Designer Babies

INTRODUCTION

All development of species go through what is called, evolution. What is evolution? How have humans change evolution? Evolution is the genetic composition of a population during successive generations. This is resulted by actions of natural selection acting on the genetic variation in individuals; which then result in the development/creation of a new specimen. Humans are a great example of evolution at work! Through thousands of years, the develop and changes made by evolution on the human body; is the result of what our bodies look like today. With today's leading technology, humans are no longer needed to wait for long periods of time to change themselves. Instead we are changing our own evolution in our species with the science we have in present. The topic of Designer Babies, has become a growing controversial target for the science media. Many question whether humans should have the right to genetically change and contemplate to artificial selection, and its ethnics in human society.


WHAT IS A DESIGNER BABY?

Designer babies, what is it exactly? The term Designer babies is used by journalists to describe the frightening scenario in where parents would be able to "Design a baby"; this term is not a scientific term in where scientist would use.
With advanced reproductive technology today -- the opportunities of allowing parents and doctors to screen embryos are increasingly growing. Though it has been sought out that the use of this technology is to solely determine and to make positive that the parents will bore a healthy child, many fear that in near the future; with this genetic technology that we will be able to modify embryos and to selectively modify and choose desirable or cosmetic characteristics to alter the appearance of a baby before birth. It is an example of how modern day people in the present, are selectively creating their children with specific genes. It can also be seen as where a baby's genetic makeup artificially selected formed by genetic engineering.

Image by: Matt Collins

HISTORY

Gene therapy
Up till today, there has been relatively few gene therapy trails on humans. One of the first began in 1900 on patients who were diagnosed with Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (SCID); which is a severe form of genetic disorder. In 2000, the first gene therapy succeeded,which resulted that patients with SCID now have developed a functional immune system. As time progressed, these patients were found to have developed Leukemia; due to this, work is now focused on how to correct the gene without having side effects of Leukemia or Cancer.

Jacques Cohen

Jacques Cohen an embryologist in the mid- 1990s pioneered a new technique for helping infertile women have children. This technique is known s cytoplasmic transfer; this is where women who had repeated failed attempts at vitro fertilization are "rescued" of their eggs. This involves a lengthy process in where cytoplasm injections found inside the eggs of a fertile donor, are placed into the infertile (patients egg).
Widespread of Cohen's success was shown in 1997, when the first baby conceived through cytoplasmic transfer was born. Cohen was immediately applauded for his technique for another technological discovery. 

Many might think, we've seen it all from Cohen! But yet, that was not his last research project. In 2005 Cohen along with his colleagues at the Institute for Reproductive Medicine and Science of St. Barnabas, created a large commotion to the views of bioethicists, and publishers. The genetic condition of two 17 cytoplasmic transfer babies was created. Cohen stated that they had implanted the children with "extra bits of genetic material". In effect, this concluded that Jacques created the first bioengineered babies, using specifically selected genes of his choice.

Cohen's quote -- " The experiment was the first case of human (inheritable) genetic modification resulting in normal , healthy children."

This quote resulted to be one of the goals of today' s scientist in where they are trying to find waves to prevent genetic disorders in children with the technology that Cohen had discovered. Which has also led to the distribution, turn, idea, and creation of Designer baby opportunities.


TECHNOLOGY

Non-human genetic engineering  has many useful applications, such as other inventions like the mobile blood transfusion unit, Insulin, GMOs, and vaccines. It is because of scientist, technology, and research that humans have enabled themselves to further advance modern day science, and put it into use of modern health concerns. As far as humans are concerned, already advanced reproductive techniques involving InVitro Fertilization allows doctors and parents to reduce the chances that a child will be born with a genetic disorder.
Depending in which part of the world you are located in, different rights and regulations are followed for the process of these treatments. In Canada, and most countries, it is only legal right now to carry out 2 types of advanced reproduction technologies on humans:

1. Choosing the type of sperm that will fertilize the egg --> used to determine the sex and genes of the baby.

2. To screen embryos for genetic disease; only selected embryos are implanted back into the womb of the mother.

________________________________________________________________________

Recently, the human genome has been discovered. The ethnically question arises when suggestions are saying that we can use genetic engineering to change the human genome. This is also known as positive genetic engineering; in where it enhances human traits. The speciality of genome is that, it can enable people to become faster, smarter, and stronger, you may also increase lung capacity. In other words, basically, anything that has a gene existence in nature can be changed into a human cell. One of the main downfalls/concerns of this is that very unsafe human experiment is required.

Future Technology?
There are 4 future technologies on a rise in the process of creating Designer babies:

• Genome Sequencing
• Viral Injection
• Homologous recombination
• Human artificial chromosome

COST

Vitro Fertilization (IVF) is definitely one of those trial and error methods of treatments in which infertile women turn to as one of their last resorts to getting pregnant. IVF can be tried many times (depending on how determined the parents are in the trial). One round of IVF typically costs around $ 9,000 USD.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) costs an additional $4000 - $7500/ per attempt.

Generally the success rate of each IVF pregnancy is 10 -35% (yes that is less than half !)
It is found that differences in age and health are a major contributing factor to the success rate. Therefore this tells us that a successful pregnancy costs a lot; and it is because of this that many people may not be able to afford these types of treatment.


ETHICAL ISSUES (CONTROVERSY)

Ethical issues have been on on the surface of controversy since 2004, when the term "Designer baby" transitioned from sci-fi films, into reality. Two common questions that are frequently asked:

1. Are the technologies of genetic modification and selection safe enough to be used on humans?
2. Even it the technologies are safe, can they be morally defended?

When new discoveries of science are uncovered, and introduced to a large mass of people, they tend to wonder and ask if these theories are safe. Human safety is among one of the highest asked questions that people wonder and are precautions about. Because this discovery is still in its light years, it is hard to say whether the process of designer babies are really safe. Though these processes have been tested, no one knows if the results would have a side effect in where something happens to the child. Like many other discoveries, though it seems like a miracle, there are times when reality hits back and the force of nature hits us -- new/development of diseases. As well, because no one has really created a designer baby  we cannot say whether it is safe or not, since the only way to really test this would require human experiment (which may or may not be safe). These technologies are more for genetically creating children so that they would not have any genetic disorders or diseases, so no one has really tried making a designer baby as of yet, but that doesn't mean that it's not possible.

Another ethic issues include how this is disruptive to the force of nature, and every one's uniqueness. Normally, when we are born children take on parts of their parents genetics into creating one individual who looks significantly different from others. If everyone were to create designer babies, it would be somewhat of where a trend would develop and everyone would want one particular type of appearance of their child. What we then have is a creation of where, there is no moral humanity of difference. Humans are suppose to be natural, we were created through natural causes. Many think that if we were to interfere with nature, we too are disrupting nature itself.

CONCLUSION

Designer babies definitely has its positives effects and negative effects. Depending on each persons perspective and views, each to their own would they a different expression, understanding, and concept of this topic. Based on what I think, I don't think really like how designer babies changes the natural flow of things. Humans were created, to love, and reproduce from love. If one were to change their child base on their desires for appearance, I feel that this is utterly wrong. Designer babies, means that parents are allowed to find certain traits like hair, skin colour, height, eye colour etc. To me I think that parents would really only do this out of their desire and happiness for creating somewhat of a "robotic" or "perfect" child. Fact is, no one is truly perfect. Because of the technology we have today, people are starting to think that they can eliminate traits they don't want and make ones that they do want. Though I disagree with  designer babies, I do agree that advances in technology and science can be wonderful -- as this allows parents to have children without having any birth defects. Even so, parents should not have the decision to force this on the child. Parents should be happy for what they are creating, -- and child is created out of love, the image of you and your partner, it is a symbol. If we were to create our own child using science, we are altering the child, and instead they become more of a scientific experiment. Overall, I just don't agree on the idea of people changing a child to their liking before they're even born.


ANALYSIS OF CREDIBILITY, ACCURACY AND BIAS

The article, " The Need to Regulate Designer Babies," was published on Scientific American on May 4th, 2009. The author in this article is unknown, as the article does not cite the wrtier. The article states that it was orginally published with the title "Designing Rules for Designer Babies." The main picture in the article was taken by photographer: Matt Collins.

Being that the article was published in Scientific American, it can be said that the source and accuracy of the article and its contents are reliable sources. Scientific American is a well known American science magazine that often covers topics about the latest and most controversed topics in science. Therefore, I believe that the accuracy of this article is written with facts from scientist and professors who have been investigating these topics. Scientific American is the winner of the 2011 National Magazine Award of Excellence.

In the article, it generally talked about the rules and ethical dilemmas of designer babies. In such sense, it does show that the article fights against the topics of designer babies, and strives to point out and question the health, and social impact in which designer babies causes; which means the article does show a bias in where they fight against the thought of designer babies. The article talks about how a fertility clinic was opened and started to "try" to regulate the creation of designer babies, but was soon cut off. The article then only continues to touch upon the topic in where designer babies is wrong, and how it can affect people with their needs and wants. Health issues from human fertilization and embryology authority was also a main concern in the article, as it talked about possible results from the treatment in creating designer babies.
The whole article in short, were rules in how designer babies should be regulated and the rules.



REFERENCES

[1] Brownlee, Shannon. " "Designer Babies" by Shannon Brownlee." The Washington Monthly. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2012. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0203.brownlee.html

[2] "Designer Babies: A Right to Choose? | Wired Science | Wired.com." Wired.com . N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2012. <http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/designerdebate/>

[3] "Designer baby - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designer_baby

[4] "Jacques Cohen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Cohen

[5] McIlwaine, Caroline . "Ethical issues surrounding the creation of designer babies." Ethical issues surrounding the creation of designer babies. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2012. <www.qub.ac.uk/methics/McIlwaineC.pdf>.

Deforestation - Effects on the diversity of living things

The videos posted above are a brief overview of how deforestation has effected the diversity of living things. It shows us just how much ONE human activity, is branching out to many other negative factors that are contributing to the harm of other living species. 

INTRODUCTION

In short, deforestation is the process in which forests or an abundant amount of trees are cleared from the area. The results of this activity,  have created  large barren land, and is often converted to non-forest use. The effects of deforestation causes loss of habitat, loss of renewable resources, loss of ecological services, and effects global climate, as well as the biodiversity of rain forests. 

With the current rate of deforestation, the world's rain forests could completely vanish in 100 years time. 

 FACTS: reason & aftermath

Since the 19th century, industrial demands have risen the need for timber and land which has led to be one of the main reasons to deforestation (others include farming, agriculture, ranches, and urbanization). According to United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, an estimate of 26 million acres of rainforest were destroyed yearly between 2000-2005. (Reference 4) As well, the deforestation rates have also increased over the decade as before the 2000-2005 range, rates were below 8.5, but has from then increased drastically.

Some of the top contributing countries involved in deforestation include: Malaysia, Brazil, Mexico, Cambodia, Burundi, Togo, Nigeria, Indonesia, and Sudan. 

Disclaimer: All efforts have been made to make this image accurate, however Compare Infobase Limited, its directors, and employees do not own any responsibility for the correctness or authenticity of the same.

Through the years, deforestation has grown rapidly, and more forests are being cleared away one by one. The aftermath of this activity is overwhelming:

•  The rainforests are homes to roughly half of the world's animal species. From this we can say that we are driving half of the species into extinction
• Global carbon dioxide levels increase due to fires used to clear forests ( estimated to have an annual release of 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere)
• Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, meaning that it is contributing to global warming and climate change
• Interrupts the cycle of resource renewability, causing loss of timber, charcoal, and medicinal plants
• Increases soil erosion due to soil loss, which increases water runoff
• Soil cohesion increases rates of flooding
• With less tree evaporation, climates become more arid

 Photograph by Michael Nichols

A burned clearing stands in grim contrast to surrounding rain forest in Brazil

© 1996-2003 National Geographic Society. All rights reserved.

GOING IN DEPTH :

The large mass of tropical rainforests stretch along, near the lines of the equator. Tropical forests, include closely packed rainforests, and has an abundance of rain all year round; there are seasonal moist conditions, as well as drier woodland conditions.( Reference 2) Either way, tropical forests of all kinds are following the momentum of disappearing: this is due to human actions that are being made to clear trees in these rainforests to create buildings, farms, to harvest timber and construction for oil, and the building of roads, all and all it is urbanization that is taking over the reason of transformation to the rainforests. These forests contain high amounts of biodiversity which include plants, trees, mammals, amphibians, reptiles and and insects. What does that mean? Well, let's think about it this way. Tropical rainforests are a massive biome to many plants and animals; meaning that it also contains many different habitats = the destruction of the forests, is not only destroying trees, but animals as well. By destroying the forests, humans are also destroying the multitudes of animals, and insects who depend on the biomes that the forests provides to them, for survival. This action has resulted, and are leading to many extinctions of animals and plants that we might have known, and those that we have never heard of.

The acts of deforestation have led to so many branches of where other life forms are affected. Speaking of animals and plants are only one of the few effects, but there are living things that are interrupted from this disturbance. These include: climate change, global warming, greenhouse gases, and soil erosion. Now, we have moved up to a point of where animals, plants, and environmental changes are being affected. So we can ask ourselves, is deforestation really worth it for all these other negative changes in the diversity of living things?

THE POSITIVES OF TROPICAL FORESTS

• play a critical role in absorbing greenhouse gases that fuel global warming
• help perpetuate water cycle - return water vapour back into the atmosphere
• canopy lowers temperature rates, and protects living things from the sun
• a large scale of approximately 50% of the world's animals depend on the tropical forest (live in them as well)
• provide homes to animals and plants

(Reference 2)
The tropical forest has all these positive effects, and yet deforestation is eliminating these effects, and instead transforming them into negative effects.

WHAT CAN BE DONE

One of the quickest solutions to end deforestation would be to stop cutting down trees.

Although deforestation in the tropics is rapid and widespread, some people are making an increasing effort to mitigate potential disaster. Sustainable harvesting of native plants, shade farming, nature preserves, and management by indigenous peoples are techniques that help maintain a vital resource. (Photograph ©2006 Leo F. Freitas.) -- (Nasa Earth Observatory)

Many strategies may be applied to preserving tropical rain forests that can reach to local - international scales.

Governments and many non-government are working with forest communities to reinforce and encourage the sustainability of the forests. Organizations are encouraging people to participate in lower - impact agricultural activities : shade farming, sustainable harvesting of non-wood forests products such as rubber, cork, medicinal plants, and produce.

For employment concerns, parks and forests that are protected and draw ecotourism can provide employment and educational opportunities to locals -- will stimulate the service-sector economies.


On the national level, countries should integrate research on the forests research on human impact on the ecosystem. From this the government will need to create realistic scenarios and cooperate with scientists so that they would be prepared for any future deforestation, and be able to use their research to subside the effects.


As well, several scientists are encouraging the conservation of tropical rainforests . Also the global marketplace can encourage farmers and land owners to adopt more forest friendly practices. The government as well, can enforce forest preservation policies.
 (Reference 3)
ANALYSIS OF ACCURACY, CREDIBILITY, & BIAS OF ARTICLE


The article "Deforestation & It's Effects It Has on a Global Scale" was written by author, Elizabeth Smith. Elizabeth Smith has been a scientific and engineering writer since 2004. Her work has appeared in numerous journals, newspapers and corporate publications. A frequent traveler, she also has penned articles as a travel writer. Smith has a Bachelor of Arts in communications and writing from Michigan State University (see Reference 1). 


The article was posted on National Geographic which is a Science/History magazine. For information to be on this magazine, it would be informative and fact targeted. Other sources that I used were also from National Geographic (author is unknown), NASA Observatory and Ehow. The writers of these articles have studied these sciences throughout their education careers or have written for many years. NASA observatory was written by Rebecca Lindsey, this site would be considered trusted since it seems to be a research group. National Geographic is considered one of the most reliable and useful sources/magazines directing in the science sector -- therefore I would say that it has high credibility.


___________________________________________________________________________


Most of my articles come from well trusted sites, and are based on fact scenarios. Though all information written are by fact, I did find something bias. I noticed how the facts are used to trigger and explain to readers how deforestation gives a negative impact. But in reality, we need to remember that deforestation also upholds employment, resources and land for humans. The rapid industry that we have does not do justice to the forest. The article only mentions how it is negative, put does not suppress on how humans rely on the forest. From this we can see that the author's of these sources are mostly trying to target and improve deforestation, and not thinking in mind of reality and globalization of the workforce. The articles a contribution to a one-sided story, that only targets the negative effects and how humans are mostly at fault.


CONCLUSION



Like many of the writers from the article and my other sources, I also think that deforestation is causing great negative effects to the diversity of living things. From just one human act, we are able to destroy so many other more important aspects of life; which is not only affects others but sooner or later it comes back to affect us. The saying, " What goes around comes around," can be related to this human activity. What we are doing do the forests, animals, trees, and plants are all coming back to us, as we see the changes in our climate change and our health due to the results of our actions. Though I know that I'm kind of being bias here, I also understand that many people depend on deforestation for jobs to support families and to raise business. But asides from that, I also believe that we can find alternatives that can help support humans and the environment to keep life in balance. Everything is dependent of another, and it is from this that we need to cherish what we have before it's too late.

SOURCES :


1) Demand Media, Elizabeth Smith. "Deforestation & the Effects It Has on a Global Scale | National Geographic." Green Living | National Geographic. Demand Media. Web. 06 Oct. 2011. <http://greenliving.nationalgeographic.com/deforestation-effects-global-scale-2214.html>.


2) "Deforestation Facts, Deforestation Information, Effects of Deforestation - National Geographic." Environment Facts, Environment Science, Global Warming, Natural Disasters, Ecosystems, Green Living - National Geographic. National Geographic. Web. 06 Oct. 2011. <http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/deforestation-overview/>.


3) Nasa Earth Observatory, Rebecca Lindsey. "Tropical Deforestation : Feature Articles." NASA Earth Observatory : Home. Nasa Earth Observatory, 30 Mar. 2007. Web. 06 Oct. 2011. <http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Deforestation/>.


4) Belhumeur, Kevin. "Negative Effects That Humans Have Had Upon a Rainforest | EHow.com." EHow | How

to Videos, Articles & More - Trusted Advice for the Curious Life | EHow.com. Web. 06 Oct. 2011.

<http://www.ehow.com/info_8413480_negative-effects-humans-upon-rainforest.html>.