Friday, November 18, 2016

Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?

Alex Swenson                                     11/17/16
AP Bio                                       Current Events


Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News Network,
n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016.

I read Jareen Imam’s article about how human organs bread in pigs can help to save lives. I article opens by explaining that there is a worldwide organ shortage. This is a major problem as the FDA estimates that 22 people per day die as a result of not being able to get the proper organs. To begin her article, she describes the research being done at UC - Irvine. There, the scientists are working to breed human organs in pigs. To start, the scientists then proceed to knock out sections of pig DNA so that the human DNA can be inserted into that place. For example, scientists to make a human pancreas in a pig would theoretically knock out the section of pig DNA which tells it to make a pig pancreas and replace it with the human DNA to make a human pancreas instead. She then explains that by putting human stem cells into the embryo of a pig they can grow human organs inside of the pigs. Currently, this study is in an ethical corner. Their research is not being supported by the US national institute of health because of the fear that the stem cells will possibly make a human brain and make a pig-human mutant. They then explain that the animal could think human thoughts to the process which they deemed cruel and unethical.
    This article was very important in explaining how scientific breakthroughs are limited by what is ethical or not. For example, in 2010, Japanese scientist Hiromitsu Nakauchi, who is now a stem cell biologist at Stanford University, was able to grow a rat pancreas inside a mouse. The science community deemed this to be ethical as it was rats and mice and did not involve humans. The debate between what is ethical and what is not has been a question is the science community for a very long time and this article helps to highlight that argument.
    Overall this was a very well written article. The author used language that was easily understandable. Also, she kept her explanations about the science quite broad so readers could easily grasp the information she was trying to explain. She also had a great counter argument to the argument about ethics. But, I felt that she could have wrote more about the ethics argument as that was quite interesting. In all, this was a well written article that helped to explain an advancement in medicine.
posted for A. Swenson

12 comments:

  1. Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News Network, n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016. .


    Alex’s review of Could Human-Pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients? was a very interesting review. I liked how he was really thorough on the process to make human-pig hybrid organs. This strengthened his review as it helps the readers have a deep understanding of what he is talking about. In addition, the fact that he went further and added actual statistics, saying that the FDA estimates that 22 people die per day because of not having the proper organs, added to his review as it was more detailed, which overall aided me in understanding this topic better and gave me some additional, interesting information about it. Finally, the last thing that I thought Alex did very well was going further into this review, stating that this research is not supported by the US National Institute of Health. Not only did this give me even more information about the topic, but it also brought up a very interesting and controversial point of view, is research always ethical?
    Although this review was extremely interesting, one way it could have been made better is that Alex could have been a bit more detailed in his second paragraph as I thought it was a bit short and he could have talked a bit more and elaborated on the ethics question. So by adding one or two more sentences to that second paragraph about ethics, Alex could have avoided this problem. Moreover, there were many typos in his review that sometimes made it hard to understand. By just rereading his review once, he could have avoided this problem and made his review seem more thought out.
    Overall, this review was captivating and taught me about a type of research that I am not familiar with. I had never heard about this new research of growing human organs in pigs and so Alex’s review taught me many new things. I am a strong advocate for animal’s rights and so my feelings were a bit mixed when I read this article as I don’t like that animals are used for the benefit of humans, without caring about what they feel. However, when it is a case of medical advancement and saving lives, I am on the fence because I ask myself, how would I feel if it was one of my family member that needed an organ replacement? Overall, reading this review made me realize how thin the line between what is ethical and what isn’t is.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I comment on Alex’s review of “Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?” I liked how Alex opened up the review by explaining why organs are needed. For example, he wrote that an estimated 22 die per day because of an organ shortage. Then I like how he explains how human organs could be bred in pigs. For example, scientists could take a pig pancreas and replace the pig DNA with human DNA to obtain a function human pancreas. Finally, I liked how Alex connected the article to ethics and discussed how morals can influence scientific discoveries. The removal of organs from pigs could be considered animal cruelty and the surgery would run the risk of pig-human mutant.
    Although it was over all well-written, there were areas of his review that Alex could have improved. For example, he left many questions unanswered. I would have been interested in hearing why scientists are experimenting with pig organs and not those of another animal. Another thing Alex could have improved was talked about how these experiments could benefit the science community. He could have discussed how this study could lead to other studies, such as the development of artificial organs.
    Overall, Alex’s review and the article were both fascinating. I was interested to learn that human organs could actually be grow inside of pigs. If human stem cells are put into the embryo of a pig, the pig can actually successfully grow human organs. This does not seem possible because the difference in pig and human structures; however, this article proves my previous belief to be incorrect.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News Network,
    n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016.

    .

    I read Alex’s review of the article Could Human-Pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients, it was a very interesting article. I really like how Alex went into detail and explained what a Human-Pig hybrid organ was. I also really liked how he included some statistics and background, saying that twenty two people die per day because of not having the necessary organs. Both of these things that Alex did gave me a better understanding of the article as a whole and strengthened his review. Another thing that Alex did very well was go into the topic further by explaining why this process is not supported by the US National Institute of Health, and then addressing the ethics issue. He did a good job bringing in the example from 2010, which informed me that this process has been done before and tested. By including this it helped me understand why it is controversial topic and that there are multiple different opinions and viewpoints on issues like this.
    Although Alex did a very good job reviewing this article I think he could have added a few more examples and details on the ethics of the human-pig hybrid. He did a good job bringing in the previous experiment done in 2010, but I think he could have done into more details on the ethics of it. By adding a few more sentences, it would have made the article stronger by presenting both points.
    Overall this article was very interesting and taught me a lot about what some scientists are doing today. Before reading this article I had no idea that people were creating human-pig hybrids. At first I thought this was a great idea, because more people would get the organs that they need, but the second paragraph changed my mind when I thought about the ethical problems. Reading this article and review it made me think more about what we do, and what is ethical and what is not.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Evelyn Kluemper
    11/30/16
    AP Biology


    Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News Network,
    n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016.
    .


    Alex’s review of “Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?” was very interesting to read. He included thought-provoking statistics that were relevant to the topic. Alex also explained how human-pig hybrid organs would work. Finally, he also included how this research may not be considered ethical. The critique provided was honest.
    Alex could have added more detail about the prior experiments that were done in 2010. Also, he could have incorporated quotes to enhance the review.
    This review was intriguing and brings attention to the issue of bioethics. Although many will be able to receive organs through this unconventional process, scientists must consider the use of human-pig hybrid organs from a moral standpoint.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News Network,
    n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016.
    .








    I read Alex Swenson’s review of the CNN article, “Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?” and thought that he did a very good job. I particularly liked his summary of the article and its main points. He kept his summary short and concise, which summaries are supposed to be, yet still included enough information for the reader to understand what happened in the article. In addition, I liked his explanation of the experiments being conducted. He explains how the scientists are working to breed human organs in pigs. Finally, he includes information regarding why the article is relevant today. He writes about how “scientific breakthroughs are limited by what is ethical or not” and later discusses a specific example in which a Japanese scientist was able to perform a study because it was performed on mice, rather than humans. He explains how this study was ethically sound, as no harm was done to any humans.


    Although Alex did a very good job in his review, he could use some improvement. I thought that he should have quoted some parts of the article, as this always emphasizes the validity of everything being said. I believe this is an important part of an article’s review and it should have been included. In addition, Alex did not speak much about the prior experiments which were done in 2010. By including more detail, the reader would have felt more educated on the background of the topic. However, I think that Alex still wrote an excellent review.


    I thought that the review was written very well and Alex chose a great article to talk about. I think that the topic is very interesting, as many scientists struggle with the ethical parts of experiments and these ethical issues could possibly be preventing any major discoveries to be made. Alex has further educated me on the topic. I never knew about this topic before reading Alex’s review and now feel knowledgeable on this topic. Overall, I really enjoyed Alex’s review and learned a lot from it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News
    Network, n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016.
    .


    I think that Alex did a good job in is review of the article, "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?". I think that Alex did a good job incorporation some statistics saying that “the FDA estimates that 22 people per day die as a result of not being able to get the proper organs”, this makes his summary more credible since he used a credible source as well, the FDA. It would have been a critical source and very interesting. Another part of his review that I enjoyed was, how he gave an example of how a scientist would use a pig organ in a human. He said, scientists to make a human pancreas in a pig would theoretically knock out the section of pig DNA which tells it to make a pig pancreas and replace it with the human DNA to make a human pancreas instead. And lastly, another part that I liked about his review is how detailed his explanation was on the process of transferring an organ is from a pig to a human. Not only was it good that he explained it, the detail he used was good as well.
    Although I think that Alex did a good job, there are a few minor things that I think that he could improve on. There were some minor spelling errors that could have made his review cleaner in some areas. Another thing is that there were also a few punctuation errors that he could have fixed. Overall these are all minor mistakes and nothing too major but could disturb a bit the flow of the article.
    This article that Alex reviewed was very interesting. If this works, it could be a huge advancement in the world of transplants in surgery. This could help the world. Alex did a great job and picked a very interesting article.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Charlotte Prior
    11/29/16


    Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News Network,
    n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016.
    .


    I read Alex’s review of the article “Could Human - Pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?” he wrote a good review and he used clear language that was not confusing to read. He also chose a good topic to read about, it is a very intriguing topic that is relevant today. Alex also did a good job of explaining the way that the hybrid organs are created.
    Something Alex could work on is including more information about previous studies on this topic and elaborating. He also made a couple typos that are small and don't hurt the flow of his review but it is always good to fix them.
    Before reading this, I did have an idea that some scientists were creating and building organs outside of the body with stem cells but I didn't know about growing them inside of other animals, I find this interesting and it was a good thing to read about.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News Network,
    n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016.

    Alex Swenson’s review of the article, “Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?” was very well done. His summary was clear and concise, while still providing a depth of information about his topic. He also incorporated relevant statistics that definitely added to the credibility of his review and helped me understand the information better. For example he included that the FDA estimates that 22 people die per day because of not having the proper organs. Finally, I thought Alex did an exemplary job relating the article to society. His statement that "The debate between what is ethical and what is not has been a question is the science community for a very long time and this article helps to highlight that argument," clarified his point well.

    Overall Alex did a good job, but he still could improve a few areas. For example, he made a few typos and punctuation errors, although nothing major. Also, he never quoted the article which I feel is an essential part of reviews. It helps to improve the validity behind what you're saying. Particularly during the critique it allows you to point out exactly what you're noting from the writers work.

    I was very interested in Alex's review and the article he cited. I had brief knowledge about the growth of organs outside the human body, but I learned a lot more from reading this. It definitely made me question the ethics behind it and included a lot of interesting points.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News Network,
    n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016.
    .


    Alex’s review of the article "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" was particularly well written. His summary of the process of creating hybrid organs was quite thorough and information dense. Second, his incorporation of background information and relevant statistics and connection of this information to the issue doubtless elevated his review. Third, his connection of the issue to society – particularly the delineation of the ethical boundary that exists in science – was quite relevant and interesting.

    While the review was generally very well written, there were a few aspects that could have been improved. First, Alex could have written in more detail about the experiments performed in 2010. Second, Alex could have incorporated a quote in his review so as to give the reader a better idea of the scientific community’s current consensus on the issue. Otherwise, the review was very well written.

    Alex’s review was indeed quite well written. The topic itself is very interesting, as it touches upon some of the ethical boundaries that exist in science. This issue has come to fruition lately as our scientific understanding and technological capability continues to grow exponentially with every passing day.

    ReplyDelete
  11. http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/09/health/human-organs-chimera-irpt/index.html


    Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News Network, n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016. .




    Alex’s review of the article “Could Human-Pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?” was a very well written review. One thing I enjoyed was how he was really thorough on the process to make human-pig hybrid organs. This allowed the reader to really understand what was going in. In addition, I liked the fact that he went further and added actual statistics. For example, he said that the FDA estimates that 22 people die per day because of not having the proper organs. This added essential details to the review. Finally, I thought Alex did a good job going further into this review, stating that this research is not supported by the US National Institute of Health. This allowed the reader to question the article and the source it came from.
    Although this review was extremely interesting, it could have been improved. One way it could have been improved is that Alex could have been a bit more detailed in his second paragraph because it was a little short and could have had more detail. He also made a lot of spelling errors which he could have corrected. By doing two simple things Alex could have made his review a lot better.
    Overall, this review was well written and intelligent, and taught me about a type of research that I had little prior knowledge about like the new research of growing human organs in pigs. This also brought up the topic of animal rights and possibly abusing animals for the advancement of science research, which has been in the news for a while now. This review really made you think of what some scientist do to animals. Overall, reading this review made me realize how thin the line between what is ethical and what isn’t is.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Connor Barrett


    Imam, Jareen. "Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?" CNN. Cable News Network,
    n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2016.
    .


    Alex Swenson’s review of “Could Human-pig Hybrid Organs Help Patients?” was very interesting to read. By reading Alex’s review I learned about the worldwide shortage of organ donors and how human-pig hybrids organs may be able to solve the problem. The way this can be done is by growing human organs inside of pigs using DNA gene splicing. By inserting human DNA in the place of pig DNA, pigs could actually grow organs that are accepted by the human body. Research in this field is being resisted by many scientists, however, because of the ethical dilemmas involved with gene splicing. While it may have the capacity for good it could go wrong, creating human-pig hybrids. There were many things that I liked about Alex’s review. Mainly his discussion on scientific ethics and the pros and cons of this type of research. I also found the way in which he explained the article to be easy to understand and his own opinions interesting. Two things I would have liked to see Alex do, however, are explain the process of how the research would work in more detail and make a few grammatical and stylistic changes. Overall the review was very interesting and it has certainly made me think about my own opinions on scientific ethics more.

    ReplyDelete