Fountain, Henry. “A First: Organs Tailor-Made With
Body’s Own Cells.” The New York Times.
The New York Times, 15 Sep. 2012. Web 15 Oct. 2012.
As the title suggests, this article discussed a medical
breakthrough: the implantation of organs fabricated by scientists outside of
the body, but with the body’s own cells.
The example discussed throughout the article describes a man, Mr.
Beyene, who had a cancerous growth in his windpipe and opted to undergo the
first transplant of a “bioartificial” organ, which ended up saving his
life. The bioartificial organs consist
of what scientists refer to as a scaffolding, based on the extracellular matrix
of a particular organ as observed from the organs of human cadavers and other
animals, which is designed and developed by scientists known as tissue
engineers. Then, to ensure that the
organ will not be rejected, cells are taken from the recipient and dripped via
pipette into the scaffold. Mr. Beyene’s
scaffold was made out of plastic and was shaped based on scans of his natural
windpipe. The piece of porous plastic
was able to become functional once Mr. Beyene’s own stem cells had been
injected. Since human stem cells are
able to become specialized cells specific to particular tissues, the cells were
able to adjust to perform the functions necessary for windpipe cells.
The scientists and doctors profiled in this article
suggested great hope for the future of this scientific field. Dr. Macchiarini wants “to go even further-to
harness the body’s repair mechanisms so that it can remake a damaged organ on
its own.” The future some researchers
are imagining provides great potential for the re-growth of organs with little
to know medical intervention. It is
possible that in the span of our lives, we will be able to receive organ
transplants that are made from our own cells, which would certainly extend the
human lifespan.
The article was, while fascinating, a little
long-winded. It was a little difficult
to understand the exact method used by doctors to implant Mr. Beyene’s
windpipe. Also, while the author did
brush upon the cost (up to half a million dollars), it would have been nice if
they had specified the cost, as that is a crucial factor to how quickly these
techniques will spread across the world and who they will be able to have an
impact on. I did enjoy the section ‘If
It Bleeds, It Lives’ as I felt that it logically explained the details of how
these biosynthetic parts truly have to have the “bio” aspect in order to
function properly.
Marika Chrisanthopoulos
ReplyDeleteAP Biology Comment on Review
October 16, 2012
Elizabeth McGough’s Review on ““A First: Organs Tailor-Made With Body’s Own Cells” By Henry Fountain, from The New York Times.
The article presented and described by Elizabeth was about a very interesting and appalling scientific discovery that will definitely have a major impact on the longevity and quality of lives of those in the future, as well as today. The article is about the new ability of scientists to fabricate organs outside of the body, but have them be created with the body’s own cells. The article contains an example of a man that opted to undergo the first transplant of a “bioartificial” organ, which ended up saving his life from a cancerous growth in his windpipe. While describing this article, one thing that Elizabeth did well was to talk about this man, Mr. Beyene, and his impressive surgery, including some of the scientific procedures used for it, including how his artificial organ was created out of his cells as well as of a “scaffold.” Another thing that Elizabeth did well in her analysis of this particular article was that she talked about the future in regards to this discovery, and quotes certain scientists, including Dr. Macchiarini, who wants “to go even further- to harness the body’s repair mechanisms so that it can remake a damaged organ on its own.” She also talks about how it was probably improve the span of our lives, as well as how this procedure could be modified to re-grow organs as well. Another thing that Elizabeth does well is that she critiques the article, talking about how during parts of the article, it was hard to follow what the author was saying in regards to the scientific aspects and procedures of this new discovery.
One thing that Elizabeth could have done better in her review of the article was that she could have explored more into the details of this procedure; she said that it was hard to follow the scientific details, so it would have been beneficial to us if she was able to provide us with more information about the scientific processes that we could understand. Another thing that she could have done better is that she could have given us more information about where and when these procedures were going in effect, as well as who was eligible to receive these treatments. It would have beneficial to hear more about the cost; Elizabeth talks about how the cost was not specified, but it would have been better to hear more inquiry about this issue instead of just noting it.
One thing that I learned from this article and Elizabeth’s review is that organs can be regenerated using cells taken from inside the body, and that this new scientific discovery can be implemented to save and enlarge the longevity and quality of the lives of many. The interesting thing about this procedure, although it may be tweaked for differing organs, is that it can be made of materials from outside the body as well as those inside the body. The organs consist of what scientists refer to as a scaffolding, which is made out of synthesized materials, and then cells from inside the body are inserted to make sure that it is not rejected from the body.
Nastaran Soroori
ReplyDeleteAP Biology Comment
October 16, 2012
“A First: Organs Tailor-Made With Body’s Own Cells” By Henry Fountain, from The New York Times presented by Elizabeth.
The article on this new discovery on the implantation of organs was discovered by scientists and carried out in the laboratory. The organs are made outside the body and use the body’s own cells. I thought the review was very interesting and well presented. The information was understandable for the reader. I thought the fact that having these new organs engineered is really amazing especially if it can prolong your life. The process is very intriguing as well, the bioartificial organs, based on the extracellular matrix of a particular organ as observed from the organs of human cadavers and other animals. They are then designed and developed by scientists known as tissue engineers. The body would not reject the new organ because cells have been taken from the recipient and dripped into the scaffold.
The review could have been improved if the process could have been better explained. It was difficult to understand what had to be done in order for the new organ to be created. Also, I think the cost and the availability could have been explored because the cost and availability becomes important in order for people to know if it is possible to have this done.
I was impressed by the idea that one day in the future scientists would be able to have the body repair itself. Dr. Macchiarini wants “to go even further-to harness the body’s repair mechanisms so that it can remake a damaged organ on its own.” The future provides great potential for the re-growth of organs.
A.P. Biology: Gina Elbert
ReplyDeleteThis review was extremely well-written, with its most outstanding aspects being its concise summary and example of biosynthetic organs, its precise critique of the article, and finally, its use of vocabulary terms we have used in class. The reviewer’s summary of the article was very clear and used the example of Mr. Beyene, who is central to the article itself, to simultaneously explain the issue. She used parts of Mr. Beyene’s story to explain how different parts of the organs, such as the scaffolding, are made and put into use. The critique of the article was also effective, because it pointed out an important omission made in the article that I had not caught otherwise. The reviewer desires a more precise measure of cost for the biosynthetic organ procedures, which I agree with, because, as she said, cost is always (and most likely will always be) an important factor that either expands or limits the ability of a person to achieve something. Finally, the reviewer used vocabulary terms, such as “extracellular matrix,” that connected the information to what we learn in class.
One thing that the reviewer could have done would have been to describe the issues involved with doing research upon biosynthetic organs. Cost is not the only factor, as rejection of the organ, as well as the development of a blood vessel network that could carry nutrients from one part of the organ to another, as well as to the rest of body. Also, the reviewer could have emphasized more how rare the procedure of biosynthesis is. While she explained the important of it to the world, she could have underlined the fact that it may take years to perfect this project and that while a few people were treated, millions of others are still in need of help.
The aspect of the article that most impressed me was the fact that the biosynthetic organ transplant worked for Mr. Beyene. This surprised me, because I knew that this kind of procedure was still in the fledgling stage and was still being developed. The fact that it helped an actual person, who is capable of living a close-to-normal life, was very striking and gave credibility to the idea of biosynthesis.
This reviewer does a fantastic job of presenting the article concisely and effectively, even though the article itself was, as she aptly pointed out, written in a confusing manner. That she chose a topic that is so relevant to the topic of biology, and I appreciated seeing the vocabulary that we used in class. It was also nice that she used a personal example to draw a bigger picture on how this technology works. I enjoyed seeing direct quotes from scientists talking about the future of this impressive technology.
ReplyDeleteOne thing she could have done better was in presenting how exactly the technology works. Besides the fact that it is implementation of an artificial organ that was made into use by the person's own cells. Since this is so fascinating and relevant, I would have appreciated more detail. Another thing that came up to mind when I was reading this is if there is a moral debate about this. I imagine that some religious groups may be against creating a portion of human body, and would have been interested in hearing what they had to say.
The technology is a very fascinating and promising one. I was especially impressed that the artificial organ becomes part of the human body system almost because the cells are able to work in them. That it helped an actual person to live a moral life was very interesting. Body could repair itself.