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.
Friday, October 7, 2011
Reflection
My past six blog posts have been about Reverse Discrimination, Human Cloning, Genetic Engineering, Death Penalty, Welfare Abuse, and Assisted Suicide. I do not feel particulary strongly about Reverse Discrimination and I also don't believe that there would be very much information to be found on it. While I'm opposed to the Death Penalty, I also understand why it's used and see some of the necessity of it. Despite my opposition to Welfare Abuse, it's not a topic that interests me enough to want to research it more. As far as Assisted Suicide, I find myself a little on the fence. For the most part, I disagree with its use, but I can find situational justification for it. I find that the topics of Human Cloning and Genetic Engineering to be closely related. However, when it comes to the two, I am more interested in and feel more strongly about Genetic Engineering. I believe this is a good topic for me and it is the topic that I plan to write my essay about.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Assisted Suicide
http://janestclair.net/about/articles/no-such-thing-as-an-assisted-suicide/
"Why There is No Such Thing as Assisted Suicide." Jane St. Clair. N.p., 2007. Web. 29 Sept. 2011.
In this article, the author argues that there is no justification for assisted suicide and that the term in and of itself is faulty. Due to its very nature, assisted suicide should actually be considered homicide or being an "accessory before the act." The author also raised the point that assisted suicide discourages the medical mantra of always searching for a new treatment and hoping for a medical miracle. In addition, patients who ask for euthanasia are often depressed, and should seek the appropriate treatment. Finally, the author pointed out the implications and the effects that would come with living in a society where suicide is an acceptable alternative and doctors, rather than treating and healing people, help end their lives.
The author's intent was to dissuade people from accepting assisted suicide, aimed towards anyone for assisted suicide. There was a very clear bias against assisted suicide.
I think this would be a good article, because its a topic that I have always been unsure on, and doing more research would help me to make a decision as to where I stand on the issue. I think this is a good article for other people because assisted suicide is common topic of debate and we should all be informed on it, as we may encounter it in out lives some day.
"Why There is No Such Thing as Assisted Suicide." Jane St. Clair. N.p., 2007. Web. 29 Sept. 2011.
In this article, the author argues that there is no justification for assisted suicide and that the term in and of itself is faulty. Due to its very nature, assisted suicide should actually be considered homicide or being an "accessory before the act." The author also raised the point that assisted suicide discourages the medical mantra of always searching for a new treatment and hoping for a medical miracle. In addition, patients who ask for euthanasia are often depressed, and should seek the appropriate treatment. Finally, the author pointed out the implications and the effects that would come with living in a society where suicide is an acceptable alternative and doctors, rather than treating and healing people, help end their lives.
The author's intent was to dissuade people from accepting assisted suicide, aimed towards anyone for assisted suicide. There was a very clear bias against assisted suicide.
I think this would be a good article, because its a topic that I have always been unsure on, and doing more research would help me to make a decision as to where I stand on the issue. I think this is a good article for other people because assisted suicide is common topic of debate and we should all be informed on it, as we may encounter it in out lives some day.
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Welfare Abuse
http://www.columbian.com/news/2011/mar/03/end-welfare-abuse/
"In Our View: End Welfare Abuse." The Columbian. N.p., 3 Mar. 2011. Web. 28 Sept. 2011.
In the article "End Welfare Abuse" the author describes a new law taking effect that will help prevent people from abusing welfare. Welfare recipients recieve electronic benefits transfer cards, or EBTs. These work rather like a debt card, the user is able to swipe it to make purchases and money is added to the account monthly. The problem with EBTs, though, is that there is no control over where the cards are being used. Consequently, some people have been using their cards to buy drugs, alcohol, tobacco products, tattoos, pay bail, and at strip clubs, rather than for food and other essentials. Therefore, to prevent this from happening Senate Bill 5327 would forbid the use of EBT cards at taverns, liquor stores, gambling facilites, and other such establishments. In doing so, money will be saved for those who acually need and correctly use welfare.
The author's intent was to inform people about kinds of welfare abuse, as well as Senate Bill 5327 and how it would be beneficial. The intended audience was anyone learning about welfare abuse. The author was very biased towards the use of Senate Bill 5327 and biased against welfare abuse.
I thought this was a good article because I'm very against people taking assistance that other people need for their own selfish purposes. This would be a good article for other people because this will effect us all when we have to pay taxes that in part will go to welfare funds.
"In Our View: End Welfare Abuse." The Columbian. N.p., 3 Mar. 2011. Web. 28 Sept. 2011.
In the article "End Welfare Abuse" the author describes a new law taking effect that will help prevent people from abusing welfare. Welfare recipients recieve electronic benefits transfer cards, or EBTs. These work rather like a debt card, the user is able to swipe it to make purchases and money is added to the account monthly. The problem with EBTs, though, is that there is no control over where the cards are being used. Consequently, some people have been using their cards to buy drugs, alcohol, tobacco products, tattoos, pay bail, and at strip clubs, rather than for food and other essentials. Therefore, to prevent this from happening Senate Bill 5327 would forbid the use of EBT cards at taverns, liquor stores, gambling facilites, and other such establishments. In doing so, money will be saved for those who acually need and correctly use welfare.
The author's intent was to inform people about kinds of welfare abuse, as well as Senate Bill 5327 and how it would be beneficial. The intended audience was anyone learning about welfare abuse. The author was very biased towards the use of Senate Bill 5327 and biased against welfare abuse.
I thought this was a good article because I'm very against people taking assistance that other people need for their own selfish purposes. This would be a good article for other people because this will effect us all when we have to pay taxes that in part will go to welfare funds.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Death Penalty
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2007/11/10/injection-of-reflection.html
Thomas, Evan. "Injection of Reflection." The Daily Beast. Newsweek, 10 Nov. 2011. Web. 21 Sept. 2011.
In "Injection of Reflection" Evan Thomas begins by discussing the decreasing trend of using a death penalty. Highlighting the various forms of execution that have been previously been used, Thomas goes on to offer an explanation for the growing dissociation with death penalties. Many people believe that the current method, death by injection, is not always completely effective and painless, categorizing it as cruel and unusual punishment. Thomas then described the new injection being considered in some states, although he concluded the article by questioning whether it would really be humane.
Thomas' intent was to inform the general public of the different forms of executions used in the death penalty and why they are not used or should not be used. The article was biased against using a death penalty.
I believe this to be a good article for me because I do not believe in using the death penalty. This would also be a good article for others because its beginning to become a more popular topic of conversation.
Thomas, Evan. "Injection of Reflection." The Daily Beast. Newsweek, 10 Nov. 2011. Web. 21 Sept. 2011.
In "Injection of Reflection" Evan Thomas begins by discussing the decreasing trend of using a death penalty. Highlighting the various forms of execution that have been previously been used, Thomas goes on to offer an explanation for the growing dissociation with death penalties. Many people believe that the current method, death by injection, is not always completely effective and painless, categorizing it as cruel and unusual punishment. Thomas then described the new injection being considered in some states, although he concluded the article by questioning whether it would really be humane.
Thomas' intent was to inform the general public of the different forms of executions used in the death penalty and why they are not used or should not be used. The article was biased against using a death penalty.
I believe this to be a good article for me because I do not believe in using the death penalty. This would also be a good article for others because its beginning to become a more popular topic of conversation.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Genetic Engineering
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/pros-and-cons-of-genetic-engineering.html
Oak, Manalai. "Pros and Cons of Genetic Engineering." Buzzle.com. Buzzle.com, n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2011.
In the article "Pros and Cons of Genetic Engineering," by Manalai Oaks, the author states different reasons why one should support or remonstrate genetic engineering. First, Oaks depicts a variety of reasons to promote genetic engineering. For plant use, it can make crops more durable and easily grown as well as increasing nutritional and medicinal value. In human use, it can strengthen beneficial traits and subdue more malignant ones. It could even bring about permanent cures to disease. On the other hand, in the case of plant modification, unpredictable genetic mutations could damage plants, decrease nutritional value, and possibly introduce newer, more resistant disease. It could also harm naturally grown plants. As for human genetic modification, capricious side effects could occur and the value of human individuality would sharply decline should everyone be able to pick their own traits or the traits of their children.
Oaks intent was to share why or why not a person should endorse genetic engineering. The intended audience would have been anyone searching for information on genetic engineering. There were no clear biases in the article. Both sides of the argument were well represented.
I found this to be a very good article. I find genetic engineering to be an important subject. Personally, I am contrary to its use in humans and I agree with all the statments made against it. I think this would be a good article for others as well due to the fact that its becoming more technologically possible and it will be a problem that will need to be settled in the near future.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Cloning
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-science/genetics-molecular-medicine/related-policy-topics/stem-cell-research/human-cloning.page
"Human Cloning." American Medical Association. American Medical Association, 2011. Web. 15 Sept. 2011.
In the article, "Human Cloning," the author illuminates the process of cloning and its effects. Briefly touching on the history of cloning, the author provides several statistics on the success rate of cloning. While the cloning of animals can be beneficial, attributed to its potential medical uses, human cloning is less advantegous. Due to the high risk of failure, the author feels that human cloning is risky, at best. Should human cloning occur and, as is most likely, prove to be fruitless, then scientific process would be hindered.
The intent of the author seemed to be to point out the benefits of cloning, but the drawbacks of human cloning, although the intended audience appeared to be ambiguous.
There were two discernable biases in this article. The author was very pro-cloning, but sought to discourage the use of human cloning.
I believe this to be a good article for me. It provided specific information on the process of cloning and all its risks and benefits. I also believe this would be a good topic for other people, as it is becoming an ever prevalent issue in the world today.
"Human Cloning." American Medical Association. American Medical Association, 2011. Web. 15 Sept. 2011.
In the article, "Human Cloning," the author illuminates the process of cloning and its effects. Briefly touching on the history of cloning, the author provides several statistics on the success rate of cloning. While the cloning of animals can be beneficial, attributed to its potential medical uses, human cloning is less advantegous. Due to the high risk of failure, the author feels that human cloning is risky, at best. Should human cloning occur and, as is most likely, prove to be fruitless, then scientific process would be hindered.
The intent of the author seemed to be to point out the benefits of cloning, but the drawbacks of human cloning, although the intended audience appeared to be ambiguous.
There were two discernable biases in this article. The author was very pro-cloning, but sought to discourage the use of human cloning.
I believe this to be a good article for me. It provided specific information on the process of cloning and all its risks and benefits. I also believe this would be a good topic for other people, as it is becoming an ever prevalent issue in the world today.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Reverse Discrimination
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30462129/ns/us_news-life/t/does-affirmative-action-punish-whites/ "Does affirmitive action punish whites?." msnbc.com. n.p., 28 Apr. 2009. Web. 13 Sept. 2011. In this article, the author is describing several instances of reverse discrimination, or discrimination against those belonging to a majority group. The article highlights different cases of Caucasian people complaining of being denied college acceptance, jobs, and promotions due to their non-minority ethnic descent. In the article, there is considerable debate as to whether or not using ethnic profiling to give equal opportunities to minorities is actually depriving people of majority of said opportunities. The author's intent was to inform the public of the history of problems concerning reverse discrimination, although seemed to be no specific audience to whom the author was aiming the article at. Overall, the article seemed rather unbiased, showing no tendency toward either side of the argument. The author merely stated occurances of declared discrimination and offered arguments from a variety of people, claiming arguments for both sides of the issue. Personally, while I found the article fascinating, I do not believe this would be a good topic for myself. I have never encountered reverse discrimination before in my life, nor is it an issue that particularly bothers me. For others, I feel this could potentially be used as a topic, especially seeing as that as we prepare to go to college or find jobs in the "real world," more opportunites to be on the negative side of reverse discrimination will present themselves. However, unless it is an issue that you feel personally about, I would not suggest using it. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)