tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-566910144128958757.post4167554876048340448..comments2023-04-30T00:48:50.178-07:00Comments on Core Biology I Honors: DNA Editing Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08576127734266494869noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-566910144128958757.post-46495345170671514792015-04-19T16:48:16.511-07:002015-04-19T16:48:16.511-07:00I choose to comment on Sean's topic because I ...I choose to comment on Sean's topic because I found the topic extremely interesting. He summarized the topic extremely well and gave me a better understanding of what genome editing is. I really enjoyed how he added in quotes from his article that gave a more detailed explanations for what genome editing was. I like how he talked about how the author did not take a side when writing about the DNA modifications because many scientist feel very differently about how genome editing should be gone about. <br />I did not know that it was even possible to edit genomes and to enhance beauty and intelligence in a person so that was very interesting to read about. I also learned that they could end genetic diseases which would be a great achievement for society.<br />I think Sean did a great job and really captured the important parts of the article. I was so fascinated by the topic that I read the entire article after reading his current event. I think he could improve on his second paragraph by talking more about the ending of genetic diseases than just talking about the enhancement of intelligence and beauty. Abby Geilinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08569949868551746502noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-566910144128958757.post-80721739363351980472015-04-19T11:19:12.287-07:002015-04-19T11:19:12.287-07:00Sean's topic was well-chosen; the article not ...Sean's topic was well-chosen; the article not only discusses the possibilities of a deviation in the course of evolution but also provokes an argument, allowing the reader to take a stance. It is extremely interesting and relevant to Biology. His ideas in the second paragraph about the dangers of this technology were articulated very well, and he assessed the credibility of the author thoughtfully. It is fascinating to think that we have control over our own race in the future; the evolution from ape to human has occurred naturally, but this article addresses how the contemporary offers technology that can easily alter the development of humans at will. Sean's prediction of a hypothetical indifferent society was creative and added intrigue to his report. Grammatically, the writing could have been proofread a more carefully, but overall learning about Sean's issue was enjoyable.CSBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14380448103955889643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-566910144128958757.post-91020426940913541622015-04-15T20:53:07.901-07:002015-04-15T20:53:07.901-07:00As I read Sean's review of the article "B...As I read Sean's review of the article "Biologists Call for Halt to Gene Editing Technique in Humans" by Nicholas Wade, I found there were both very good aspects and also ones that could be improved on. The first thing I felt Sean did a great job on was how he presented both sides of this issue to the reader. He clearly laid out the positives and negatives of DNA editing. I also felt the Sean did an exemplary job addressing the impact this will have on our society. He gives a thoughtful and insightful explanation so the reader can really understand how this is effecting the word around them. Finally, I found that Sean's use of quotations from the article made his review more reliable and gave us an idea of the authors writing technique and voice. Through Sean's detailed summary and intuitive analysis, I was able to learn a lot. For instance, I didn't understand the full capabilities of this process before reading Sean's review. I learned that it could actually alter the human genome enough to create a "perfect human being". I also learned the extremely negative effects DNA editing could have on our society and was surprised to hear how open it may be to the public .he one critique I have for Sean, is that he explain the actual scientific process more. I felt he mostly addressed its effect on society and not the actual science behind DNA editing. However, overall Sean did a very good job on his review. <br />Grace Randallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01651944797678318174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-566910144128958757.post-65413751779222278202015-04-14T16:36:33.821-07:002015-04-14T16:36:33.821-07:00I chose to comment on Sean’s analysis of "Bi...I chose to comment on Sean’s analysis of "Biologists Call for Halt to Gene Editing Technique in Humans" by Nicholas Wade. One thing that I enjoyed about Sean’s review was how he logically presented his information. The clear presentation of the material was conducive to my understanding of the pros and cons of DNA editing. I also took to Sean’s use of quotations from the article, they backed up his general points solidifying his already well done summary. Furthermore, I appreciate how Sean created an honest and thoughtful critique of the article. The critique adds to my understanding of the article because it supplements my understanding of the pros and cons of the topic, as well as the authors writing style and whether he may have presented the information in an objective or subjective way. Finally, Sean’s great use of vocabulary and solid grammar made his review more enjoyable to read. Though much of Seans report was very good, there are a couple things he could improve upon. First of all, he could include some more background on DNA editing and the science behind it. Occasionally I was confused because I did not have a full understanding of the process itself. Additionally, I thought that the potential implications that Sean articulated were very interesting and certainly true, but I hoped that he would include more immediate impacts about the possible commercial use of DNA editing. I learned many things from Sean’s review, but one thing that stood out to me was the reality of DNA editing if it were to become an unregulated process in third world countries with not as sophisticated technology. Faults in the editing process can lead to serious harm as well as the armageddon like problem of lacking individuality. Overall, Sean did a great job with all parts of his review and I learned a lot about DNA editing and its impacts, both positive and negative, and how it may affect both our generation and future generations. <br />Nate Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16171465955111160232noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-566910144128958757.post-66389754301862644692015-04-12T09:45:26.962-07:002015-04-12T09:45:26.962-07:00The strongest aspect of Sean’s current event was h...The strongest aspect of Sean’s current event was his transitions from explaining the positive outcomes of this technique to the negatives. I admired the fact that he took the time to explain what the technique was, instead of not informing the reader. The last way Sean did well was incorporating how society would make use of this new technique. Society would be rushing to get their hands on it because most people only look at their flaws.<br /><br />Based off the current event, I learned about how the technique could altercate the human genome. The altercations could eventually create a perfect human by getting rid of unwanted traits and generic diseases. I was surprised why scientists mostly disapprove this technique. They have put so much effort into the study of the sequence of DNA and the human genome, but now they do not want to get this technique approved. <br /><br />I have one suggestion for Sean: to try and not be too repetitive. He repeated a lot of what he stated in the summary and wrote it again in the relevance paragraph. Overall, he did a great job.<br />Catherine Wortelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10126095884078111919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-566910144128958757.post-38543984480529404272015-04-12T09:44:45.927-07:002015-04-12T09:44:45.927-07:00The strongest aspect of Sean’s current event was h...The strongest aspect of Sean’s current event was his transitions from explaining the positive outcomes of this technique to the negatives. I admired the fact that he took the time to explain what the technique was, instead of not informing the reader. The last way Sean did well was incorporating how society would make use of this new technique. Society would be rushing to get their hands on it because most people only look at their flaws.<br /><br />Based off the current event, I learned about how the technique could altercate the human genome. The altercations could eventually create a perfect human by getting rid of unwanted traits and generic diseases. I was surprised why scientists mostly disapprove this technique. They have put so much effort into the study of the sequence of DNA and the human genome, but now they do not want to get this technique approved. <br /><br />I have one suggestion for Sean: to try and not be too repetitive. He repeated a lot of what he stated in the summary and wrote it again in the relevance paragraph. Overall, he did a great job.<br />Catherine Wortelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10126095884078111919noreply@blogger.com