Brian Li
AP Biology D-Odd
Current Event #3
26 September, 2018
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
Organoids, or artificially grown masses of cells that resemble organs, have been integral in many scientific and medical fields, especially oncology. A more recent form of organoid is the brain spheroid, which is essentially a spherical mass of neurons. Sam Rose in his Scientific American article discusses not only what spheroids are and how they are made but also more specifically its possible applications in studying a type of brain cell called oligodendrocytes and a rare disease called Pelizaeus Merzbacher disease, which causes a delay in motor and intellectual functions, that is associated with those cells. These masses of cells — though not an actual brain that is able to perform cognition — can be used to test lifesaving drugs.
Despite their relatively new status, these spheroids are an important step to personalized medicine, where drugs and treatments can be refined to meet the needs of individuals. Especially when there are around 3,486 inherited neurological disorders around the world, the need for greater personalization of medicine to meet specific needs is expanding. And even though applications are currently limited to rare diseases like Pelizaeus-Merzbacher, through further testing and research more prominent neurological disorders like Alzheimer's, which like Pelizaeus-Merzbacher disease is related to the failure of electrical signals to travel between neurons, could find treatments.
The author did a good job of putting technical scientific concepts in simple terms, while also clearing up possible misconceptions that readers might have on what exactly organoids are. Furthermore, the article is not cluttered with data, definitions, and studies with the author opting to provide links to certain words and studies instead. All of these links are to reputable scientific publications or organizations that help elaborate the author’s point. However, the author’s title, “Growing Brains in Lab”, can be misleading for the purposes of getting more views as these are not actual brains, but 4mm masses of neurons that cannot even function as an actual organ. I believe it would be good if the author would make the title more truthful so as not to mislead readers and possibly expand on further applications of organoid models beyond treating rare diseases.
Despite their relatively new status, these spheroids are an important step to personalized medicine, where drugs and treatments can be refined to meet the needs of individuals. Especially when there are around 3,486 inherited neurological disorders around the world, the need for greater personalization of medicine to meet specific needs is expanding. And even though applications are currently limited to rare diseases like Pelizaeus-Merzbacher, through further testing and research more prominent neurological disorders like Alzheimer's, which like Pelizaeus-Merzbacher disease is related to the failure of electrical signals to travel between neurons, could find treatments.
The author did a good job of putting technical scientific concepts in simple terms, while also clearing up possible misconceptions that readers might have on what exactly organoids are. Furthermore, the article is not cluttered with data, definitions, and studies with the author opting to provide links to certain words and studies instead. All of these links are to reputable scientific publications or organizations that help elaborate the author’s point. However, the author’s title, “Growing Brains in Lab”, can be misleading for the purposes of getting more views as these are not actual brains, but 4mm masses of neurons that cannot even function as an actual organ. I believe it would be good if the author would make the title more truthful so as not to mislead readers and possibly expand on further applications of organoid models beyond treating rare diseases.
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
ReplyDelete2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
Overall, I think that Brian did a very nice job summarizing the main points of the article and what its purpose was. I have never heard of organoids before, so getting a brief introduction of what they are and what they can do was rather intriguing. In fact, the first thing that Brian does is make sure that the reader understands what an organoid is, “Organoids, or artificially grown masses of cells that resemble organs, have been integral in many scientific and medical fields, especially oncology.” I think that this worked really nicely because it transitions and primes the reader well for what he is going to talk about. Additionally, I liked how Brian included some facts and specific numbers to accentuate the importance of organoids. For example, “Especially when there are around 3,486 inherited neurological disorders around the world, the need for greater personalization of medicine to meet specific needs is expanding”. Medicine is always expanding and coming up with new and improved ways to treat diseases. As someone who hopes to go into a field of medicine, I was really astonished by this kind of advancement. I think it is really amazing that scientists have found ways to create tissues of neurons that allow them to test potentially life changing drugs. Lastly, I think that Brian’s last paragraph was amazing. He touches on the credibility of the author and his sources, discusses how the author presented the information in a way that was easy to understand, and Brian brings up something he thinks the author could have done better.
Although Brian did a pretty nice job summarizing and presenting the point of the article, some parts of his writing were a bit confusing to read. Sometimes in his writing, he had some sentences that were a bit of run-on sentences, such as, “Sam Rose in his Scientific American article discusses not only what spheroids are and how they are made but also more specifically its possible applications in studying a type of brain cell called oligodendrocytes and a rare disease called Pelizaeus Merzbacher disease, which causes a delay in motor and intellectual functions, that is associated with those cells,”. Trying to put so much information into one sentence can be kind of confusing for the reader to follow. I think that Brian could have easily split up sentences like these, making his writing more clear and efficient. Also, I felt like Brian could have incorporated a bit more facts and statistics about the brain spheroid organoid. I think that this is such an interesting topic and I would have liked it better if Brian gave some more specifics about it.
I absolutely loved reading about this topic and I find it astonishing that medicine has come this far. Being able to replicate brain cells and test on them as if testing on an actual brain is almost unfathomable. After reading about this, I can only wonder what other kinds of advancements medicine will make in the next few years. Hearing about all of these crazy developments in medicine only further peaks my interest about the field. Whenever I hear about topics like these it only makes me wonder, how did they do that? This motivates me to learn more about medicine and push me more towards this field of study.
In Brian's article review, he did a very good job of summarizing the main points of the article. The article clearly focused on a very complex topic, yet I was very easily able to understand Brian's description of how these lab-grown "brains", despite not actually being used for cognition, may prove very useful in medical research. Secondly, I was impressed by Brian's criticism of the writing. In particular, I strongly agree with his point that the article's title was somewhat deceiving, as I, similarly, was led to believe the article would have had different content than it did. Finally, I feel that overall the review was very well written. Brian did an excellent job of hitting all of his points without providing to much extra information and organized his writing very well.
ReplyDeleteWhile Brian did a very good job of summarizing, it may have helped his cause to include slightly more background information about the spheroid brains. While he mentions that Rose's article explains such topics, he provides little insight into exactly how they are grown or how they function. Additionally, it would have been interesting to here more about Brian's personal take on the topic. Does he feel these artificially grown organs are worth much further investigation? Does he believe these lab grown brains hold the key to many discoveries?
Reading about this topic was fascinating to me, as someone who has always been interested in this type of bioengineering. I've known for some type that cells were being used to grow organs such as kidneys and stomachs, but the fact that brain cells are being cultivated in this way is extraordinary. The amount of progress the scientists in these fields have made in such a short amount of time makes me wonder if one day soon real brains with the capability to actually think will be developed. As someone with an interest in medical research, reports such as this inspire me to learn more about the field and the discoveries being made. Seeing the progress that is being made gives me faith that our capacity to cure will only increase and that scientists in the field will never cease to amaze our world.
****^^^ The citation for the comment above is:
ReplyDeleteRose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
Joseph Daher
ReplyDeleteSeptember 28, 2018
AP Biology
Current Event #3
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25
Sept. 2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
Brian Li reviewed an article that originally appeared in the science magazine Scientific American about recent breakthroughs in the artificial generation of brain tissue. The science discussed is relevant because the article is very recent, and is also from one of the most prestigious and popular science magazines in the world. His assertion that the article title may be clickbait is credible, considering that only 4mm masses of neurons are being grown, which is nowhere close to an actual brain. I find that his analysis that the development in this field could lead to the treatment of rare neurodegenerative diseases very interesting, and the notion that advancements in research on Pelizaeus-Merzbacher could overlap with Alzheimer’s is credible considering their stated similarities.
I think that Brian could have at least described some of the actual studies the Scientific American article references without simply paraphrasing the article, perhaps the recent paper in Nature Methods specifically. I also think that Brian could have elaborated on the mechanism on which scientists are able to grow brain spheroids, though overall Brian did an excellent job of concisely capturing the central ideas of the original article.
The most interesting takeaway from the article is undoubtedly the notion that we could potentially grow (or regrow) brain tissue some day. Obviously the scope of synthetic brian spheroids are very limited right now, but like the article states, such technology could be useful in finding treatments for neurological diseases. Additionally, perhaps the application of this technology could be more broad, maybe leading to brain transplants or regrowing brain tissue after severe head trauma.
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
ReplyDelete2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
Brian chose to read an interesting article about a fascinating new development in the medical. In his review of “Growing Brains in Lab” by Sam Rose, Brian does a good job explaining what the organoids are that the article is talking about, saying “Organoids, or artificially grown masses of cells that resemble organs, have been integral in many scientific and medical fields, especially oncology.” Another thing that Brian does well in his review is he clearly describes the possibilities for this technology and how it can be used for personalized treatment for thousands of different disorders. A third part of Brian’s review that I particularly enjoyed was how he critiqued the title of the article. I thought he made a very insightful point when he said that the article’s title, “Growing Brains in Lab,” drastically exaggerates the capabilities of the technology that it talks about. I agree with him that the title should be changed to be more realistic and reflective of the contents of the article.
Though Brian did many things well in his review, there were a few aspects that he could have improved upon. Throughout his review, I noticed that Brian’s language was clunky and contained many run-on sentences that made for an arduous read. By editing the writing and making the sentences more direct and smoother, the review would be much more enjoyable to read. A second thing that I thought was lacking was that while Brian explained the possibilities of the spheroid technology, he did not talk about its limitations. The article explained not only what the technology is, but what it is not, but Brian did not cover this aspect in his review, leading to an incomplete perspective on the brain spheroids.
I chose to comment on this article because the topic of lab grown brains sounds fascinating and controversial. However the article was not at all about growing consciousness in a lab but rather how stem cell cultivation could provide treatment for a myriad of neurological disorders. I learned a lot from reading the article and Brain’s review about this new technology and its applications and limitations. The fact that scientists can cultivate even a small clump of brain cells in the lab can be the first step to many more advancements along this route. Perhaps in a few decades it will be possible to grow entire functioning brains in a lab, and the controversy that would come with that would likely grip the entire world in a fierce debate about ethics and consciousness.
James Apostolatos
ReplyDeleteSeptember 28, 2018
AP Biology
Brian chose a very interesting topic for discussion. One great aspect of this article was that is from a credible source, the Scientific American community. This article also has great importance to the scientific world. As explained in his research, brain spheroids are an important step to personalize medicine, drugs and treatments, which can benefit humans with diseases. This is a great topic because of its relevance to the world. These experiments can lead to further discoveries and possibly even cures. Brian formatted his research in an easy to read format and explained his topic very well.
Although Brian explained the key points of the article, it would have been nice to add more data and detail to support his claim. Although he explained its importance in the scientific community, there could have been more analysis and description on the specific test in the article. The description on the organoids, and the brain studies was correct, but he could have used more in-depth analysis.
The most significant factor of this article was its hope that it could one day grow brain neurons and possibly cure diseases such as pelizaeus Merzbacher disease. This changed my understanding of genetic engineering and how close we have to creating drugs and treatments to cure neurological disorders. The connection to alzheimer's disease also shows how close we are to finding cures through these breakthroughs dealing with the brain.
Isabella Patterson
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology C-Even
10/1/18
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept. 2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
Brian chose a very interesting topic that is not very common in the discussion. One part of the article that I like this the topic that he chose which is very different from the other topics that were chosen among other students. This article is very critical to the world especially some patients in need. In his research, brain spheroids are important to eventually personalize medicine, drugs, and treatments, which can benefit humans. I also liked how Brian picked a topic that is relevant to society. The way Brian chose the article is also well done. He chose to be very factual, but also explained them so one could fully understand. Especially to how experiments can lead to further discoveries and possibly even cures.
Although Brian was very factual, he should’ve included more quantity (data) and less quality. Even though the quality is well done and explained It would've been nice to have evidence to back up his research. The description and detail of the organoids and brain studies were statistically done well this part should’ve had more analysis on the study.
The one piece of the article that was so interesting is how one day we could grow brain neurons and eventually cure very rare and deadly diseases. This opened my eyes to new possibilities and research that is being done. Also, how close we are to continue these amazing breakthroughs with the brain.
Ella Stupart
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito C Even
October 1, 2018
Current Event Comment
Citation:
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
Li, Brian. Rev. of “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2018/09/growing-brains-in-lab.html
Of many things in this review that were executed extremely well, three of Brian’s strengths in this essay are that he gave an interesting, informative, and concise summary; he took the reliability of the sources used in the article he was reviewing into account; and he critiqued the author’s use of a questionable literary tactic. In Brian’s summary, he explains the research presented in the article he read and defined terms that are needed to understand the topic. For example, he opens with “Organoids, or artificially grown masses of cells that resemble organs…”(Li 1). Defining necessary terms is an important part of summarizing the mean of any article, especially a scientific one. If he did not define any terms, most readers would not be able to understand the concept he is discussing. In the third paragraph, Brian cites the credibility of the author by checking the author’s sources. “All of these links are to reputable scientific organizations that help elaborate the author’s point.”(Li 3). In doing this, Brian proves that he and the author of the article he is reviewing should be considered valid and reliable sources on this topic. It is important that a reader believes an author and is able to trust the information being presented in order for the article to be successful. Brian’s third strength, questioning the author’s use of a literary tactic, is evident in the third paragraph as well. While evaluating the author’s argument, states that the title of the work is misleading to readers, claiming that the author did this to ensure that more people read their article. This impressed me because not only did Brian evaluate the author’s argument, but he considered the author’s point of view and their reason behind making certain choices.
While Brian’s review is excellent, he does have a couple of things that he could improve upon. For example, a few of his sentences become confusing due to their length. For example, the third sentence in the first paragraph and the fourth sentence in the third paragraph are very lengthy and I found the, confusing to follow. When a reader is confused by a sentence, it takes away from the impact of the piece of writing, because it not only diverts the reader’s attention from the subject of the article, but it also discourages them from reading on. Something else that Brian could have done more successfully is he could have elaborated more on his discussion of the affect on society. His next step would be to explain why Parkinson's disease was chosen for the study and go further into detail on the study can help people with this disease. I believe this would strengthen his argument even further and address some unanswered questions that come up when reading this text.
Before reading this review, I never even considered the possibility of personalized medicine; it seems impossible. I am extremely impressed by this study and if it is successful, this advance in medicine could save millions of lives and completely change medicine. I am excited to see what success this study yields in the future and to learn more about the process of how it works and why it works.
Andy Goldbaum 9/30/18 CE 2 Bio C Even
ReplyDeleteRose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, © 2018 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, A DIVISION OF SPRINGER NATURE AMERICA, INC., 25 Sept. 2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab1/.
Brian Li’s review of “Growing Brains in Lab,” by Sam Rose, is very strong in several areas. Rather than just mimic the order of events written in the article, Li takes an approach in his summary that will best elucidate the information for the reader as quickly as possible by first explaining what organoids are and that this brain being synthesized in laboratories is an example of a concept that has been worked on for a long time. Only later in his summary does he get more complex by describing the application of the brain spheroid for studying neurological disorders and personalized medicine. Another strong suit of Li’s review was his “societal application” paragraph, in which he doesn’t merely restate the article’s point about the spheroid’s potential applications in personalized medicine, but explains for the reader what personalized medicine is and goes above and beyond the text to describe how Alzheimer's is similar to the more rare neurological disorder in the article and that because of this, he hypothesizes the use of brain spheroids for such common disorders with further research. Lastly, Li’s critique paragraph is very strong, in which he demonstrates three specific reasons for the article’s strength that are not only well-supported by the article, but shows that he went above and beyond the reading to read the linked studies as well and ascertain the article’s credibility. This is a very scientific mindset.
Even though this review was very strong, there are two minor areas in which it could be improved. He should add another sentence in his summary paragraph explaining why the organoid is not exactly comparable to a real brain, as the reader would naturally want to know why the neuroscientists creating them would refrain from making their organoid closer to the real organ. He should also give a brief definition of oligodendrocytes for the readers so that the disease isn’t just another vague disorder that impairs neurological function, but something specific. I know that at least for me, understanding how a disorder relates exactly to the brain structure and successful transmission of action potentials and signals across synapses makes the entire topic of neurological disorders much more compelling, and it most likely would for the readers as well.
One revelation I had while reading this article was that not even all of the basic, broad concepts of biology and the specific sciences within it have been completely elucidated. I would expect this for niche or esoteric topics within biology, but much in the same way that I found it shocking that the DNA to protein dogma has only recently been upended with the fact that there is RNA with different functions than simply use for protein construction, I find it shocking that in a field that has led to the development of small brains, scientists have not found a way to also differentiate stem cells into blood vessels that can carry nutrients deep into the brain spheroid. This revelation made me realize that it is important when learning about the basics of biology to also learn about how this foundational information is still either being questioned or is directly applicable to a new budding field such as that of organoids so that information learned in school is linked to its real-world applications, generating early interest in a career in biology and not just the grades in a class (for example, I want to go into either neuroscience or molecular medicine, but this is in large part because information from school was connected to the real world when I was at Oxford this summer and through reading about these topics in my free time).
Grace Sperber
ReplyDeleteAP Biology
Current Event #4-Review
Growing Brains in Lab
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
Brian Li’s review of Scientific American’s “Growing Brains in Lab” was outstanding for its contextualization of the development discussed in the article in terms of its practical medical applications and potential for enhanced treatment. I was particularly impressed by his incorporation of outside knowledge including the abundance of different neurological disorders and the need within the medical community for specialized treatment to frame his argument. Through his writing, Brian was able to expound upon the conclusions reached by the author Sam Rose through a more practical lense. Another strength of this review was its objective critique of the author’s presentation of information on the growing brain. Brian rightly pointed out that the title of the article was slightly misleading for the purposes of attracting readers to “click”, thus increasing ad revenue. The title implies that following developed organs are currently being developed while this is far from the case. Overall, I greatly enjoyed this review as it reflected all the positive points of the original article while adding additional perspective.
I felt that Brian could have improved on his summary of the article. Firstly, I would have liked to have read more about the complex mechanisms and scientific concepts employed by the scientists to engineer the organoid. In particular, the fundamental importance of myelin sheathing in more real and artificial neurons was underrepresented. In terms of writing construction, I think that Brian’s sentences toward the end of his second paragraph were tending on run ons. Perhaps if the last, long sentence of the summary paragraph had been divided into several different ideas, a more clear and comprehensive overview of the topic could have been provided.
The most impactful message that I took away from both Brian’s review and the original article is the resources and time that must be dedicated to engineering specialized treatment for rare diseases. I was struck by the abundance of inherited neurological disorders in existence. While many of these illness only affect a small portion of the population, the human suffering and deteriorated quality of life that these illnesses inflict cannot be quantified. I think that specialized disorders present and opportunity for scientists to create exciting new technologies, techniques and theories that we can use to better understand the most important organ in the human body. However, in order to do so we must prioritize this research.
Michael Grieco
ReplyDeleteAP Biology
Current Event 4 - Comment
October 9, 2018
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2018/09/growing-brains-in-lab.html
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
In his review, Brian was very concise with his points. He introduces the topic with a definition: “Organoids, or artificially grown masses of cells that resemble organs, have been integral in many scientific and medical fields, especially oncology.” This gave me some background information regarding the topic, allowing me to understand this new study in a better way. Additionally, Brian explained the possible effects of this study in a way that emphasized the important points using clear and concise language. For example, he states, “Despite their relatively new status, these spheroids are an important step to personalized medicine, where drugs and treatments can be refined to meet the needs of individuals.” Finally, Brian’s criticism brings a prominent aspect to the surface. He says, “However, the author’s title, “Growing Brains in Lab”, can be misleading for the purposes of getting more views as these are not actual brains,” which must be considered when validating the author and his credentials.
Despite Brian’s conciseness, he does have extended sentences that could be difficult to understand for some. He wrote, “And even though applications are currently limited to rare diseases like Pelizaeus-Merzbacher, through further testing and research more prominent neurological disorders like Alzheimer's, which like Pelizaeus-Merzbacher disease is related to the failure of electrical signals to travel between neurons, could find treatments.” I believe that this sentence could have been broken up into two smaller sentences that allowed the reader to understand the review better. Additionally, the concise language may have left out some information that could have been helpful. If he had included more statistics and facts, the review could have left a larger impact.
The part that stood out to me were the implications of this research. If this ability were to be enhanced, it could function in replacing non-working organs within humans, creating a healthier population. Additionally, it could advance research into living organisms and how they work. This article has increased my interest in the biomedical fields, and will prompt me to do further research into this topic to gain a more thorough understanding.
Ally Bruno
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology
9 October 2018
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
Brian’s review of “Growing Brains in Labs” published in Scientific America was not only eloquent and articulate but very informative. Brian opens his review with a definition of organoids. This was an intelligent way of incorporating the definition because by opening his paragraph with this, he has provided the reader with background knowledge that is necessary for the comprehension of the rest of his piece. Another way in which Brian’s work truly stood out to me was how he was able to incorporate a strong and thorough description of the research while at the same time being succinct and not overly wordy in his sentence configurations. Lastly, I believe that Brian’ analysis of the author in his final paragraph was well written and truly added to the credibility and importance of his article. Brian pointed out both the strong suits of his author as well as his shortcomings. By saying that wished the article had a less misleading title, Brian is acknowledging a flaw in his article and explaining how he would fix it.
Although Brian’s current event was informative and enjoyable, I believe Brian could have improved upon his writing and parts of his analysis. Brian's language was sophisticated for the majority of his work until the last paragraph. He had some repetitive phrasing and his language was much less descriptive than the rest of his work. Also, Brian’s could have added more description about the importance of his article. While the research was very clear, the way in which this new found knowledge will change science was less prominent in his piece.
Reading Brian’s Current Event was very beneficial for me because I had no prior knowledge of organoids. I found it quite interesting how the research could lead to the personalization of medication for individual treatments. I was unaware that pharmacology was reaching such heights. Overall, Brian’s review was a worthwhile read and has sparked my interest in researching the topic further.
Charlotte Cagliostro
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology / Current Event 4
10/10/18
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
Brian Lee did a great job reviewing “Growing Brains in Lab”. He was able to construct an informative and interesting piece. One aspect of his review I liked was his writing style; Brain wrote in a sophisticated manner and in a knowledgeable tone. Additionally, Brain did a great job in his second paragraph in which he explained brain spheroids and their impacts within the medical field. I liked how he mentioned a case study and included that spheroids could help individuals suffering from Pelizaeus Merzbacher disease. Finally, Brain did an exceptional job defining many complex medical terms. For instance, Brain provided concise and incredibly helpful definitions for organoids, spheroids, and Pelizaeus Merzbacher disease.
Although Brain wrote an exceptional review, I believe he could improve it through making two changes in specific. First, Brain could add more information to his first paragraph. I believe adding more detail and giving a more complete explanation could have give the reader a better understanding of the article. Second, Brain could provide a more comprehensive critique of the article in his final paragraph. He only criticized the article’s title and I think he could have gone further and discussed more of the shortcomings of the article.
One interesting thing I learned from reading Brain’s review is the possible benefits from the development of organoids in the medical community. I find it fascinating that, through the use of organoids, scientists could take a step towards personalized medicine. Overall, Brain was able to write an incredibly detailed and informative review on “Growing Brains in Lab”, which taught me a lot about organoids and the future of medicine.
Caroline McGrath
ReplyDelete2/24/20
Current Event 17
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2018/09/growing-brains-in-lab.html
Rose, Sam. “Growing Brains in Lab.” Scientific American, Nature Publishing Group, 25 Sept.
2018, www.scientificamerican.com/article/growing-brains-in-lab/?print=true.
I read a summary of the article “Growing Brains in Lab”, the most intriguing thing the author did was write the name of the title of his article as the title of his review which made me curious and click on the article. Secondly, the author did a great job summarizing the experiment in a descriptive way that kept me interested. This is important because without the knowledge of that “Organoids, or artificially grown masses of cells that resemble organs, have been integral in many scientific and medical fields, especially oncology.” I wouldn’t understand the point of the article. Finally, the author used an example how advancements in research on Pelizaeus-Merzbacher can overlap with Alzheimer’s is interesting and really made me think.
Although the review was very well written, there were multiple grammar mistakes, especially in his summary of the experiment that distracted from the important information. Secondly, I think he should have related the issue to other diseases and made the argument that it is a intense medical advancement that can really impact our future.
This article was very interesting, especially with new information about different disorders, because it showed how important different areas of the brain are. It described it in a different way that I had never heard of before, and thus made me more intrigued in the information provided and made me want to read more about it.