Popular+articles

Tucker, Patrick. "Genetically Designing Babies Is Ethical Under Certain Circumstances." //Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context//. Gale, 2010. Web. 26 Apr. 2011. <[|__http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?displayGroupName=Viewpoints&prodId=OVIC&action=e&windowstate=normal&catId=&documentId=GALE%7CEJ3010328216&mode=view__]>.

The author of this article is Patrick Tucker. He is a senior editor of the Futurist, which in an international consumer magazine that monitors sociological and technological trends worldwide. This article is an overview of the beliefs and reasons behind gene therapy and "designing a baby." The intended audience is any average person. The author's thesis is that ethically, gene therapy causes many controversial opinions to arise, because it can be looked at from a medical standpoint (fending off bad diseases) or from a personal standpoint (designing the perfect child). The author seems to support the medical side of gene therapy. Tucker references PGD, which allows parents going through in vitro-fertilization to screen the embryos to determine what sex each is and then place which sex they want in the womb. He also explains gene interventions that would target the best interests for the child, such as being safe and only altering threatening diseased genes. He does not advocate "doping," which promotes muscles for sporting reasons. To support my argument, the medical purposes of gene therapy can save and enhance many people's lives, but I do not feel that "doping" or personal gain should be considered when thinking of gene therapy. The work is logical, clear, and well researched. The topic has been adequately addressed. There is not much of an position because of the author's presentation of all reasons for gene therapy. This has been helpful in my research because it gave me a basis as to the reasons behind gene therapy and it supports my argument that the medical uses for gene therapy should be more heavily considered if the process were to continue than the personal reasons.

"Gene Therapy Falters, Then Triumphs." Today's Science. Facts on File, 2000. Web. 10 May 2011. <[|__http://www.2facts.com/tsof_story.aspx?PIN=s0900050&term=gene+therapy__]>.

David E. Newton has written four hundred educational pieces and has taught math, physical sciences, chemistry, physics, and professional studies at both the high school, college, and graduate school levels for over thirty-eight years. This article is an overview on the background of genetic engineering. It is written to be read by any lay person. Newton describes genetic engineering from both supporting and opposing viewpoints. He explains what gene therapy is and how it can be beneficial. Through genetic engineering, better and more nutritious food can be produced, vaccines can be created, and the curing of diseases is possible. He also recalls the publicly biggest failure within the field and addresses the main controversial arguments. The biggest failure was when Jesse Gelsinger died during a clinical trial in an attempt to cure his ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency. Genetic engineering is controversial for the main reasons of altering human life, putting humans, like Jesse, at risk, possible environmental effects of releasing altered organisms, and long term affects of the treatment on the organism being treated. The author states that there are both good and bad sides to gene therapy, but many of the risks are still unknown and various. This supports my argument that the process should be extensively tested more and should only be used when completely necessary. The piece is very logical and clear. The topic has been fully addressed. The author does not appear biased. I learned more about Jesse Gelsinger from this article and both the positives and negatives about genetic engineering. This information helped me to clarify specifically that I am not completely against genetic engineering if it is not overused or unnecessary.