On one hand, if genetic modification were allowed, parents could choose to give their children more desirable traits, such as intelligence, good health, or athleticism. It could also help parents avoid passing on defective genes or dangerous genetic disease. In addition, if inheritable genetic modification were legal, it would prevent any "black markets" for genetic engineering. On the other hand, IGM is irreversable, so unanticipated side effects would be permanent and there's no way to predict how this will effect humans in the future. Also, it would change the parent-child relationship and would further increase the disparity between the rich elitists, and the lower class who would not be able to afford IGM.
As far as plants and crops, genetic engineering gives all seeds identical genetic structures. This means that any failure, as far as fungi, pests, and viruses, would be widespread. Also, due to wind and insects, the genetically modified crop seeds can be spread to fields of non-genetically modified crops. This could then cause the crops to cross-polinate, causing unforseen and irreversable side effects. Genetically engineered crops can also be harmful to organisms that live in soil and around fields. In terms of genetically modified food, the GE food has not been fully tested and contains substances from far outside the natural human diet. Additionally, there are many possible genetic mutations and potential allergies.
She lists many good, solid arguments, including gene therapy, a way in which to treat people for genetic diseases and defects, such as autoimmune and heart diseases. Also, genetic engineering has been able to produce stronger, more effective pharmaceutical products. Pregnant women can have a sort of genetic screening, so that they and their doctors may know ahead of time any genetic problems their child will have, providing time for preparation. In addition, through modification, the genetic strength of plants can be increased.
With the use of genetic engineering, humans would be able to modify their food and plants to make them healthier, faster growing, and more abundant. Genetic engineering allows scientist to locate an exact gene in one plant or animal and implant it into another plant or animal so that it may aquire that gene and improve in quality. Or genes may be altered within the plant or animal so that it may be more or less dominant. Healthy foods can become better tasting and unhealthy foods can be enriched with viatmins, minerals, and protein. Additionally, plants can be modified to grow faster, repel insects and herbicides, and require less water for growth. However, these things may come with a cost. By changing the genetic structures of food, allergens can spread and cause unexpected allergic reactions in people who previously did not experience them. Also, plants resistant to insects and herbicides may spread rampantly, wiping out natural, pre-existing plants.
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Thesis Statement
Genetic engineering, in both plants and humans, will reap numerous benefits, although some may question whether it is ethical or if the assets outweigh the side effects.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
The Good, the Bad, and the Genetically Engineered
http://articles.cnn.com/2000-01-13/health/biotech.food.one.wmd_1_genetic-engineering-food-supply-clare-hasler?_s=PM:HEALTH
"The Good, the Bad, and the Genetically Engineered." CNN. CNN, 13 Jan. 2000. Web. 26 Oct. 2011.
With the use of genetic engineering, humans would be able to modify their food and plants to make them healthier, faster growing, and more abundant. Genetic engineering allows scientist to locate an exact gene in one plant or animal and implant it into another plant or animal so that it may aquire that gene and improve in quality. Or genes may be altered within the plant or animal so that it may be more or less dominant. Healthy foods can become better tasting and unhealthy foods can be enriched with viatmins, minerals, and protein. Additionally, plants can be modified to grow faster, repel insects and herbicides, and require less water for growth. However, these things may come with a cost. By changing the genetic structures of food, allergens can spread and cause unexpected allergic reactions in people who previously did not experience them. Also, plants resistant to insects and herbicides may spread rampantly, wiping out natural, pre-existing plants.
The author's intent was to inform why genetic engineering is not catching on as fast as predicted, despite its many benefits. There was no clear bias.
"The Good, the Bad, and the Genetically Engineered." CNN. CNN, 13 Jan. 2000. Web. 26 Oct. 2011.
With the use of genetic engineering, humans would be able to modify their food and plants to make them healthier, faster growing, and more abundant. Genetic engineering allows scientist to locate an exact gene in one plant or animal and implant it into another plant or animal so that it may aquire that gene and improve in quality. Or genes may be altered within the plant or animal so that it may be more or less dominant. Healthy foods can become better tasting and unhealthy foods can be enriched with viatmins, minerals, and protein. Additionally, plants can be modified to grow faster, repel insects and herbicides, and require less water for growth. However, these things may come with a cost. By changing the genetic structures of food, allergens can spread and cause unexpected allergic reactions in people who previously did not experience them. Also, plants resistant to insects and herbicides may spread rampantly, wiping out natural, pre-existing plants.
The author's intent was to inform why genetic engineering is not catching on as fast as predicted, despite its many benefits. There was no clear bias.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Cons of Genetic Engineering
Franchino, Jen, et al. "The Cons of Genetic Engineering of Plants, Crops, and Genetically Engineered Food." Cotelligent
Genetic Engineering Project. University of Delaware, 8 May 2000. Web. 23 Oct. 2011.
In this article, the numerous drawbacks of genetic engineering are listed. As far as plants and crops, genetic engineering gives all seeds identical genetic structures. This means that any failure, as far as fungi, pests, and viruses, would be widespread. Also, due to wind and insects, the genetically modified crop seeds can be spread to fields of non-genetically modified crops. This could then cause the crops to cross-polinate, causing unforseen and irreversable side effects. Genetically engineered crops can also be harmful to organisms that live in soil and around fields. In terms of genetically modified food, the GE food has not been fully tested and contains substances from far outside the natural human diet. Additionally, there are many possible genetic mutations and potential allergies.
The authors' intent was to inform of all sides of the genetic engineering argument. In this specific article, their intent was to inform people of the drawbacks of genetic engineering in crops, plants, and food. There was a clear bias against genetic engineering in this instance.
Pros of Genetic Engineering
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/benefits-of-genetic-engineering.html
Shandilya, Anju. "Benefits of Genetic Engineering." Buzzle. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Oct. 2011.
In this article, Shandilya describes all the benefits associated with Genetic Engineering. She lists many good, solid arguments, including gene therapy, a way in which to treat people for genetic diseases and defects, such as autoimmune and heart diseases. Also, genetic engineering has been able to produce stronger, more effective pharmaceutical products. Pregnant women can have a sort of genetic screening, so that they and their doctors may know ahead of time any genetic problems their child will have, providing time for preparation. In addition, through modification, the genetic strength of plants can be increased.
This article's intent was to inform people of why genetic engineering is beneficial. Shandilya was very biased toward genetic engineering.
Shandilya, Anju. "Benefits of Genetic Engineering." Buzzle. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Oct. 2011.
In this article, Shandilya describes all the benefits associated with Genetic Engineering. She lists many good, solid arguments, including gene therapy, a way in which to treat people for genetic diseases and defects, such as autoimmune and heart diseases. Also, genetic engineering has been able to produce stronger, more effective pharmaceutical products. Pregnant women can have a sort of genetic screening, so that they and their doctors may know ahead of time any genetic problems their child will have, providing time for preparation. In addition, through modification, the genetic strength of plants can be increased.
This article's intent was to inform people of why genetic engineering is beneficial. Shandilya was very biased toward genetic engineering.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Inheritable Genetic Modification
http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=287
"Inheritable Genetic Modification Argument Pro and Con." Center for Genetics and Society. Center for Genetics and Society, 1 June 2006. Web. 13 Oct. 2011.
In this article, the different pros and cons of inheritable genetic modification are stated. On one hand, if genetic modification were allowed, parents could choose to give their children more desirable traits, such as intelligence, good health, or athleticism. It could also help parents avoid passing on defective genes or dangerous genetic disease. In addition, if inheritable genetic modification were legal, it would prevent any "black markets" for genetic engineering. On the other hand, IGM is irreversable, so unanticipated side effects would be permanent and there's no way to predict how this will effect humans in the future. Also, it would change the parent-child relationship and would further increase the disparity between the rich elitists, and the lower class who would not be able to afford IGM.
The authors intent was to inform people of the pros and cons of inheritable genetic modificaiton. There were no clear biases.
"Inheritable Genetic Modification Argument Pro and Con." Center for Genetics and Society. Center for Genetics and Society, 1 June 2006. Web. 13 Oct. 2011.
In this article, the different pros and cons of inheritable genetic modification are stated. On one hand, if genetic modification were allowed, parents could choose to give their children more desirable traits, such as intelligence, good health, or athleticism. It could also help parents avoid passing on defective genes or dangerous genetic disease. In addition, if inheritable genetic modification were legal, it would prevent any "black markets" for genetic engineering. On the other hand, IGM is irreversable, so unanticipated side effects would be permanent and there's no way to predict how this will effect humans in the future. Also, it would change the parent-child relationship and would further increase the disparity between the rich elitists, and the lower class who would not be able to afford IGM.
The authors intent was to inform people of the pros and cons of inheritable genetic modificaiton. There were no clear biases.
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/agriculture/problem/genetic-engineering/
"Say No to Genetic Engineering." Greenpeace. Greenpeace International, n.d. Web. 12 Oct. 2011.
In this article, the Greenpeace Organization was stating reasons against the support of genetic engineering. They claim that by introducing new strains of genetically modified plants, these plants will spread unrestrained through the environment and will "contaminate" non-genetically engineered plants. Doing this will effect future generations in unforseen ways as their has not been enough research on the effects of genetically altered plants.
The author's intent was to persuade those who are pro-genetic engineering or on the fence that genetic modification of plants should not be allowed. There was a very clear bias.
"Say No to Genetic Engineering." Greenpeace. Greenpeace International, n.d. Web. 12 Oct. 2011.
In this article, the Greenpeace Organization was stating reasons against the support of genetic engineering. They claim that by introducing new strains of genetically modified plants, these plants will spread unrestrained through the environment and will "contaminate" non-genetically engineered plants. Doing this will effect future generations in unforseen ways as their has not been enough research on the effects of genetically altered plants.
The author's intent was to persuade those who are pro-genetic engineering or on the fence that genetic modification of plants should not be allowed. There was a very clear bias.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)