Abbey Thomas
AP Biology
Mr. Ippolito
12 October 2017
Zimmer, Carl. “Ancient Viruses Are Buried in Your DNA.” The New York Times, The New York Times,
4 Oct. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/10/04/science/ancient-viruses-dna-genome.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=9&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0.
For this current event, I chose to read Carl Zimmer’s article on viral DNA and how it affects the modern human. Viral DNA makes up 8% of the human genome, mostly in the form of retroviruses. These viruses are still present in the humans because they invade host cells and insert their own DNA into the human genome, and “if a retrovirus happens to infect an egg or sperm, its DNA can potentially be passed to the next generation and the generation after that,”. The viruses first altered human DNA around 450 million years ago. Retroviruses have evolved so that they are fatal to any animal, but beneficial to humans. Scientists have been interested in studying viral DNA because it causes the production of proteins that are present in the embryo. Viral DNA is a new frontier for scientists, and in July, biologists published their studies on how retroviruses produce a protein in pregnant women, called Hemo. Hemo is involved in suppressing the mother’s immune system so that does not attack the fetus, it is also hypothesized that Hemo preserves the flexibility of stem cells, so that the cells can become a variety of tissues. Retroviruses are also connected with the production of proteins involved in fusing together placental cells, etc. The discovery that different viral DNA proteins have functions in the embryo, leading scientists to believe that these viruses evolved to impact a fetus because it would be easy for the virus to be replicated and be passed on to another generation.
Overall, Zimmer’s article was very informative and strong. Since Zimmer used scientists for his research, there were times in the article where it was difficult to understand. While this article is most likely for the scientists, it would be more accessible to the public if the explanations were in Layman’s terms. Also, Zimmer should have included more quotes from researchers, and the quotes should be more meaningful. One of the strengths of this article was that if provided background information on the history of retroviruses, and also explained how they enter into the human genome. Another strength was that Zimmer told the whole truth about the adaption of the viruses to affect the embryo, even though “this feature might have a sinister origin”. This article had many strengths and weaknesses, but it was a informative article that opened my mind to a new concept.
Mairead Cain
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Forensics
10 October 2017
Zimmer, Carl. “Ancient Viruses Are Buried in Your DNA.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 4 Oct. 2017.
www.nytimes.com/2017/10/04/science/ancient-viruses-dna-genome.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=9&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0.
Abbey did a very nice job with her current event review on the article “Ancient Viruses Are Buried in Your DNA,” by Carl Zimmer. I decided to review her report as the title of the original current event was very compelling as it seemingly affects all of humanity. There are many good techniques she uses throughout her report. One example is how includes many thought-provoking quotes from experts in her current event review. These quotes, all of which are from experts of the topic, provided crucial information and an overall deeper understanding of the topic at hand. Another aspect of Abbey’s writing that was done rather well was when she explained the presence of Hemo in pregnant women and how it affects the immune system of expecting women. This was an interesting addition of information as it offered an example of a retrovirus. Lastly, I appreciated how Abbey was still critical concerning some of the evident flaws of the original report. She explained how she believes that the original report should have included more quotes from researchers and information that can be understandable by a larger quota of people.
Overall, Abbey’s report was extremely interesting and informative, however there are some details that she could tweak and add to make the current event report even that much better. I recommend that she explains what, exactly, viral DNA is. This information would have given readers an even deeper understanding of the topic in discussion. Also, she could have discussed how, exactly, the information given in the report has an impact on the world of science. It would have been interesting to see her take on the article’s research.
Abbey’s report was very informative and I learned extensively about the recent discovery of a certain type of protein found in pregnant women. Before reading the report, I had little knowledge about how certain viruses have been found still living today after thousands of years. Countless people across the world could be affected by some of these specific viruses (whether for the better or for the worse) and it is important that scientists gain a deeper understanding about what these ancient diseases mean for the future of humanity.
Zimmer, Carl. “Ancient Viruses Are Buried in Your DNA.” The New York Times, The New York Times,
ReplyDelete4 Oct. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/10/04/science/ancient-viruses-dna-genome.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=9&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0.
I read Abbey’s review of the article “Ancient Viruses are Buried in Your DNA” by Carl Zimmer. I thought Abbey did a nice job summarizing the article. Because the topic is relatively new, even to scientists, the topic can get confusing or strange quickly. I thought Abbey did a good job on pointing out the main details about retroviruses such as some background information, and an example of one specifically in pregnant women called Hemo. Another thing I enjoyed in Abbey’s critique was her use of quotes. Although she only used one, it was very effective in helping our understanding of retroviruses. The article itself did not use many quotes, and the ones they used weren’t. I like that Abbey’s quote got to the main point of the topic. A third thing that I liked about Abbey’s critique was her critique of the article itself. She did a nice job pointing out some pros such as how the article was very detailed in explaining about retroviruses given the limited amount of information, and cons such as how they did not include many useful quotes. I thought Abbey was very thorough when she read the article and made a point to understand what it was about.
One thing that Abbey could work on was explaining the significance of the finding. Although she kind of touched on that, I felt that she added it as additional information on the summary of the article rather than as a separate topic of its own. Another thing I think that the article could have talked about was why this research came so late. For what seems like a long time ago, the entire human genome was mapped out along with the DNA for lots of other animals. Considering that the retroviruses account for more than 8% of the genome, I was surprised that this was not discovered earlier. It might have been interesting for the article to include reasons that research was suppressed (was it difficult to spot, did nothing stand out before, how this “Hemo” stood out enough to be researched).
The article in total surprised me. It was interesting because we mapped the human genome in 2003. I was surprised that it took nearly more than 10 years to find out that 8% of what was discovered led to even more discoveries, which is just a natural part of science. It was interesting that such an important discovery came from something we “finished” years ago. I never heard of retroviruses (or at least the name, as HIV is classified as a “retrovirus”). I liked the article overall because it talked about how this new discovery could move forward and impact all people.