After reading the article, “Hopeful Start for First Uterus Transplant Surgery in U.S.“ I am pleased to share this breakthrough in the united states. There are about 50,000 women in the United States who either have suffered damage to the uterus or were born without them that want children of their own. The transplant has been performed in Sweden successfully and the procedure has just been approved at a program in Cleveland to do a trial to see if the transplant holds and provides a functioning uterus. Due to either missing or damaged fallopian tubes, “The donor’s uterus is connected to the recipient’s vagina and the uterine vessels are redirected to large blood vessels running outside the pelvis.” Because the fallopians don’t connect the ovaries to the uterus, these women will not be able to conceive a child the “normal” way, get their periods, or be able to physically give birth to a child. The uterus is normally connected to nervous tissue, so a woman who went through a transplant will not feel menstrual cramps, nor feel the burden or pain of childbirth, which could prove to be fatal and which is why all births must be done my cesarian section.
The procedure takes a long time to complete, over 9 hours, but women would say it is worth it. Moving forward, doctors and researchers can now begin to explore different types of innovative transplants outside of the female body, but also the male reproductive organs. Some clinics are already trying to perform penile transplants to soldiers wounded in battle. This breakthrough transplant is important for these women who are infertile due to a mutation at birth. A woman can now give birth to her own child through invitro fertilization and a cesarian section. Although it is not a “classic” birthing process, the child will still be genetically related to the mother (versus adoption) and she can still feel the pressure of the baby inside of her even though the uterus is not connected to nervous tissue.
This article was very well-written and clearly explained the different parts of the operation. In particular, I liked how the author looked to the future to explain how this transplant can lead to bigger and better things. However, the article was lacking some authority. I wish the author had interviewed and asked better questions to the doctors who performed the surgery and expert researchers on the subject. I would like to know more about possibly connecting the uterus to the nervous tissue and possibly being able to do the transplant when the donor is alive.
Grady, Denise. "Hopeful Start for First Uterus Transplant Surgery in U.S." The New York Times. The New York Times, 07 Mar. 2016. Web. 10 Mar. 2016. <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/08/health/uterus-transplant-cleveland-clinic.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-3&action=click&contentCollection=Science®ion=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article>.
ReplyDeleteI read Caroline’s review on the article, “Hopeful Start for First Uterus Transplant Surgery in U.S”. She did a good job of summarizing that women who are infertile or have had damage to their uterus, can now get an implant. Since fallopian tubes are missing, the donor’s uterus is now connected to the vagina and uterine vessels are redirected to large blood vessels outside the pelvis. The women are not able to conceive or give birth to their children the regular way, but the plus is that their children has their genes and parents don’t have to go through the adoption process. Another aspect that she did well on was that she recognized that the article did not have much authority. For instance, the author did not interview doctors or others. Lastly, Caroline stated the benefits and the significance of the breakthrough very well.
Although the review was well written, there were a few aspects that she could have improved on. Some of the grammar and sentence structure looked as if the review had not been edited or proofread before she posted it. Another aspect was that she could have provided a quote from someone in the article.
This article is a very important breakthrough for science and the public. Scientists and doctors can now look into pursuing the transplant of other organs or tissues so that more people can have the surgery if they need it. Women also have more of an option now. If they are infertile or if their uterus’ were impaired due to mutations or accidents, they can now have biological children.
Audrey Kim
ReplyDelete17 March 2016
Grady, Denise. "Hopeful Start for First Uterus Transplant Surgery in U.S." The New York Times. The New York Times, 07 Mar. 2016. Web. 10 Mar. 2016. .
Caroline did a really great job with this article review, especially in her summary. She summarized the article and the surgery process in a concise, yet effective manner that helped me understand the article better. Another thing that she did very well is her accurate criticism of the article in that it lacked authority because it did not have many interviews that would have added more perspective to the article. This allowed me to approach the article in a different way that I had not considered before. Lastly, Caroline also showed the real world applications of the uterus transplant surgery very effectively. Women who were deemed infertile in the past now may have a chance to give birth if they wish. Her explanation allowed me to see the possibilities that this new breakthrough research holds.
Although this article review was very effective, it had some areas that could be improved. If Caroline had mentioned some of the specific researchers and their affiliated academic institutions in her summary, it would have made her review sound more credible. Another aspect that could have been improved is her explanation of the women’s conditions after the surgery and the possible downsides of the operation. Although she briefly mentioned them in the summary, it would have been interesting to know more long lasting health effects of the surgery and the possible side effects that it may have. This would have added another interpretation of the new research, making the review more more detailed and interesting.
This article review informed me about breakthrough research that may forever change the way that women with reproductive conditions can have children. It is very important because such research can lead to solutions to other health problems that men and women face today. I chose this article review because the topic seemed very interesting and relevant to society. Being aware of such scientific possibilities makes me excited for scientific solutions to health problems that seem impossible to fix as of now. It changed my understanding of the limits of scientific research now that such advanced surgeries have been successful.
Caroline,
ReplyDeleteI thought you did a good job in reviewing “Hopeful Start for First Uterus Transplant Surgery in U.S.” One area in which your review shined was in your ability to concisely summarize the article. All extraneous information was left out, however you included enough information to help build context and inform the reader. Another area in which your review was well done was your analysis of the real life applications. You were able to effectively describe the benefits of uterus transplants to the reader, which helped increase your authority as an author. Lastly, I thought that you thoughtfully criticized the article. You were especially astute in considering the benefits of including further data or interviews.
One area in which you could have improved your interview is in establishing your own credibility as an author. For example, in your first sentence you make two grammatical errors. Although they may seem small, they really work against any credibility you establish later in your review. Also, including further detail, such as a quote or specific statistic, would help establish more credibility.
Again, I thought you did well with your review. One thing I learned from your review is that a uterus transplant can help aid the fertility of sterile women.
Work Cited:
Grady, Denise. "Hopeful Start for First Uterus Transplant Surgery in U.S." The New York Times. The New York Times, 07 Mar. 2016. Web. 10 Mar. 2016. .
In Caroline’s review of “Hopeful Start for First Uterus Transplant Surgery in U.S.,” she did a good job of summarizing the main idea of the article. She provided just enough details for the reader to understand the new transplant that has been done successfully in Sweden and is now moving to the United States in Cleveland. In addition, Caroline also did a good job of providing the cons of the new transplant, which I thought was very interesting. She states that females with the uterus transplant would not be able to feel pain associated with the uterus, which forces any child births to be done strictly through cesarean section. I also think Caroline did a good job of critiquing the article. She brought up a good point that she believed that the article lacked authority because the author left out some technical details regarding the connection to the nervous tissue.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I think Caroline could have paid closer attention to the grammatical errors within her review. For example, she says “united states” instead of “United States.” In addition, I think Caroline could have provided the names of the doctors associated with this research in her review. She mentioned that she wished the author would have asked better questions to these doctors, so I think providing their names and positions would be beneficial to the reader.
After reading Caroline’s review, I have learned a new alternative for females who were born without or have damaged uteruses. If the transplant is successful for the specific female, then she will be able to have her own biological child. I chose this article because of the title. It immediately grabbed my attention and made me extremely curious to learn more. I think this is a great breakthrough regarding female reproductive health and I am hopeful to see it become a major success in the United States!
Grady, Denise. "Hopeful Start for First Uterus Transplant Surgery in U.S." New York Times. New
York Times, 7 Mar. 2016. Web. 29 Oct. 2016.