One of my favorite classical novels is Frankenstein by Mary Shelley. It’s a story where Victor Frankenstein creates a superhuman out of body parts to prove that man can manipulate science to transcend natural boundaries. The main underlying premise argues, however, that some scientific endeavors are just better left unfulfilled because the consequences bring more problems than promise. In the same way, I think the cloning of human organs and pets would be a dire case of life imitating art.
As far as scientists in the United States go, I think they have many more practical issues to deal with than in cloning human organs. In general, I am against human cloning of any kind because I believe that desecrates the sanctity of life and opens up a huge Pandora's Box over what could arbitrarily deemed right and wrong. Then again, science is a perpetually progressive field of study that is always looking for the next major breakthrough. But cloning human organs is one step too far.
For instance, one scientific approach involves cloning an exact replica of another person for the sake of having a perfect match if an organ transplant is needed [3]. It sounds like a fantastic idea because it virtually guarantees an individual won’t suffer from the rejection of their own organs, should they need them in an emergency. However, several ethical concerns are raised by this notion. Among others, cloning a human being to harvest back up organs would "violate the clone's individual autonomy and liberty", as well as it's Thirteenth Amendment right to be protected from being treated like a piece of property [3]. Another possible option scientists have looked at is to create genetically modified pigs in order to produce organs suitable for transplant in humans [1]. The problem with this idea is that pigs and humans are not one and the same anatomically. They may closely emulate each other, but pig organs work best with pigs and human organs work best with humans. Whatever their m.o., there’s bound to be more concerns than closure.
On a related issue, I think pet cloning is as absurd as cloning human organs. I love domestic animals, but I'm not a fan of having copies of an original pet. The main reason I disagree with pet cloning is because the animal in question has no say in the process. It's unethical, really. For instance, I have a cat, and if I wanted to replicate him, he can't object and tell me I'm violating his rights. He may hiss and emit blood-curdling screams, but those can be easily misinterpreted by the people looking to clone him.
As it turns out, I'm far from alone in thinking this way. An independent study conducted by the American Anti-Vivisection Society found that 80% of respondents were opposed to pet cloning and 84% objected to companies selling genetically engineered animals as pets [2]. Even though pets are subordinate to humans, they're just as real and don't deserve to undergo a process that does little, if any, long-term benefit to anyone.
Not only are cloned pets controversial, they carry a hefty price tag, too. Some go for up to $50,000 [2]. I think if I were to spend that much money to keep a pet from my past, I probably have unresolved psychological issues only a professional counselor can correct.
In the end, cloning of pets, like the cloning of human organs, is a novel idea that's better off a rough draft in the minds of inquisitive scientists.
(Academic) Works Cited
[1] "Cloning Fact Sheet." Human Genome Project Information. U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, 11 May 2009. Web.
[2] "Ethics." NoPetCloning.org. American Anti-Vivisection Society, n.d. Web.
[3] Hilmert, Laura J. "Cloning Human Organs: Potential Sources and Property Implications." Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 77 (363). Pp. 363-386. Web.
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Does Science Matter?
With scientific discoveries come an enhanced quality of human life and greater public interest from those findings. In the field of clinical pharmacology, for instance, scientists in this specialty have become trailblazers by developing better drug treatments. Over the last 50 years, their research vastly improved the efficiency of a drug's effect and duration in the body, measurements to track the progress of a given medication, and follow-ups to treat potential side effects [2]. Had it not been for their tireless efforts, many people who need medication today may either not be alive or still suffering from their ailments.
This is one instance why science is still held in high regard today, despite its lack of appropriate coverage in the media. According to the 2008 General Social Survey, more than 80% of Americans were "very" or "moderately" intrigued by current scientific discoveries [3]. Even though most people are not actively involved in scientific research, the preceding statistic shows that they're still curious to find out what is being uncovered. Science may not be interesting in America now as it was during the Cold War, but its efforts to find solutions to numerous, contemporary problems keeps science relevant.
However, for all its blessings, the bane of scientific discoveries means that people's livelihood will be subjected to greater threats than they could've foreseen. Some opponents of science claim that field of study to be "intrinsically evil" because its discoveries either permit unwarranted corruption or destruction with newfound scientific aid [4]. Indeed, scientific studies can be manipulated to sound beneficial, when in fact they are dangerous, possibly even fatal. For example, controversy arose in 2007 when the Food and Drug Administration kept Avandia, a pill for diabetics, on the market even though several studies found the drug caused adverse cardiac reactions in up to 43% of users compared to those who took placebos or similar medication [1]. A scientific discovery of this magnitude should've raised serious red flags and never been approved for treatment in the first place. Still, the FDA's insistence to keep the drug available shows the audacity one will do to sweep any malignant issues under the rug, especially when they stand to make a profit. As long as science continues to generate positive and negative implications with its findings, addressing its role in society will remain a checkered affair.
Ultimately, science matters because its results affect many facets of life, from fighting the common cold to fighting various types of cancer. This relationship between science and society is not an unrequited love affair; both need each other so the circle of life will keep moving forward. But, it's not just clinical pharmacology making a difference. Many fields, such as physics and ecology, play an important role in people's lives by offering applicable insight into the world they live in.
Most of the time, new findings corroborate or provide alternative explanations for falsifiable hypotheses as part of the scientific method. Other times, such discoveries are not pleasant to hear – like the Avandia case – and skeptics will subsequently excoriate anything related to science. Nonetheless, to reject every scientific finding would be as nearsighted as the Catholic Church once was when they thought Galileo's theory of a heliocentric universe was heresy. Simply put, without science, there is no progress.
(Academic) Works Cited
[1] Calabresi, Massimo and Alice Park. "After Avandia: Does the FDA Have a Drug Problem?" Time. 12 Aug. 2010. Web.
[2] Dollery, Colin Terence. "The Scientific Contribution of Clinical Pharmacology." European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, Vol. 64 (2), 3 Jan. 2008. Pp. 99-106. Springer Berlin/Heidelberg. Web.
[3] "Information Sources, Interest, and Involvement." Science and Engineering Indicators 2010. National Science Board, Jan. 2010. Web.
[4] Siegfried, Tom. "Ease of Destruction Poisons Society's Affair with Science." Dallas Morning News 2 Mar. 1998: 7D. NewsBank. Web.
This is one instance why science is still held in high regard today, despite its lack of appropriate coverage in the media. According to the 2008 General Social Survey, more than 80% of Americans were "very" or "moderately" intrigued by current scientific discoveries [3]. Even though most people are not actively involved in scientific research, the preceding statistic shows that they're still curious to find out what is being uncovered. Science may not be interesting in America now as it was during the Cold War, but its efforts to find solutions to numerous, contemporary problems keeps science relevant.
However, for all its blessings, the bane of scientific discoveries means that people's livelihood will be subjected to greater threats than they could've foreseen. Some opponents of science claim that field of study to be "intrinsically evil" because its discoveries either permit unwarranted corruption or destruction with newfound scientific aid [4]. Indeed, scientific studies can be manipulated to sound beneficial, when in fact they are dangerous, possibly even fatal. For example, controversy arose in 2007 when the Food and Drug Administration kept Avandia, a pill for diabetics, on the market even though several studies found the drug caused adverse cardiac reactions in up to 43% of users compared to those who took placebos or similar medication [1]. A scientific discovery of this magnitude should've raised serious red flags and never been approved for treatment in the first place. Still, the FDA's insistence to keep the drug available shows the audacity one will do to sweep any malignant issues under the rug, especially when they stand to make a profit. As long as science continues to generate positive and negative implications with its findings, addressing its role in society will remain a checkered affair.
Ultimately, science matters because its results affect many facets of life, from fighting the common cold to fighting various types of cancer. This relationship between science and society is not an unrequited love affair; both need each other so the circle of life will keep moving forward. But, it's not just clinical pharmacology making a difference. Many fields, such as physics and ecology, play an important role in people's lives by offering applicable insight into the world they live in.
Most of the time, new findings corroborate or provide alternative explanations for falsifiable hypotheses as part of the scientific method. Other times, such discoveries are not pleasant to hear – like the Avandia case – and skeptics will subsequently excoriate anything related to science. Nonetheless, to reject every scientific finding would be as nearsighted as the Catholic Church once was when they thought Galileo's theory of a heliocentric universe was heresy. Simply put, without science, there is no progress.
(Academic) Works Cited
[1] Calabresi, Massimo and Alice Park. "After Avandia: Does the FDA Have a Drug Problem?" Time. 12 Aug. 2010. Web.
[2] Dollery, Colin Terence. "The Scientific Contribution of Clinical Pharmacology." European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, Vol. 64 (2), 3 Jan. 2008. Pp. 99-106. Springer Berlin/Heidelberg. Web.
[3] "Information Sources, Interest, and Involvement." Science and Engineering Indicators 2010. National Science Board, Jan. 2010. Web.
[4] Siegfried, Tom. "Ease of Destruction Poisons Society's Affair with Science." Dallas Morning News 2 Mar. 1998: 7D. NewsBank. Web.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
Should the U.S. Government Have Quarantined Andrew Speaker?
Four years ago today, American lawyer Andrew Speaker sparked a transcontinental game of cat and mouse when the U.S. government discovered he had a rare, infectious, and deadly disease before he flew overseas to get married. What followed was a controversial set of consequences that made headlines around the world.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Biodiversity in South Carolina
As a native South Carolinian, I pride myself in anything and everything related to the Palmetto State. The following are some of my state's official animals. Whether by air or land or sea, they are all marvelous creatures.
Perhaps the most fragile of all the species here is the loggerhead sea turtle. Its scientific name is Cattera cattera, and they are distinguished by their reddish-brown carapace, a.k.a. the upper shell. Loggerheads are most known for their annual migration to coastal beaches to lay their eggs in the summertime, which typically lasts from mid-May to mid-August.
However, they have been a designated endangered species since July 28, 1978, and their nesting populations have decreased by 3% every year since 1980. This is due to poachers and other forms of wildlife killing off newborn loggerheads before and during their migration from the nest to the ocean. It is now both a state and federal offense to tamper with a loggerhead’s nest, 90% of which are in Florida. These are big animals that can live as long as, if not longer than, humans with a volatile future. Next time you get the chance to see them up close, look in awe but don’t touch.
The Eastern tiger swallowtail, which is the official state butterfly of South Carolina, is as colorful as its wings. Its scientific name is Pterourus glaucus, and they can be found all over the southeastern United States in various settings, from meadows to local parks, feeding off a variety of wild nature and garden plants.
Both sexes are differentiated by the color of their wings. Males tend to have a yellow and black design while females have predominantly black wings. These particular butterflies are known for their aesthetic beauty and many people plant flowers nearby just to entice the swallowtails. Their presence is both attractive and constructive for all.
Then there's the Carolina wren, the small bird with a big voice. Its scientific name is Thryothorus ludovicianus, and theirs is a grandiose lifestyle. These wrens are typically seen in pairs, monogamous to each other when breeding and the males "employ one of the loudest songs per volume of birds."
They seldom leave their habitat long term because they are loyal to their home base, no matter where it is. Like the aforementioned swallowtail, Carolina wrens are commonplace throughout the southeast. They stay within those confines because they can’t survive harsh winters up north and won't dare cross their own immutable boundaries. They know what they want and how to get it, which is punctuated by their shrill, harmonious cry.
Lastly, there's the white-tailed deer, a graceful, naturally shy creature. Its scientific name is Odocoileus virginianus, and they have a unique lineage to themselves. For starters, these deer are not indigenous to South Carolina or even the southeastern U.S. In addition, these animals are frequent targets of hunters, a threat none of the above species have to deal with. However, there are approximately 750,000 of these deer in South Carolina alone, and this particular population has been stabilized since the mid-1990s after years of rapid growth.
But whether or not they are hunted, people have taken a liking to these deer from both their natural setting and their placement as an ornament for some. The fact that white-tailed deer can be both appreciated and assassinated shows the two extremes of human emotion when confronted with raw, natural beauty.
Perhaps the most fragile of all the species here is the loggerhead sea turtle. Its scientific name is Cattera cattera, and they are distinguished by their reddish-brown carapace, a.k.a. the upper shell. Loggerheads are most known for their annual migration to coastal beaches to lay their eggs in the summertime, which typically lasts from mid-May to mid-August.
However, they have been a designated endangered species since July 28, 1978, and their nesting populations have decreased by 3% every year since 1980. This is due to poachers and other forms of wildlife killing off newborn loggerheads before and during their migration from the nest to the ocean. It is now both a state and federal offense to tamper with a loggerhead’s nest, 90% of which are in Florida. These are big animals that can live as long as, if not longer than, humans with a volatile future. Next time you get the chance to see them up close, look in awe but don’t touch.
The Eastern tiger swallowtail, which is the official state butterfly of South Carolina, is as colorful as its wings. Its scientific name is Pterourus glaucus, and they can be found all over the southeastern United States in various settings, from meadows to local parks, feeding off a variety of wild nature and garden plants.
Both sexes are differentiated by the color of their wings. Males tend to have a yellow and black design while females have predominantly black wings. These particular butterflies are known for their aesthetic beauty and many people plant flowers nearby just to entice the swallowtails. Their presence is both attractive and constructive for all.
Then there's the Carolina wren, the small bird with a big voice. Its scientific name is Thryothorus ludovicianus, and theirs is a grandiose lifestyle. These wrens are typically seen in pairs, monogamous to each other when breeding and the males "employ one of the loudest songs per volume of birds."
They seldom leave their habitat long term because they are loyal to their home base, no matter where it is. Like the aforementioned swallowtail, Carolina wrens are commonplace throughout the southeast. They stay within those confines because they can’t survive harsh winters up north and won't dare cross their own immutable boundaries. They know what they want and how to get it, which is punctuated by their shrill, harmonious cry.
Lastly, there's the white-tailed deer, a graceful, naturally shy creature. Its scientific name is Odocoileus virginianus, and they have a unique lineage to themselves. For starters, these deer are not indigenous to South Carolina or even the southeastern U.S. In addition, these animals are frequent targets of hunters, a threat none of the above species have to deal with. However, there are approximately 750,000 of these deer in South Carolina alone, and this particular population has been stabilized since the mid-1990s after years of rapid growth.
But whether or not they are hunted, people have taken a liking to these deer from both their natural setting and their placement as an ornament for some. The fact that white-tailed deer can be both appreciated and assassinated shows the two extremes of human emotion when confronted with raw, natural beauty.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
On The Origin of Man's Folly to Explain the Creation of Life
In a class of mine I'm currently taking, we've just finished covering the chapter on the theory of evolution. It's a touchy subject, no doubt, because it champions science over religion, which frequently mix as well as oil and water. Having come from a Christian background and a private high school, learning about this material in a secular college was inevitable. But it wasn't as dangerous as the people from my past made it out to be. If anything, I feel enlightened.
Turns out, the theory of evolution is all smoke and mirrors.
So why has it been accepted as fact in the public sector for the longest time? Because it's convenient.
Turns out, the theory of evolution is all smoke and mirrors.
So why has it been accepted as fact in the public sector for the longest time? Because it's convenient.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)