfectly healthy. Although there are other advantages that come with human genetic engineering there are also many question one must ask them self. Is it right to alter the appearance a child would be born with, is it ok to change how this person may be born, is it right to be toying with the genetics of a human. The man issue I have with this field is the fact that changing human genetic code is bordering on the power of God, to change something in His image to something of one’s own.
I am going to be researching human genetic engineering. This field of expertise is looked down upon by many, but also held in high regard because of the possibilities it allows. The reason it is so looked down upon is that it is an altering of what is natural and unique, to becoming something molded by someone else’s image and not by the original genetics. The reason I am so drawn to this area of expertise is because of the obstacles mankind could overcome with such knowledge. It could be possible to one day remove all harmful genes located in a fetus so the baby is born perfectly healthy. Although there are other advantages that come with human genetic engineering there are also many question one must ask them self. Is it right to alter the appearance a child would be born with, is it ok to change how this person may be born, is it right to be toying with the genetics of a human. The man issue I have with this field is the fact that changing human genetic code is bordering on the power of God, to change something in His image to something of one’s own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)