Hugh Duffy
Mr. Ippolito
AP BIO
4/25/2021
Mitch Leslie Apr. 15, 2021, et al. “Lab-Grown Embryos Mix Human and Monkey Cells for the
First Time.” Science, 15 Apr.
2021,www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/04/lab-grown-embryos-mix-human-and-monkey-c
ells-first-time.
Scientists have recently combined human and monkey cells in hopes of replacing organ donorship with ones grown in a lab. The article states that this discovery is significant because it opens doors for creating additional chimera cells of different species such as humans with pigs or cows. It is already understood that pig and cow hearts can be used as replacements in surgery with high efficacy rates. When grown in a lab, scientists could specifically tailor an organ to its recipient, negating the possibility of organ rejection - where the immune system recognizes a transplanted organ as a foreign body and dangerously attacks it. “ These chimeras could help scientists hone techniques for growing human tissue in species better suited for transplants, such as pigs.” (Leslie 1) There is hope that these experiments will work in humans as they did with mice, “In 2017, researchers reported growing pancreases from mouse stem cells inserted into rat embryos. Transplanting the organs into mice with diabetes eliminated the disease.” (Leslie 1) This has worked with mice because of their relation to rats, however the biology seems to fail when it comes to combining species that differ greatly in genetic makeup. As of now, combinations between humans and pigs, as well as humans and cows have all gone terribly wrong. Cells of this nature were instantly undergoing apoptosis, detecting an error in their DNA and terminating themselves. It is unclear if this research will ever come to fruition and benefit modern medicine as it is predicted to.
One aspect I wish the author had expanded upon was the lack of emphasis on human and pig trials. There was a clear focus on the concept or idea of those trials, without actually regarding them in any seriousness. I would have liked to learn more about the potential for growing organs in a lab, and if this were to occur, would organ donation still be necessary? And would the free market seize this opportunity to capitalize on said organs? Selling them? In that scenario, the idea becomes grim.
I chose this article because I found the title interesting. I am personally against most forms of stem cell and combination research, as I find it appalling, however this study seemed promising. As long as individuals aren’t capitalizing on the health needs of others, this could be a brilliant discovery for humanity and - as it did in mice - aid in eliminating chronic illnesses like diabetes.
Willy Swenson
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP BIO
4/25/2021
Duffy, Hugh. “Bronxville AP Biology.” Blogspot.com, 26 Apr. 2021, bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/. Accessed 26 Apr. 2021.
Mitch Leslie Apr. 15, 2021, et al. “Lab-Grown Embryos Mix Human and Monkey Cells for the
First Time.” Science, 15 Apr.
2021,www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/04/lab-grown-embryos-mix-human-and-monkey-c
ells-first-time.
In Hugh’s review of “Lab-Grown Embryos Mix Human and Monkey Cells for the First Time”, Hugh did an amazing job to summarize this article. It is very important, especially in this type of format, to have a comprehensive review of the article. Since the reader is not reading the review, we must rely on the author’s summary of their article to make informed decisions of our own on the topic at hand. I think Hugh did a great job at this. Secondly, I thought Hugh did a good job of keeping his tone professional and formal. In these types of review, it is important to keep a professional tone, so your claims sound less biased and more credible. While he did have a good personal tone as well, the professional tone was good for the review. Lastly, he opened the review with a great hook. He started by asking the reader a series of interesting questions that got the reader hooked on what he had to say. I myself wanted to continue reading after asking those questions to myself.
Two areas in which Hugh could improve upon is supporting evidence and personal connection. I thought Hugh’s review lacked specific evidence to substantiate his claims. For example, many of his claims were not supported by the article he read or any outside information. Although I trust Hugh not to lie in his reviews, I believe that his article can be strengthened by adding in some specific evidence. Lastly, I think that Hugh could’ve made better connections to how it impacts our lives. While he did talk about society and the country as a whole, I would have liked it if Hugh focused more on the local ecosystem, such as how it could’ve impacted our school, doctors in Bronxville, or something along those lines.
I chose this article because I did not know much about artificial organ donation. Before reading this review, I did not think it was important but I was sorely mistaken. I had a moment of realization that mixing species’ genes is extremely complicated and is important in the future of medicine. I thought it is so cool that this could one day benefit me if I need a new organ in the future.
Julia Reich
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology C even
5/4/21
Link to blog:
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/
Link to article
Mitch Leslie Apr. 15, 2021, et al. “Lab-Grown Embryos Mix Human and Monkey Cells for the
First Time.” Science, 15 Apr.
2021,www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/04/lab-grown-embryos-mix-human-and-monkey-cells-first-time.
Hugh’s review of “Lab-Grown Embryos Mix Human and Monkey Cells for the First Time” was a very interesting read. One aspect he did well was talk about the study in great depth. For example, he writes, “When grown in a lab, scientists could specifically tailor an organ to its recipient, negating the possibility of organ rejection - where the immune system recognize.” I never felt like the review was lacking details. A second aspect he did well was including his own opinion with a nuanced thought. He writes that he usually does not endorse stem cell and combination research, but this study was one that could change his mind. I felt like his leniency on the study proves that it could be effective. A third aspect he did well was include quotes from the study, like “These chimeras could help scientists hone techniques for growing human tissue in species better suited for transplants, such as pigs.” By using a reliable source, Hugh builds credibility within his review.
One aspect Hugh could have improved on is introducing his topic more. I felt like he just dove into the subject a little, and I found myself a bit confused. He could fix this simply by adding a few more sentences to introduce what scientists have been working on. A second aspect he could improve on is connecting his topic to our daily lives better. While he does begin to do this in his first body paragraph, the thought is not complete. He could easily fix this by adding a few extra sentences of deep analyses. Overall, however, I felt as if I learned a lot from Hugh’s intriguing article.
I chose Hugh’s article because progressive science studies are incredibly interesting. As well, the title “for the first time” is enough to draw in any reader. Scientists have found a way to grow human tissues and provide for our future generations. This is very beneficial to me and my future line. I hope to do more research on this topic because it is fascinating.
Angelinna Faisca 5/5/21
ReplyDeleteMitch Leslie Apr. 15, 2021, et al. “Lab-Grown Embryos Mix Human and Monkey Cells for the
First Time.” Science, 15 Apr.
2021,www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/04/lab-grown-embryos-mix-human-and-monkey-c
Ells-first-time.
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com
Hugh’s review was easy to understand and a very interesting topic to read about. In summary, scientists attempted to try to grow new cells from cells that are already existing. This is a big investment that opens the door up for experimenting with cells that are from pigs or cows, as his review stated. Another issue is that when a foreign organ is put into a body, it automatically attacks it, scientists have negated this by directly tailoring the organ to the body, as scientists have done. Hugh also includes the success of rats and getting rid of diseases that some hold with organ transplants. This is also important because it offers a goal in mind with organ transplants since currently, patients wait a long time on lists to get new organs. Overall, his review was pretty well written and I learned a lot about organ transfusion, especially with the risks involved, this could make it a lot easier.
Since it was a pretty concise review there are few questions, but I was curious about the trials with humans and pigs. Talking about trials, I think could have been better to compare the two different subject trials, which are monkeys and pigs, both two animals that have been tested to determine cell growth. Overall, Hugh did a nice job at explaining the trials and testing smoothly.
This review is very important because it holds great importance for our future, especially with organ donations, which as I said earlier, can take a very long time for a patient to obtain a needed organ. Trials like these bring us closer to unnecessary deaths.