what do you know about biology?
well it deals with societies.
Changing Things
Modifying Things
should we do this?
can we change the way we look?
where is it written in a book?
Who chooses if it is right or wrong?
I do not know but the book will be long
should we do this?
We are messing with our food
which is not necessarily good
messing with Creatures
for no so good features
the question is should we do this?
Imagine that you can choose what your baby would look like, what he or she could be good at and even chose its gender. But do you think all this is fair? Genetically modifying children takes away those children’s autonomy, fairness, and individuality and thus should be banned.
Autonomy is the right to self govern according to Wikipedia. So how can we steal this from our children? Well, we have the technology to make children stronger, smarter, better, and even choosing the sex of the child. If a parent decides to makeup the genes of their child the parents would be taking away the chance for the child to pick what he or she would like to be. For example, if we make a child really good at a sport, then it is likely that the parents or the child its self would be pushed to pick that sport instead of choosing what ever they really want to choose. By being pushed and influenced by others the child is losing its autonomy. Another example is that sometimes parents did not become what they wanted to become and sometimes they push their kids to do what they wanted to become, instead of letting them choose what they want. It is very wrong to think or to choose for someone that is not there.
The second question is if all this really fair. One place that this would apply would be in sports. Many athletes would be eager to make them self better and is there a reason to stop them from doing it? The only reason why they should not is because it is unfair and gives an advantage to those who are modified. Another thing is that only rich people would be able to afford this which does not give the poor any chance. Just another example how the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But its not just sport it is also your intelligence. We can also make us smarter but like the sports, it is expensive. This would mean that only the rich would be the only one that would obtain it and the poor would not. The intelligence can be passed down generations, which in the future there might be to subspecies. We do not want to divide our world more than it already is.
Individuality is the thing that makes you you, but what would have if someone would steal that away from you? When a parent decides to make up a child genetically they are steal away their individuality. They are stealing the part that make them themselves and by modifying the child the parent is making what they want the child to be. In other words they are making their own children. If individuality is lost so is their way of thinking, which means that everyone would think alike and that is not good. Everyone would be a follower and no one would challenge other people’s ideas. We would also lose humanities like art and other things that make us human. Having everyone the same is not a good idea.
So think about whether you would like your kid to be genetically modified. It will help in the short run but destroy us in the long run. No one has the right to steal someone’s autonomy, fairness, and individuality. Being perfect have great consequences.
Kinitz, Edvard. "Why genetic engineering is advantageous for humankind." GEENOR. 19 Nov. 2000, http://www.geneticengineering.org/isgood/default.htm
This article tells what will happen in the future if genetic engineering kept growing. It talks about life in the future and why we need genetic engineering to grow as a society. Also, it says that we could find cures and even genetically modify our food, so that our food can grow faster.
The source is kind of reliable because it does not talk about the author but the guy knows what he is saying. This source is useful if you want to get an idea about what is going to happen in the future. The source is a little bias against religion, which may effect some information. It just wants to inform you.
In the end this source actually did help me. It helped me with prediction I can use for my blog. This source made me think a lot about my topic because I am usually against genetic engineering but this showed me all the benefits of it.
Ballin, Camillo. "Where the Catholic Church Stands on Genetic Issues." Letter to the president. 9 Feb. 2006. http://www.catholic-church.org/kuwait/seminar_cairo.htm
Out of all my sources this one is the only letter. This letter explains the church’s beliefs and what is acceptable to them. The letter is a must read for all Catholics and is recommended to everyone.
The source really helped me with the blog that we needed to write about to different sides. The source did not give me information about my topic but it did give me an opinion about my topic. The letter comes from a bishop which is reliable. It a good source period.
This source did not only help me in my research, it helped me as a person. I indeed am a catholic and I was aware that the church was against it but know I know the reasons why. So I agree with the church that we should not genetic engineer only if it will produce cures for untreatable diseases.
"Pros and cons." Genetic Engineering: the Human's playground. 2004. http://library.thinkquest.org/04apr/00774/en/index.html
This was one of the best sources you can use when you researching this topic. The website has everything you need. It gives little descriptions of history, usage, pros and cons, and many more. This also includes pictures and diagrams showing how everything works. It is the best site to visit when you do not know anything about this topic
When I came across this website I have already learned most of the things they had there so it did not help me out as much as I wanted to. The website is trying to give you the basic information and does a pretty good job at it.
As I have mention before the source did not help me as much as I wanted to because I already knew the background. The only part that did help me was the pros and cons. They did a fine job giving example of each one. It was good information but did not change the way I think about my topic.
"Human Genetic Engineering." All about popular issues. 2002-2008. http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/human-genetic-engineering.htm
The article is separated into four parts. The first part is a quick overview on genetic engineering and how it had become go big in the last few years. After first one it talks about genetic engineering and the government. The third one is explaining the problems with genetic engineering and the last part is their own opinion on the topic.
The source helped in the part of the problem and the government and rest I already knew so it was not that helpful. This, like most of my source, is an article but the bad thing about this is that it is bias towards the church. Other than that it is a good source.
This source really helped me. Not many articles talked about the government in genetic engineering but this one did. The source is bias towards the church but the letter helped me understand it more.
"Human Genetics Research." All about popular issues. 2002-2008. http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/human-genetics-research-faq.htm
This article is talking about the ethical issues genetic engineering will bring. The article also explains what the church does not permit. If someone asked about this article I would say it is a good article if you find genetic engineering to be ethically wrong.
The source was pretty helpful because it gave a side of my topic. Other sources give more than one side but this source does not. Due to the fact that the article was made by the church, the source is bias. Another thing about the source is that it is trying to convince you that genetic engineering is unethical.
The article helped me a little because I have already read the other source about the church and genetics. I use the parts that were not in the letter in my blogs. One thing that I did get out of this is the moral reasons why we should not genetic engineer.
"FDA to review genetically engineered animals as food." Chron. 18 Sept. 2008. 20 Sept. 2008
This article helped me the most out of all the rest. It talks about genetically engineered animals as food. This also says that the government will not label this meat and that it is safe to eat. I would say that every person should read this because the saying goes “you are what you eat.”
The article was so much different from the others because it is one of the few that talks about genetic modified foods. This article wants to inform people what the government is doing and that we should as lest try to stop them or make it public.
The article was so good that it even helped me. Now I am more aware what is happening in the meat world. I have used this in a lot of different blogs. Some of genetic engineering is good but I do not want them messing with what I eat.
Dear Shoppers,
Before you get that piece of meat take a minute to think where it really came from and if it was the real animal or just something engineered by humans. Many people just get what they want without actually knowing what it really is. That’s why I am writing to you today shopper, so you can start thinking what you are actually eating. Many people say” you are what you eat” so what are we?
Today many of our meats and other foods are genetically engineered. This means that you might think that you are eating beef but in reality you are eating beef with pig gene in it. Is that what you would like? I personally would not. People need to be aware what they are eating since most of the general store is constituted of genetically modified food. The FDA recently said that more genetically modified food would be in the market. The bad news is that that meat will not be labeled. So how is person going to know if it is modified? One way you can prevent that is by buying organic meats and cheese. This is degenerating our way of living and it should be changed.
I hope now most shoppers will open up their eyes to the truth and realize what they are eating. We have messed with our food source, how will that affect us in the future? We still do not know but when that day comes it might be too late.
Sincerely,
Alan Felix
Key: The spares is the people that think that both benefits and harmful effects are equal. The triangle are the people that the harmful results will outweigh the benefits of genetic engineering. The diamonds are the people that think that the benefits will out weigh the harmful results.
“Run!” yelled Dr. Grant as the giant T-Rex broke out of its cage. This scene is from Jurassic Park, one of the best classics we ever had. The director Steven Spielberg made this movie realistic and most of all he entertained so many people. He has won three Oscars and has been nominated over 70 times. Spielberg is a famous director and producer. Other movies that he has produced are Saving Private Ryan, E.T., and Sherk. The actors in Jurassic Park help the viewers feel the same pain they felt. The cast members were Sam Neill, Jeff Goldblum, Richard Attenborough, Laura Dern, Joseph Mazzello, Ariana Richards. All of them helped in one form or another. The genre of the movie was Science-Fiction. In other words the movie is very hypothetical.
I think Jurassic Park is a must see because it is constitutes of action and a good story line. The story starts of in a small isolated island. There some scientist clone and genetically engineered dinosaurs for an amusement park. Some thing bad happens and the dinosaurs break out and over run the island. One of the best scenes in the movie is the part when the T-Rex broke out and is chasing the rest of the people. There is a lot action to explain it all so I recommend watching it.
The writer did know about genetic engineering thanks to his education in Harvard. He had this to say “I believe that science is a wonderfully powerful, but distinctly limited tool.” I completely agree with him due to the fact that science helps us in some places but we have to be careful in others.
When it comes down to genetic engineering there are two main sides to the issues. One of the sides is the church’s point of view. We are going to talk about the Catholic Church. Different churches have different opinions. The other side would be the scientists and the people that support genetic engineering. In the two different opinions there are some things that are the same.
The similarity of both sides is the agriculture. Both the scientists and the church believe that genetically engineered foods can help people. Camillo Ballin, a bishop that wrote to the president explaining what the church thought about this topic, said that the church accepts technology that protect human life and that help it. Edvard Kinitz, a scientist, explains that genetically engineered foods can stop world hunger. Both of these opinions agree that genetically engineered food can potentially help the human race (Camillo Ballin, in a letter)(Edvard Kinitz http://www.geneticengineering.org/isgood/default.htm).
When it comes down to genetic engineering human both sides have different ideas. The Church implies that we should not sacrifice someone’s life for science. The Church does want science to keep going and find cures that we have not yet found. While, Edvard believes that we need to genetically modify ourselves to live in the future. He thinks by genetically modifying ourselves we can keep up with the intelligent of the computers, or we can modify our body to adapt to a different planet. By doing such things it will enhance the way we live. He also believes that genetic engineering is the key for cures that we do not have today. The different sides orient them selves by their beliefs (Camillo Ballin, in a letter)(Edvard Kinitz http://www.geneticengineering.org/isgood/default.htm).
The two different sides think completely different but they do have some common ground. Everyone has their own opinion.
Ballin, Camillo. "Where the Catholic Church Stands on Genetic Issues." Letter to the president. 9 Feb. 2006.
Kinitz, Edvard. "Why genetic engineering is advantageous for humankind." GEENOR. 19 Nov. 2000.
When we chose the topics for the blogs I knew I wanted to research something sciences related. I narrowed my options to two main things, cloning or genetic engineering. I chose genetic engineering because I have heard a lot about it but never knew what it actual was. Once I started researching I found a lot of things on it and there were always two main sides; one was for genetic engineering and the other one was against genetic engineering. I felt a little pushed toward the side that is against genetic engineering because of my religion.
Most of the things I found, when I was researching had, did not agree with my idea of ethical. For example, changing the way a baby should looks or making it genetically better then others. If you ask me I say we are trying to play God. We are trying to advance our society but we are doing it in the wrong way. I did not like this. Other information that I found was not that bad but it is not good. The other thing that I found was that we genetically modify food to our advantage. We have done this to corn, tomatoes, and even to some animals. I personally do not what to eat an animal with another animal’s gene in it. I also found out that that kind of meat is not labeled, so we could be eating it right now and not even be aware of it. This is what I have so far.
After all the research I have done I still have some question to look for. I still do not know the laws behind it all. One example is to find who makes the laws or something thing like that. I will find this in quarter two. I was my personally opinion thanks for reading.
P.S. sorry for the way the blog looks I do not know how to fix it
As the world moves on so does the potential of changing its genetic structure. Currently humans are now able to change genetically the appearance of an unborn. We should not genetically modify humans because it takes away our individuality, may create the “perfect” race, and will add ethical issues.
Scientists have discovered that we can change the appearance of a baby that is still in the mother’s womb. We have the ability to change the eye color, the hair color, and even intelligent. In recent studies we can also change the behavior and a person’s character, but until what point makes you, you. Once someone changes certain things like these he or she is not them selves anymore. If everyone started altering their babies to be the perfect baby, then everyone would look the same and individuality would be lost. Someone’s special gift would be just another trait for a “perfect” baby. When those babies reproduce their babies will also carry those traits, changing the gene pool (http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/human-genetic-engineering.htm). Does the world really want to lose its individuality?
In 1945 Adolf Hitler tried to create the “perfect” race. Hitler believed that everyone with blue eyes and blond hair was perfect but those who did not have that needed to be eliminated. Hitler killed more than 43 million people to try to reach his goal but never made it (http://library.thinkquest.org/04apr/00774/en/controversy_con.html). Is America trying to create a perfect race like Hitler? By altering the next generation of babies to be perfect we, in other words, are trying to change the way everyone looks, thinks and acts. This would be a great calamity if there were going to happen. We would become the same people that we once fought against. We should think about what our next move is so that history does not repeat its self.
A big question that pops up in this is, are we playing God by doing this? Many ethical issues are brought up when this topic is mention. It is NOT ethical or moral to change someone genetically when that person can not talk or speak for its self. What can a baby do if it is inside the mother? Are trying to play God by trying to create our very own children? We should not mess with a life because it is sacred. But most of these ethics situations depend a lot on what belief someone has (http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/human-genetics-research-faq.htm). This is something someone should ponder about.
Further more, genetically modified human should not be permitted. If America wants to keep its individuality and its ethical morals, then they should stop with genetic engineering. History should not repeat its self.
My survey for genetic engineering was simple and strait forward. The first question I asked was gender. That good to know because you know who is more informed, girls or boys? The second question I asked was what grade level they were in. I asked that because of my arbitrary behavior. After that I asked if you know what genetic engineering is. That may sound banal but you will be surprised on the results. The other two questions were more in deep. One was if you think genetic engineering is ethical and the other was would you eat genetically modified food.
Now let’s see the results. I surveyed 12 people, 5 girls and 7 boys. Out of the 5 girls 4 of them did know what genetic engineering was. While only 4 of the guys knew what it was. This implies that girls are more informed then boys. Another thing I noticed was that the higher grade levels knew what it was while the lower levels like freshmen did not. This means that genetics is taught at a higher grade level. On the question talking about ethics 4 of the 5 girls say it was perfectly fine to mess with genes. When I asked the boys this question, only 2 out of the 7 said it was ethical. That’s pretty interesting. On the final question 3 girls would eat genetically modified food and 1 might eat it. For the boys only 2 would eat it, 3 won’t eat it and 2 might eat it. One thing that might have affected my data was if they were with friends. Usually people tend to copy one any other cause their too lazy or just don’t want to do it. I think that happened with the girls. Another thing was that some people marked that they did know what genetic engineering was when they actually didn’t know. It was interesting to see what I got.
On my next few blogs I will work on informing the people about genetic engineering and about thinking freely. I thought there was going to be more people against it then for it but I learned a lot in this survey.
For genetic engineering there are a lot of websites. The best website for a person that is interested in genetic engineering is http://www.genengnews.com/ because it is easy to use, it is up to date, and has reliable information.
The website is a business in which was crated in 1981. There job is to altruistically inform the public about what is happening today with genetic engineering and biotechnology. You can subscribe to them to get there magazines. Someone can find this information online or on print from Gen. The issues come out two times a month but only once in July, August, and December so this magazines are current. There are a few sponsors and they are all science base. This website is laid out so it is easy to use but some times it is difficult to find information. It has the main topics on the top of the website that will lead you in your search. The website in not really visual appealing but it will inform you. This website is banal compared to other websites. Also since the website has articles, they are well right and edited. The information on the website is correct but there does seem to have a bias opinion towards genetic engineering. The website favors genetic engineering. This website is good for finding recent information on genetic engineering or if you just want to learn about it.
In conclusion the website look credible but its sponsors and all the people working on it has a PHD. The main reason why it is credible is because it is constantly up to date. Visit this website.
Today we are still modifying and messing with genes. What you might ask? Well currently scientists are trying to break the genetic code for the potatoes. It sounds so simply but it is one of the hardest tasks scientists have faced. The potato has 840 million DNA base pairs, while humans have 3 billion DNA pairs. In other words potatoes are pretty sophisticated. Breaking this code is really important. Potatoes are the world’s third most important crop under wheat and rice. If we can break the code we can make it resistant against droughts and diseases. Also the cost of potatoes will go down.
Another very important issue we are debating is engineering animals as food. The government is saying that we are close to allowing genetically modified animals as food. So we would put in a gene from another animal to elicit a certain trait. For example the might add in a gene to a fish so it can grow faster. This being said the government also says that this meat will not be labeled. So you might get a genetically modified piece of meat and you do not even know it. Jean Halloran, the director of food policy for Consumers Union had this to say, "They are talking about pigs that are going to have mouse genes in them, and this is not going to be labeled?” Can the government really exploit the public like that? Unless we do something about this we might as well eat mouse genes.
The beginning of genetic engineering opened doors that we would never imaged come be opened. The first time genetic engineering techniques were applied was in 1970. Ever since then humans now have the power to destroy something from the inside as well as the outside. The numbers of doors are endlessness. Having control of genetics means you can make a slow growing plant fast or make a cow give more milk. With something this big wouldn’t you think the government should inform the public? Well they don’t. Most of genetic engineering is under military use which limits the informant we obtain. In 1970 (well it all began) leaders of biomedical research had an encounter to discuss the social and ethical issues. As strikes being formed genetic engineers died down but they were soon working for the National Institutes of Heath in 1976. Controversy popped up every where. As smart as the scientist are they were able to find loopholes to get around this. Some scientists adamantly believe that genetic engineer will do well. The scientists said that thanks to genetic engineering we have made a vaccine for hepatitis B, and that in the future we might find a cure for AIDS or malaria.
In 1994 the genetically engineered tomatoes so they can be on the selves for a long period of time. This of course made the headlines. Should we genetically modify our food? In some cases it can help, for example they sprayed cotton with something called herbicides which alters the cotton’s DNA so that is can be resistant to bromoxynil. They sprayed millions of acres with that. But there is a downside to this. Herbicides have toxics that mess with the plants and animals. It also contaminates water supplies and destroys wildlife habitats. So as you can tell genetic engineering has its ups and downs just like everything else. One can learn from the past so we won’t make that mistake again.
