World’s Biggest Animal Cloning Center Set for ’16 in a Skeptical China
Reviewed By Trevor Pettit
Northwest China’s port city of Tianjin is set to become host to the world’s biggest animal cloning center this upcoming year. China’s Boyalife Group and South Korea’s Sooam Biotech have set foot in a venture to create the world’s largest factory farming project. The compounds, consisting of a laboratory, gene-bank, and museum, will “eventually churn out up to a million beef cattle embryos a year, as well as sniffer dogs, racehorses and other animals” (Owen Guo, New York Times). This enormous project is attached to a projected cost of $500 million.
The Chinese public has so far been anxious regarding the booming factory farming industry. Many Chinese citizens have posted their concerns with Boyalife Group and Sooam Biotech’s collaborative project across social media; however, factory farming is already playing a large role in China’s produce, and it could serve to help quell public food safety concerns. For example, many strawberries and bananas sold across China are products of cloning technology. Furthermore, Xu Xiaochun, and executive of this Tianjin Project, sees cloned beef as a solution to the overwhelmingly large population of low quality beef in China. Xu said, “One reason we have so much low-quality beef is because we haven’t applied clone technology...this is the only way to allow Chinese and many other people in the world to enjoy high-quality beef in an efficient manner” (Owen Guo, New York Times). Public food safety has become a large concern following exposures of scandals like melamine-tainted baby formula and recycled industrial “gutter oil.” Executive Xu concluded that the cloning process would be just like “pouring a glass of orange juice into another empty glass” (Owen Guo, New York Times).
Several analysts from China’s financial sector have questioned the profitability of this project however. They proposed that cloning may be a fiscally reasonable solution for combatting endangered species, but that farming via cloning would not produce reasonably priced meat. Boyalife Group and Sooam Biotech await approval from the Chinese Government as they continuing building their facility.
This article is extremely relevant because it proposes a solution to China’s many public safety issues -- cloning would ensure that meat comes from a viable source. However, with what would likely be a high pricetag, cloning may not be the ultimate answer, as legitimate meat would still be inaccessible to China’s explosively large working class. This article also illuminates much of the stigma attached to cloning. The Chinese people feel as though cloned product would be filthy and disgusting, even though it would, likely, be of much higher quality than what they currently have access to. The origins to this stigma seem to elude the author of this piece as well as Boyalife Group and Sooam Biotech.
I felt that this piece was written very objectively. The author did not seem to have any bias, but rather he just provided the entire context of this development and the opinions of the public and the company. This made the article very easy to read, and also gave the reader space to formulate their own opinion. This really made the article very intriguing to me, as I ultimately decided that I conditionally supported this venture depending on the price tag. As expected from a reputable source like the New York Times, I encountered no grammatical errors or spelling errors. In conclusion, I really enjoyed reading this piece for its objectiveness, for the relevance and depth of the topic, and for the great amount of information given in this piece. I would strongly recommend it.
Source:
Guo, Owen. "World’s Biggest Animal Cloning Center Set for ’16 in a Skeptical China." The New York Times. The New York Times, 26 Nov. 2015. Web. 29 Nov. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/27/world/asia/china-animal-cloning.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0>.
I thought that report was fantastic. It explained the relevance in detail and all the specific reasons and pieces of evidence for the findings were included in a very easy to understand manner. The report flows very smoothly. The order makes logical sense and it is very easy to read. I liked how there was enough background information and the reader is not left unclear about any topics discussed. The topic choice was also a good choice because it is very interesting. This is also very relevant to the topic we are currently discussing when it refers to genes and genetic manipulation to potentially clone species and take advantage of the benefits.
ReplyDeleteI did not find anything to be improved in this piece. Everything was very well edited and revised. This was a great report.
This topic is very relevant because provides a solution to China’s many public safety such as ensuring that meat comes from a viable source. It also discusses the issues with this approach because of its high cost which would still be inaccessible to China’s explosively large working class. Also with the constantly growing population of China’s already large citizenship, finding practical sources of higher quality meat will be important in its long term plans to support its people.
Guo, Owen. "World’s Biggest Animal Cloning Center Set for ’16 in a Skeptical China." The New York Times. The New York Times, 26 Nov. 2015. Web. 29 Nov. 2015. .
ReplyDeleteWhenever one reads an article, it is critical to consider the relationship formed by the author to the reader. The first thing Trevor wisely acknowledged in his third paragraph was the source, whom he deemed unbiased. He then connected the author’s neutrality to how it impacted his take on the article as he says that it was “easier to form his own opinion.” He also chose an article that best explores the topic of cloning and its impact on society. Cloning is more relevant in China than in many other countries because of how it addresses the nation’s problems (mentioned in the article). The report itself could have been written slightly more efficiently--the distinction between pros and cons could have been more coherent. There also could have been more elaboration in his second paragraph about why this topic’s relevance impacts China more so than other countries, even though a few issues were already mentioned. It would have been better to see how this topic’s problems compare to those in other areas of the world.
I enjoyed reading about both the benefits and disadvantages of this bizarre topic, especially in relation to China. I wonder if it would be less of an issue in a country like Scandinavia or Finland, where their working classes are smaller, their meats are higher quality for duplication, and there is wealth. Thinking of potential solutions to potential problems is crucial to survival, even if they’re way outside the box.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTrevor,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your review of “World’s Biggest Animal Cloning Center Set for ’16 in a Skeptical China” by Owen Guo. This article is a great choice because cloning is such a controversial topic and this project is obviously going to receive a lot of media attention throughout the next couple of years. I liked how you included very legitimate issues with cloning and what the counterarguments are for it. It was especially helpful that you included specific incidents that cloning is hoping to avoid like the issues with melamine-tainted baby formula and recycled industrial “gutter oil”. I also liked how you included not only the ethical but also the financial aspect of cloning to give a much broader view of all of the pros and cons of this facility. I also thought you had a very well thought out paragraph on the relevance of this issue to the world which included facts and specific details. This review was overall very well written and thought out and I thought you did a good job at displaying your thoughts in a descriptive manner.
I felt that the primary problem with your review was that it was too long. Many of your points, though informative, were redundant and the review just felt drawn out. Other than that I have no complaints with this article.
Overall I really enjoyed reading your review and was especially interested by this topic because it is banned in a lot of areas and I am interested to see the international response to this and whether or not this cloning process will be approved and/or succeed. It was interesting to learn more about
Trevor, you did an excellent job by stating an interesting fact in your first sentence. This gave me a sense of what I was about to read right away. The rest of that first paragraph continued this set up for the reader by naming specific places and groups like China’s Boyalife Group and South Korea’s Sooam Biotech. The following paragraph was a great transition into addressing why the public is concerned with this new project, but also gave supportive examples on why there should be no concern. Finally, the quotes you used were relevant and were appropriately incorporated into your writing. Good job!
ReplyDeleteMy biggest and only concern with your review was its length. Although you wrote and explained the article well, you could have shortened it a bit. Other than that, I found nothing wrong.
Overall, I enjoyed reading your article. I was interested once I saw the word “cloning” in your title, and was definitely intrigued once I read on. It kind of freaked me out though, the point about “churn out up to a million beef cattle embryos a year” because it reminded me of the book Brave New World. Nevertheless, you did a great job.