Annotated Works Cited: The Rights and Wrongs of Biological Science: Genetic Engineering

Religious Views on Genetic Engineering:

The Christian Post speaks about their view on genetically engineering children. Other articles written by The Christian post include more religious opinions on the matter of genetic engineering. Although most articles aren’t opinionated on the Christian view, the topics that are written about show what they are interested in. The article about genetic engineering included a debate between two professors arguing over whether there should be a ban on genetically engineering children.

The Center for Genetics and Society have written about the process of cloning an organism, and explains what is commonly seen in a lab studying genetics. The controversial side is included as well along with mention of the different types of studies that are happening currently. Though some topics are short, this article give you a good summary of the processes.

  • Cloning Dolly the Sheep.” The Global Resource for Scientific Evidence in Animal Research., n.d. Web. 14 Jan. 2014.

This explains how Dolly was cloned, and what her life was like. The article also explains how her cloning was different than any other animal at the time, speaking of a brief history of cloning. With more focus on Dolly, the history of cloning is a bit vague but gives a good skim of information if one wasn’t to research it more.

This article is about how we should approach genetic engineering ethically. There is mention of biowarfare, GMOs, plants that are engineered to make plastic, etc. Epstein also bring in the views of certain religions and explores the morality of modifying genes. The authors ideals seem reasonable, but there is nothing showing where he received some of his information.

The article contains a brief list of some religious diets. There is also mention of how one should remember to consider the diet of guests. It is short and a bit vague, but it includes the general idea of most religious diets.

  • GMO Safety.” GMO Safety. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Jan. 2014.

This site contains a large number of interesting and informative articles that debate over the use of GMOs.

The article considers the question: how should a Christian view genetic engineering? Included are many passages of scripture which concern the topic of health. There is fear that we are beginning to take God’s work into our own hands. To the author there are no clear answers right now but there are concerns, “and they should be carefully considered by Christians attempting to adopt a view of genetic engineering.”

Different religious leaders speak their opinion on the matter of genetic engineering. One, Lama Chuck Stanford claims that asking if it’s right or wrong is the wrong question. We need to worry about whether or not it is being conducted responsibly, whereas many others strongly oppose the use of genetic engineering.

The article explores how the Jewish religion seems to appreciate science when it comes to using genetic engineering for health.

The Huffington Post reports the rejection of another bill concerning the labeling of GMOs in May 2013, along with the different views of a few Senators.

The Pew Charitable Trusts has archived their research on genetic engineering. Many projects of theirs include food additives, food and biotechnology, safety, etc.

Genes Could Take Away Your Privacy?:

This article is about how easy for to get your DNA varieties ways. This is a problem and Amy Gutmann who has aPH.D in political science says that people fear that their private information is no longer private. So this article came out because the issues with this is that people fear of being discrimination against by insurance companies and in the work place. This covered genetic testing and privacy.  This is about testing and privacy.  I find this page to be useful because the article talks about the danger of DNA testing and how people can use your private information against you. This source is on point because it talks about how private information is not so private as people say they are and that we need to protect ourselves. The source is objective because of the ways people can get DNA without trying tell us the government need to work hard to fix the problem . Reading this my opinion of this topic has not change, it just provide me the evidence I need to prove the point that our private informatin is not private.

  • “Ethically Impossible” STD Research in Guatemala from 1946 to 1948.” Home Page. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Jan. 2014. <>.

This page talks about how President Obama wanted to make sure researchers follow the policies when people are involved in the research, after the incident in Guatemala in 1946-48 with penicillin. The point of this page is to make sure something like this don’t happen because it can cause a huge lawsuit. The topics this page covered is the ethical issues around getting consent and permission to include the person in the research. The page is about Obama trying to address the ethical issues surrounding bioethics. I find the page useful because it is an example of an ethical problem with bioethics. I like this source because it is informative and shows how President Obama feel about the issues around bioethics. The source is objective because it gives you a little information about the situation in Guatemala and the President want to fix the situation. The goal was to bring awareness and to send out a letter so that we want have another situation that will lead to a lawsuit. The source was helpful in terms of proving my argument that there are issues surrounding bioethics. After reading this page my opinion on the topics has not change but support it.

The main argume3nt of this article is just Rebecca telling the story of Henrietta Lacks. The point of the article is to tell Henriette story and how her cells became famous. This covered the part where people should feel like they have privacy with their genetic information. Reading this article I now know scientist did an unethical medical procedure on a African-American woman in the !940s and died a couple weeks or so after. I find the source interesting and helpful. comparing it to my other source I would say that is probably more bias because it tell only one side. In the article Rebecca done ton of research and she even reach out to the family for the story. Not only that, when she heard what happen to Henrietta, she was interested in the story, when she heard that she was African-American, she was not only interested, she was intrigue with the story. I think thats what make this article bias. The goal for the story was to gain sympathy from audience about a woman who was sick and not in her right mind was taken advantage of. From it, HeLa cells was created and was famous. This source was helpful to me because it tells a story of a woman , whose cells was taken like property was taken from its owner and gave it to someone else for greater value. Because of this article, my argument shows that I can feel empathy and I want my audience to feel the same way when they read about Henrietta Lacks story in my narrative. My opinion have not change from using this site as a source.

This source was mostly talking about were the money is going into for human genome project. The point of this is to inform people how much money is being spent on because it affects the economy.There are no topics being covered in the source. I would say that this article is about money and how we spend money. I don’t find the source useful because it doesn’t fit my narrative or what I am trying to say. This source is different from my other sources because it talks about money and not about how privacy is an issues in bioethics.The reason I use this source is because I think it is interesting to know how much is being spent on genetic engineering. The source is not reliable because it is not fit for my narrative. I believe the article is objective since it is talking about the money being spent on human genome. Now that I am informed about how much money is spent, I feel like the source reach its goal to inform the public. Didn’t find the source helpful much that much.  since the source wasn’t helpful, it didn’t shape my argument. Knowing how much money the government spent on this project my opinion on the topic, which is the government is not paying attention to the problem.

Tailor-Made Children:

  • Bonsor, Kevin, and Julia Layton. “How Designer Children Work.” HowStuffWorks, 10 May 2001. Web.

An informative piece of reproductive sciences and human genetic engineering. Touches upon the details of in vitro fertilization, the human genome project, and several instances of public controversies concerning “designer children”

  • CBSnews. “”Designer Babies” Ethical?” CBS Interactive, 3 Mar. 2009. Web.

Article covering an incident in 2009 when a Los Angeles fertility clinic offered people the chance to select the hair and eye color of their potential future offspring. Public backlash convinced the head of the clinic to cancel the program.

  • Green, Ronald M. “Building Baby From the Genes Up.” Washingtonpost. The Washington Post, 13 Apr. 2008. Web.

An opinion piece in the Washing Post written in favor of human genetic engineering. Acknowledges concerns over the issue, uses the movie Gattaca as an example of what people fear. Gives counterarguments in response to those concerns.

  • Hayes, Richard. “Genetically Modified Humans? No Thanks.” The Washington Post, 15 Apr. 2008. Web.

An opinion piece in the Washington Post written in reaction to another in favor of human genetic engineering, which makes this article anti-human genetic engineering (at least when it comes to “designer children”). The author acknowledges counterarguments and even admits that human genetic engineering has it’s benefits, but points out flaws in other arguments. Makes a good ethical argument for the case against “designer children”

  • Newman, Alex. “Genetically Engineered Babies Are Moral Duty, “Ethics” Guru Claims.” The New American, 22 Aug. 2012. Web.

Article covering controversial statements made by ethicist and editor of the Journal of Medical Ethics, Julian Savulescu. Makes extreme comparison and contrast by likening Savulescu to Margaret Sanger and Adolf Hitler. Includes multiple links.

  • Newman, Alex. “Outrage Grows After “Ethicists” Push Legalized Baby Murder.” The New American, 29 Feb. 2012. Web.

Article covering the “after-birth abortion” piece published in the Journal of Medical Ethics.

  • Waldman, Paul. “In Praise of Designer Babies.” N.p., 10 Oct. 2013. Web.

Pro “designer children” article published by politically left-leaning magazine/website “The American Prospect.” Ask rather rhetorical questions for the sake of argument, and is one of the shorter pieces on the subject.

The Ethical Ramifications of Genetic Engineering Being Utilized For The Advancement And Modification Of Medicine:

AgBioscience. “What Is Genetic Engineering and How Does It Work?” AgBiosafety. U of Nebraska, 2005. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <;. A short Overview of How Genetic Engineering Works

Amgen. “Timeline of Medical Biotechnology.” Amgen. Amgen, 2012. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <;. A brief timeline detailing important discoveries in medical biotechnology from 1950-2012

BBC News. BBC News, 2 Jan. 2014. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <;. sherrie walter ear transplant

Cbsnews. “Obama Ends Stem Cell Research Ban.” CBS News. CBS News, 9 Mar. 2009. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <;. Obama Ends Stem Cell Research Ban

Genetics Home Reference. “Ornithine Transcarbamylase Deficiency.” Genetics Home Reference. National Library of Medicine, 22 Jan. 2014. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <;. Reference to Ornithine Transcarbamylase Deficiency

Jennings, Ashley. “Doctors Grow New Ear on Cancer Patient’s Arm.” ABC News. ABC News, 29 Sept. 2012. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <;. New Ear transplant story

Johns Hopkins Medicine. Johns Hopkins Medicine, 24 Jan. 2014. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <;. Reference for Hospital

Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center. “Wake Forest Physician Reports First Human Recipients of Laboratory Grown Organs.” Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center. Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, May 2006. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <;.

Wake Forest School of Medicine. Wake Forest School of Medicine, 24 Jan. 2014. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <;.

One Comment Add yours

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s