hi, this dorothy's bio blog. which used to be her media blog. because she's lazy. so yeah, here it is. in all it's beautiful non-beautiful glory.
the source of life/grades
jeanie bo beanie
hay sarah jay
step up stephanie
denden denis(e)
deborah, no gibson
|
|
Designer Bags, Shoes, Babies?
0 Comments:
"Designer Babies" is the term being used by the media to describe the future of modifying or selecting our children's genes for desirable characteristics (medical and cosmetic). Are things getting out of hand with our research into genetic processes? In this blog investigate social and ethical implications of this research and technologies that have been developed from it.
We manage to live in a world where appearance is everything. Designers make clothes, bags, shoes, everything imaginable. People buy them to give the appearance that they want. So much is already aimed to create an image, so why not have babies that are designer too?
 We're not talking Chanel or Prada babies, with a little stamp of Made In Paris on the back of their head but babies that are genetically engineered. Parents deciding what genes they want and what they don't. Do they want a tall or short daughter or son? Blue eyes, green eyes, brown eyes? The decisions are endless and why leave it up to fate when you can pick and choose how your kid will look like?
This technology isn't just for the shallow minded, it's also for medical reasons. If you carry a gene that can cause a medical condition it is possible for you to avoid this scenario. This process is used in Invitro Fertilization, where you have a few embryos that can be screened for that gene. Then when selecting which ones to implant in the uterus you can choose the ones that don't carry that gene. In that aspect it could be helpful and even productive. It will be easier for both parents and offspring.
However many people fear that this technology will be used to select cosmetic features of the babies. For now it is only be used to select a baby's gender. People fear that one day you will not just be able to pick out traits you don't want but put in traits you do want. Even ones created in a lab. The idea that one day you can give your baby genes that don't even exist in the human genome is what science fiction is made of. But is this playing God?
Some would say that yes, you should leave everything about creating life up to fate. That picking and choosing attributes of your child is just messed up. And if you start picking simple things like gender or eye colour where will it stop? Will we actually start creating super babies, babies who can fly or breath underwater? As cool as that may sound is that even ethical? And then there's those who will say that this is for the benefit of the world. By selecting certain genes we are just helping evolution. Survival of the fittest but everyone is fit. Or maybe it's for the benefit of the children, preventing them from suffering from genetically illness.
Really the whole thing is a matter of opinion. Personally I think that this technology can be used for medical purposes, and medical purposes only. Anything else would be taking it too far.
SOURCES
- http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,989987,00.html
- http://www.canada.com/topics/lifestyle/parenting/story.html?id=af85fffa-81df-4c47-b389-d7eefc2faccf&k=7781
|
|
|
Designer Bags, Shoes, Babies?
"Designer Babies" is the term being used by the media to describe the future of modifying or selecting our children's genes for desirable characteristics (medical and cosmetic). Are things getting out of hand with our research into genetic processes? In this blog investigate social and ethical implications of this research and technologies that have been developed from it.
We manage to live in a world where appearance is everything. Designers make clothes, bags, shoes, everything imaginable. People buy them to give the appearance that they want. So much is already aimed to create an image, so why not have babies that are designer too?
We're not talking Chanel or Prada babies, with a little stamp of Made In Paris on the back of their head but babies that are genetically engineered. Parents deciding what genes they want and what they don't. Do they want a tall or short daughter or son? Blue eyes, green eyes, brown eyes? The decisions are endless and why leave it up to fate when you can pick and choose how your kid will look like?
This technology isn't just for the shallow minded, it's also for medical reasons. If you carry a gene that can cause a medical condition it is possible for you to avoid this scenario. This process is used in Invitro Fertilization, where you have a few embryos that can be screened for that gene. Then when selecting which ones to implant in the uterus you can choose the ones that don't carry that gene. In that aspect it could be helpful and even productive. It will be easier for both parents and offspring.
However many people fear that this technology will be used to select cosmetic features of the babies. For now it is only be used to select a baby's gender. People fear that one day you will not just be able to pick out traits you don't want but put in traits you do want. Even ones created in a lab. The idea that one day you can give your baby genes that don't even exist in the human genome is what science fiction is made of. But is this playing God?
Some would say that yes, you should leave everything about creating life up to fate. That picking and choosing attributes of your child is just messed up. And if you start picking simple things like gender or eye colour where will it stop? Will we actually start creating super babies, babies who can fly or breath underwater? As cool as that may sound is that even ethical? And then there's those who will say that this is for the benefit of the world. By selecting certain genes we are just helping evolution. Survival of the fittest but everyone is fit. Or maybe it's for the benefit of the children, preventing them from suffering from genetically illness.
Really the whole thing is a matter of opinion. Personally I think that this technology can be used for medical purposes, and medical purposes only. Anything else would be taking it too far.
SOURCES
- http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,989987,00.html
- http://www.canada.com/topics/lifestyle/parenting/story.html?id=af85fffa-81df-4c47-b389-d7eefc2faccf&k=7781
|
0 Comments:
|
tagboard.
who you kidding. there is no tagboard
|
archives.
By post:
Humans Aren't Good Caretakers, Just Look at Their ...
By month:
October 2009
January 2010
April 2010
|
affiliates.
Credits
Layout: Mary
Colours: refuted
Host: blogger
|
profile.
lalalazy
Adopted Trees.
|
