Mia Gradelski
Mr. Ippolito
AP Biology
21 September 2017
Scientific American. Magazine, Bruno MartinNature. "Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving: Analysis of 215,000 people’s DNA suggests variants that shorten life are being selected against." Scientific American. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2017. <https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/massive-genetic-study-shows-how-humans-are-evolving/>.
After reading the article “Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving” by Scientific American, I obtained lots of resourceful information regarding our type of species, humans and how our genome is evolving through the analysis of a range of participants willing to test what their DNA supposedly says about their life span. At the start of this article, readers are introduced to the research on natural selection and how it is not “only getting rid of a harmful genetic mutation that could shorten people's lives” but describes how it is used as an attempt to shape the research regarding human evolution. Next, researchers explain how they must identify bits of the human genome that might be evolving by taking samples of people’s DNA which later could result in information regarding the “measure of longevity, or their own age in some cases.” Previous research suggests that people who carry harmful genetic DNA and diseases are at risk for an earlier death rate, which is in agreeance with Hakhamanesh Mostafavi, an evolutionary biologist who is conducting a similar study. Based on this research, the variant of the APOE gene, which is linked to Alzheimer’s disease and other known mutations, are less prevalent in people over the age of fifty of older. Backing up this data, the “mutation in the CHRNA3 gene associated with heavy smoking in men petered out in the population starting in middle age.” This means that people without mutations such as these, are likely to live longer according to researchers. By studying the effects of many harmful mutations that could arise in offsprings, leads to more questions regarding if the study of evolution is “weeding them out” according to Mostafavi. As this study continues to prevail, previous research done on natural selection shows that this new research done to observe the link between longevity and late fertility is correct. This article not only shapes people’s curiosity regarding ongoing evolution and how set backs such as gathering statistical data over a vast quantity of people is hard according to Gil McVean, a statistical geneticist could be possible, but delivers a prominent message regarding fertility and longevity.
After reading this article, I began to immediately question my own DNA history and being surprised at the findings that a set of mutations in delayed puberty and for older people are being found mostly in these age groups. I believe this article will greatly affect the way society thinks because the public is constantly observing how they can live longer and what they have to look out for. Humans are constantly improving their findings in science and most importantly looking into the future. As society becomes more curious, these breakthroughs such as pinpointing how the human genome is evolving leads society to become more interested in their genetics, by going onto sites such as Ancenstry.com or 23AndMe. After reading this article, people will have conflicting questions regarding evolution and past thoughts on natural selection that they initially thought were true. Having the scientists such as Mostafavi present their ideas and explanations regarding how longevity is achieved leads to the question why a genetic variant can influence survival. As a result, these findings done by multiple researchers and scientists will greatly affect the way humans study and hypothesize their own lives.
This article not only provides newsworthy thoughts and discoveries done by professional scientists across the globe, but gathers this information to lead to a worthwhile impact on each person and for generations to come. While reading, I noticed this article did a great job on identifying what could be done to understand the major questions about the human genome regarding how it might be evolving and if the genetic variant influences survival. Yet, we know that all this evidence is not fully backed up inside this article due to the case that “studying ongoing evolution in humans is notoriously difficult” stated by McVean. In addition, the article constantly mentions ongoing research that will happen in the future, which I believe frustrates readers if this information presented is true. In this case, this leads the public to be questioning if there is a link between longevity and late fertility through the “effect of wealth and education, because people with high levels of both tend to have children later in life” questioned by Jonathan Pritchard, a geneticist. It would of been better if the author explained how future studies will be conducted by providing statistical data that will be uncovered and how they would measure the frequency of the mutation in one generation. Conclusively, this article leads readers to become curious regarding their genetic heritage and what is to come in the future about ongoing evolution, which makes me look forward to reading followup information stated by these scientists.
Isabella Dibbini
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Current Event Comment
23 September 2017
Current Event #2
Scientific American. Magazine, Bruno MartinNature. "Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving: Analysis of 215,000 people’s DNA suggests variants that shorten life are being selected against." Scientific American. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2017. .
Mia wrote an excellent review of the article “Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving” by Scientific American. She created a great summary of the article, by discussing how theories conducted in the past may help form new conclusions in the future. For example, she discusses how natural selection is used as an attempt to shape the research with respect to human evolution. She continues to bring up previous research, which helps her address the main ideas of this article. Mia states “Previous research suggests that people who carry harmful genetic DNA and diseases are at risk for an earlier death rate…” and continues to discuss how this idea confirms the beliefs of Hakhamanesh Mostafavi, an evolutionary biologist. Lastly, she does a good job of supporting her ideas with evidence directly from the article. She states how the variant of the APOE gene is less prevalent in people over a certain age. To support this fact she includes quotes from the article: “mutation in the CHRNA3 gene associated with heavy smoking in men petered out in the population starting in middle age.” Therefore, according to researchers, people are likely to live longer without mutations such as these.
Overall, this review is extremely well written, however, there are a few small things that would make it even better. For instance, Mia says that “the article constantly mentions ongoing research that will happen in the future,” however she did not elaborate on this topic as much as I hoped she would have. Although she did mention she wanted the author to explain how future studies would be conducted, she did not go into detail about what the article stated. In addition, she did a very good job of incorporating quotes from the article to support her claims, but she did not cite who said each quote. I noticed she did quote Jonathan Pritchard, a geneticist, however she did not write who stated the previous quotes she used in her review. Next time, to make this review even better, Mia should make sure to state who she is quoting, allowing the readers to believe that her information is from reliable sources.
After reading Mia’s review of the article “Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving” by Scientific American, I learned that research conducted in the past is extremely important for studying new topics in the present or even in the future. I chose to read this review to further my knowledge on this topic. I agree with Mia when she stated that many will now begin to question their own DNA. Overall, I really enjoyed reading this review, and I am curious to see what will happen concerning this topic, in the future.
Gigi Chrappa
ReplyDeleteSeptember 25, 2017
AP Biology
Current Events 2
Scientific American. Magazine, Bruno MartinNature. "Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving: Analysis of 215,000 people’s DNA suggests variants that shorten life are being selected against." Scientific American. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2017. .
I read Mia’s review of “Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving”. Her review was extremely informative and well thought out. The layout of her review is phenomenal. She clearly organizes the topics addressed in chronological order. This allows the audience to read with ease and this also creates a more organized tone overall. In addition to this, Mia actually relates this article to herself and how it has affected her. I find this extremely interesting as it allows for the audience to see the current importance of the topic. Sometimes when reading current events, one may ask, “well why does this matter” or “well how does this affect me”? But Mia successfully relates a broad topic (which seemingly does not relate on a larger scale to us) and demonstrates the importance in our lives today. This was done exceptionally well. Finally, in addition to writing a stellar review, Mia successfully critiques the article. She does this in a professional way; not attacking the author nor stating what is ‘wrong’ with the article. Simply, she explains what may be improved upon or items that could be altered in the future.
Although Mia wrote an incredible review, there were a few areas in which she could improve upon. For example, in the future, Mia may want to explain certain quotations in depth. At points, since the topic she read about was very complex, it was difficult to understand points of the essay. For instance, Mia mentions the CHRNA3 gene in depth. However, I still do not clearly understand what the gene is responsible for and the consequences of altering such a gene (what is its purpose?). Lastly, if Mia wanted to take her review to the next level, she could perform some outside research and look into what ‘the future of genetics’ may look like. Countless movies have been produced about the future. There are even some theories about parents being able to choose the desired traits for their children when this technology becomes available. So, it might be interesting to see what else could be found out about the future of genetics and how it may influence our lives as we get older.
In conclusion, Mia wrote a wonderful review and addressed topics important to society. Her layout was wonderful and the review was easy to follow. She did many things wonderfully and there were a few things she could improve on in the future. Overall, her review was a great read and I plan to read the article her review was based on soon!
Nina Veru
ReplyDeleteAP-Biology C-ODD, Mr. Ippolito
Current Event #2
9/24/17
Scientific American. Magazine, Bruno MartinNature. "Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving: Analysis of 215,000 people’s DNA suggests variants that shorten life are being selected against." Scientific American. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2017. .
After reading Mia Gradelski’s review on “Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving: Analysis of 215,000 people’s DNA suggests variants that shorten life are being selected against”, I learned a lot of new information in regards to genetics. While reading this review, I noticed Gradelski condensed the scientific information, making it easier to understand. Gradelski explains how researchers must obtain samples of DNA to understand the longevity of their lifespans. It was helpful that she included an example: the APOE gene, which has been found in many Alzheimer's patients. In addition, I really liked how the author wove in quotes from the original article. Gradelski quotes, “mutation in the CHRNA3 gene associated with heavy smoking in men petered out in the population starting in middle age.” The addition of this quote helped back up her previous statement, which was that people without certain genetic mutations live longer. The organization of this review was also done well. In her first paragraph, Gradelski gives a brief overview of the information in the article. She explains how certain mutations in the humane genome can shorten one’s lifespan. She then goes on to explain how reading this article led to her own curiosity in genetics. Finally she explains the things she liked and did not like about the article.
Although Gradelski wrote an excellent review, there needs to be improvement in sentence structure. While reading, I felt as though some of the writing choices made the review difficult to follow. For example, Gradelski states, “After reading this article, I began to immediately question my own DNA history and being surprised at the findings that a set of mutations in delayed puberty and for older people are being found mostly in these age groups”. The author first begins to talk about questioning her own DNA history, but then goes on to say that certain mutations are found in these age groups. It sounds as though she is talking about two very different things in the same sentence. In addition, further grammatical edits could have been made. For instance at the beginning of the review Gradelski claims, “I obtained lots of resourceful information regarding our type of species, humans and how our genome is evolving”. A comma needs to be placed between the words humans and how.
I chose to read this review because I am also very interested in genetic research. Although I already know some information regarding genetics, reading this review has further inspired me to look into my own genetic background. I learned I could do this by using Ancestry.com and 23andme.com. However, I do question the accuracy of these sites.
Alexander New
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology/C Block
September 25th, 2017
Comment 2
Scientific American. Magazine, Bruno MartinNature. "Massive Genetic Study Shows How
Humans Are Evolving: Analysis of 215,000 people’s DNA suggests variants that shorten
life are being selected against." Scientific American. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2017. .
My classmate Mia wrote a tremendous review of the article “Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving: Analysis of 215,000 people’s DNA suggests variants that shorten life are being selected against”, by Scientific American. I thought this article was enlightening and I learned a lot from it. One thing that I liked about Mia’s review was that she did a very good job of critiquing the article. She accomplishes this in a very professional manner, by constructively criticizing rather than personally attacking the author. She offered ways that the author could have improved his writing rather than telling the author where he went wrong. In addition to this, Mia did a good job by relating the article to herself. I liked how she describes that it has genuinely affected her. It also allows the reader to see that the article still affects people in present day, making it relevant. Finally, Mia did a very good job creating a summary that is easy to read and understand. For example, she manages to bring up previous research, which helps her to address the main ideas of the article.
Although Mia did a great job, that does not mean there were not areas where she could have improved. One thing I noticed is that Mia included quotes from scientists and others, but fails to explain these quotes in depth after including them in the review. At some points, it was rather hard to understand, but she does not explain it very well. I also noticed there were some minor problems with sentence structure. It seemed that some of the her writing choices made the review difficult to follow.
Overall, I thought this article was very intriguing and that is why I clicked on it to comment on. I also learned the importance of building upon others’ research. That is why science is always evolving, because new scientists pick up where others left off, just like in this article.
Alexander New
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology/C Block
September 25th, 2017
Comment 2
Scientific American. Magazine, Bruno MartinNature. "Massive Genetic Study Shows How
Humans Are Evolving: Analysis of 215,000 people’s DNA suggests variants that shorten
life are being selected against." Scientific American. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2017. .
My classmate Mia wrote a tremendous review of the article “Massive Genetic Study Shows How Humans Are Evolving: Analysis of 215,000 people’s DNA suggests variants that shorten life are being selected against”, by Scientific American. I thought this article was enlightening and I learned a lot from it. One thing that I liked about Mia’s review was that she did a very good job of critiquing the article. She accomplishes this in a very professional manner, by constructively criticizing rather than personally attacking the author. She offered ways that the author could have improved his writing rather than telling the author where he went wrong. In addition to this, Mia did a good job by relating the article to herself. I liked how she describes that it has genuinely affected her. It also allows the reader to see that the article still affects people in present day, making it relevant. Finally, Mia did a very good job creating a summary that is easy to read and understand. For example, she manages to bring up previous research, which helps her to address the main ideas of the article.
Although Mia did a great job, that does not mean there were not areas where she could have improved. One thing I noticed is that Mia included quotes from scientists and others, but fails to explain these quotes in depth after including them in the review. At some points, it was rather hard to understand, but she does not explain it very well. I also noticed there were some minor problems with sentence structure. It seemed that some of the her writing choices made the review difficult to follow.
Overall, I thought this article was very intriguing and that is why I clicked on it to comment on. I also learned the importance of building upon others’ research. That is why science is always evolving, because new scientists pick up where others left off, just like in this article.