Caroline Brashear
Mr. Ippolito
Core Biology
January 31, 2017
The article, “New Prospects for Growing Human Replacement Organs in Animals,” by Nicholas Wade, introduces the idea of growing human stem cells in pig embryos to be later used for human transplant, which has recently been successful for the first time. In order to do this, stem cells must be collected from a patient’s skin for the new organ to grow in a large animal like a pig, which will later be harvested and transplanted into the patient. A beneficial aspect to this approach is that since the organ will be made of the patient’s cells, there would be little risk of immune rejection. These human-organ-growing pigs are examples of chimeras, which are animals composed of both their own cells and that of a human, created by implanting human stem cells into an early pig embryo. The author also highlights some negative outcomes that could result from this process, which include the possibility of the human cells being incorporated into a pig’s brain or reproductive system, humanizing the animal in an undesirable way. All in all, to achieve the goal of growing human organs for transplant in a way that addresses ethical concerns about chimera research will require several years of development and testing, but it is achievable in the future, considering new techniques that allow human cells to be channeled into organs of interest and excluded for tissues such as that of the reproductive and brain.
I chose this article because it discusses a scientific breakthrough that could help many people in the future who are in need of organs. Currently, approximately 76,000 people in the United States are waiting for transplants, so new methods to help people in need are necessary.
This article was well-written, as it was easy to follow and each concept introduced was thoroughly explained. The author also did a good job of providing background information regarding prior trials of this method being tested, including previous successes and failures in the experimentation of this process. Additionally, the author provided quotes from biologists and their teams to provide the reader with an inside perspective. Although, one way the article could be improved would be to condense the information into less lengthy paragraphs and get the point across faster without including unnecessary repetitive explanations. Ultimately, it provided me with new in-depth knowledge on an interesting subject that will hopefully bring new success to the medical field.
Citation:
Wade, Nicholas. "New Prospects for Growing Human Replacement Organs in Animals."The New York Times. N.p., 26 Jan. 2017. Web. 31 Jan. 2017.
Three things I thought were important from the article, “New Prospects for Growing Human Replacement Organs in Animals” by Nicholas Wade was the way growing stem stells was presented, the health, and social benefits growing stem cells brought. In the past, harvesting stem cells had a lot of people asking if it was ethical, because of the way they were harvested. By harvesting stem cells from a pig, this completely completely resolves any thinking of that manner. I also thought it was interesting that the stem cells were made by a pig embryo! Finally, I think it's amazing that since its individual human stem cells, the chances of an immune rejection response is very low.
ReplyDeleteI thought that the way the article explained how stem cells were made in a pig was confusing, and that they should try to clarify it a bit more. I finally thought that the point could have been conveyed faster.
I am amazed that science is developing new ways to improve human health and needs. I would've never thought that growing human organs in a pig could be possible, but low and behold, it's currently being studied. I think it's great that the current 76,000 people currently waiting for an organ transplant can be treated, if this procedure works out. This article provided me with a better understanding of stem cells, and how they are helpful.
Alyssa Lee
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Biology 10H
5 February 2017
Wade, Nicholas. "New Prospects for Growing Human Replacement Organs in Animals."The New York Times. N.p., 26 Jan. 2017. Web. 31 Jan. 2017.
.
This review by Caroline Brashear on the newly developed way of growing human replacement organs in animals was well-done. One aspect that was well-executed was her description of the process that is needed to transplant the organs from the pigs into the human body. It is simply stated and yet provides sufficient detail for the readers to understand the process. For example, Caroline states that “stem cells must be collected from a patient’s skin for the new organ to grow in a large animal like a pig”. From this, the readers can gather that the cells needed to grow the organ are from the human themselves, while the actual process will occur inside the pig. Another characteristic of her report that was noteworthy was that she stated the pros and cons of the experiment. She does this through explaining both the benefits and the disadvantages, stating that “the organ will be made of the patient’s cells, [so] there would be little risk of immune rejection”. Later, Caroline says that there is a negative aspect of this seemingly beneficial process, the “possibility of the human cells being incorporated into a pig’s brain or reproductive system”. She also summarizes her analysis in a neat and organized manner that leaves the reader with an acute understanding of the article. She comments that to “achieve the goal of growing human organs for transplant in a way that addresses ethical concerns about chimera research will require several years of development and testing, but it is achievable in the future”.
Although her review was very well-written, there are some aspects in need of improvement. For example, Caroline should have explained some new vocabulary, such as the “stem cells” mentioned in the article, to avoid any confusion with the reader. Caroline also could have explained what she meant when she stated that the animals would be “humanized in an undesirable way”. I was a bit confused as to what she may have been trying to convey in the humanization of the pigs, and a deeper explanation may have been the solution to this problem.
This article was certainly thought-provoking, and it was shocking not only to see that a method of organ transplant from animals could be used in the future, but also that science has become so advanced in such a short time. I chose this review to read because it was interesting to me that animals had the capability of growing human organs within themselves. I can only hope that this possibility can be made into a reality to save more people, although there are some moral aspects to this that can be seen as concerning from the eyes of the animals who will have to take on this new burden.
Kevin Leka
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Core Bio H
2/8/17
Citation found on review:
Wade, Nicholas. "New Prospects for Growing Human Replacement Organs in Animals."The New York Times. N.p., 26 Jan. 2017. Web. 31 Jan. 2017. .
I read my classmate Caroline’s report on "New Prospects for Growing Human Replacement Organs in Animals." She did a great job explaining, reviewing and critiquing the article. She explained the science behind the human organ replacement and gave background on the article as well. Caroline excelled in reporting the information, using good vocabulary, understanding the article, and analyzing it. She also used the same scientific terms found in the article, which showed her understanding about the topic. She wrote with an educated tone all while explaining the significance of the article and of the discovery of growing organs in animals . Lastly, Caroline’s analysis was well done. Her review was thoughtful and gave good feedback at the end on what the authors of the article should have done differently.
Although Caroline wrote an interesting review, she can improve in some areas. She could have furthered the research and explained what immune rejection is and what other animals besides pigs could be used to grow the organs. Caroline also could have discussed why pigs are being considered as the first animal to be used to grow the organ in. Caroline did not have any grammatical issues, however her sentence structure could be more clear when she said “Although, one way the article could be improved would be to condense the information into less lengthy paragraphs.” Caroline could have chosen to reword this, but ultimately her review was well written.
While reading Caroline’s review, I realized that the human’s have a great need for organs and that tens of thousands of people are currently waiting for an organ replacement. This is extremely complicated and needs to be addressed with a clear solution, however the solution should not be at the risk of other animals lives. It may take years of medical studies to reach the point to safely and successfully grow the organs, but in the long run it will be worth it. The article was very interesting and was very recent which made the review even more impactful. This new organ replacement research and option will have a great impact on many people in the very near future.
Katie Quigley
ReplyDeleteWade, Nicholas. "New Prospects for Growing Human Replacement Organs in Animals."The New York Times. N.p., 26 Jan. 2017. Web. 31 Jan. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/26/science/chimera-stemcells-organs.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=9&pgtype=sectionfront
I read a current event by Caroline Brashear about the article, “New Prospects for Growing Human Replacement Organs in Animals. Caroline’s article was very well written, however did need some improvement. Caroline stated the pros and cons of the experiment in the article she read. This really helped the reader understand the article better and learn more about the topic that was being presented. Another aspect of Caroline’s paper that was well done was that she summarized the article in a very neat and organized way. This leaves the reader with a good taste of the article. The last thing that made Caroline’s current event good, was her description of the process that is needed to transplant the organs from the pigs into the human body. It is simple and helps the reader understand the process.
Although Caroline’s current event was mostly well-done, there were some aspects that needed improvement. For example, Caroline should have used words that were simpler. Another solution to this problem is that she could have defined the complicated scientific words. This would have helped the reader understand the article better. The other problem with Caroline’s current event is that she should have elaborated on the effects the article had on society. She did not go into depth on what this research could actually do to society.
This current event was well written and interesting. The subject of the article is very new and it is interesting that the research that they are doing now could be revolutionary. I choose this article while scrolling through the website because it sounded cool and as soon as I read the title, I knew I wanted to learn more about this subject. I hope to learn more about this in the future and cannot wait to see how this experiment will save people’s lives.
Catie Burnell
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Core Biology Honors
February 17, 2017
My classmate Caroline Brashear wrote an excellent review of the article “New Prospects for Growing Human Replacement Organs in Animals” by New York Times journalist Nicholas Wade. Not only was the topic of the article she chose very interesting, her review was well-written and easily understandable. Caroline provided both positive and negative aspects of chimera growth. For instance, Caroline states that an example of a negative outcome of the human-organ-growing-pigs is “the possibility of the human cells being incorporated into a pig’s brain or reproductive system, humanizing the animal in an undesirable way.” I also enjoyed how Caroline included statistics on the current status of Americans currently awaiting organ transplants, thus displaying the significance of the research shown in the article. However, although Caroline’s review was overall well-written, it would have been beneficial to include some quotes from the article in her review in order to prove and back up her claims. Additionally, I would have liked to see some more background information on chimeras to understand the science of human-organ-growing animals better. Nevertheless, Caroline did a great job with this review. The thing that really stood out to me in the article was the topic itself - I did not think it was possible in the near future to create a human-animal hybrid, but obviously, much research on this subject is being done currently and chimera growth is becoming a widely studied topic that may help advance the world of medicine.