Maddie Parker

Annotated Bibliographies

 

Aizaki, H., Sawada, M., & Sato, K. (2011). Consumers’ attitudes toward consumption of cloned beef. The impact of exposure to technological information about animal cloning. Appetite, 57(2), 459-466. Retrieved January 28, 2016.

 

This study was designed to test consumer’s views on food technologies, specifically on cloning. The practice is not widely accepted by the human population. The researchers designed an online survey to see if informing consumers about the process of cloned cattle (both by ECNT and SCNT) and the low health risk they pose would change their attitude towards it. The survey was issued to Japanese consumers and the results showed they held the same attitude towards cloned cattle before and after learning more about it. The lack of change may have been due to consumers’ lack of food safety knowledge, their strong views on cloning, or their lack of understanding of the material presented to them.

 

Heyman, Y., Chavatte-Palmer, P., Berthelot, V., Fromentin, G., Hocquette, J., Martignat, L., & Renard, J. (2007). Assessing the quality of products from cloned cattle: An integrative approach. Theriogenology, 67(1), 134-141. Retrieved January 27, 2016.

 

This study talks about the in depth testing of the maturation process of cloned cattle, the milk composition, and the meat compared to naturally mating animals. The study did find slight but significant differences in the amount of prenatal deaths, in the composition of the meat, and in the composition of milk. In order to then test the safety of the animal products, they conducted a study using Wistar rats. The trial concluded there was no significant different between cloned animal products and the naturally mated animals in the effect of the rats’ health. It was concluded the potential risk for consuming cloned animals was very minimal, however, further research should be conducted before the products enter the food chain.

 

Laible, G., & Wells, D. N. (2007). Recent advances and future options for New Zealand agriculture derived from animal cloning and transgenics. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 50(2), 103-124. Retrieved January 21, 2016.5

 

This article is about the background of cloning and the new problems scientists are facing. These problems include the altering of the frequency of many genes in an unregulated manner and the technology to test if human consumption is safe. The process of cloning at the moment is inefficient and often times causes errors in the animal’s genes. They are looking at ways to improve these issues. There is also a resistance of consumers to buy animal products that have been cloned. Scientists are currently creating a way to test the cloned animals and approve them for commercial consumption.

 

Rudenko, L., & Matheson, J. C. (2007). The US FDA and animal cloning: Risk and regulatory approach. Theriogenology, 67(1), 198-206. Retrieved January 25, 16.

 

This article explains how the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates food for consumption. It discusses the lack of regulation the FDA had on the cloning technology. This lead to the Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) to investigate any potential risks of cloned animals. They found cloned animals produce the same hazards as naturally mated animals. Although cloning has not been extremely successful due to the smaller gene pool, the healthy animals that come out of it should be able to be consumed with no risks. The FDA has decided to not add any additional safety regulations for cloned meat based on these findings. They have agreed to stay up to date with new research on cloned animals and take precautions as necessary. For now, they have not approved of cloned meat in the market.

 

Yang, Xiangzhong, X. Cindy Tian, Chikara Kubota, Ray Page, Jie Xu, Jose Cibelli, and George Seidel. “Risk Assessment of Meat and Milk from Cloned Animals.” Nat Biotechnol Nature Biotechnology 25.1 (2007): 77-83. Web. 28 Jan. 2016.

 

This article compiles a bunch of studies done on cloned cattle and specifically compares two types of cloning methods. The two methods compared are embryonic cell nuclear transfer, (ECNT) cloned cattle and somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) cloned cattle. They found that after testing all parts of the cattle including maturation, blood composition, meat composition, and milk composition that ECNT cattle are safe for human consumption. The blood composition varied in the SCNT cattle, however, all the other differences were only slight. Overall, the article concludes that after evaluation all the research that the differences between cloned cattle and normal cattle are very slight and do not effect human consumption.

 

 

.

 

Blaszczak-Boxe, Agata. “Artificial Pancreas May Improve Type 1 Diabetes Treatment.” Live Science. Live Science, 26 Nov. 2014. Web. 28 Jan. 2016. http://www.livescience.com/48932-artificial-pancreas-type-1-diabetes-treatment.html

• This article details the advancements of the artificial pancreas (AP) in the last couple years and it describes a specific study where a comparison between the insulin pump and the artificial pancreas were made. A comparison in the duty was also made between an AP with a store of insulin and an AP equipped with glucagon and insulin. The study verifies that the AP significantly reduces low blood sugar episodes at night. The study also points out that there is no “significant benefit” to having an AP with insulin and glucagon over an AP with only insulin. This article is helpful because it points out the immense benefits derived from the AP.

Caudal, Arianne, Matt Mulroy, Wesley Wagers, Eran Atlas, and Eyal Dassau. “Closing the Loop.” Mary Ann Liebert. Mary Ann Liebert, 13 Feb. 2015. Web. 23 Jan. 2016. http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/pdf/10.1089/dia.2015.1504

• This article defines what closing the loop means by first differentiating between closed and open loop. Closed loop describes a device that can measure blood sugar and then decide what amount of insulin to deliver. Open loop describes devices that measure one’s blood sugar, but do not deliver insulin. The article then goes on to describe what encompasses an artificial pancreas: CGM, Insulin Pump, and Algorithm. Then it lists the three leading algorithms. Finally the article mentions that the artificial pancreas testing has changed from clinical trials to out patient trials and it lists a multitude of studies that have occurred this past year. One study tested the artificial pancreas on 10 patients in an extremely controlled environment for 24 hours. The results were amazing in that 7 of the 10 patients had no blood sugar lows during the time period. Another study test the artificial pancreas on 10 virtual patients for 10 days. The artificial pancreas was only used for 16 hours a day. These two studies show progress in that the artificial pancreas is moving towards being tested for longer periods of time. This article is useful because it can be used to support my argument that the artificial pancreas helps type 1 people better live their lives. This article is reliable because it mentions a variety of different clinical studies and points out each trial’s pros and cons.

“Two Clinical Trials Could Lead to FDA Approval for Type 1 Diabetes Device.” Science Daily. Science Daily, 4 Jan. 2016. Web. 27 Jan. 2016. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/01/160104130828.htm

• This article talks about how far along the artificial pancreas is in testing. According to the article there will be two final clinical trials in 2016. These trials will test how an artificial pancreas acts in a real life setting.  The trials will be conducted at UVA and at Harvard. There will be trials internationally as well. These trials are for long periods of time (6 months). This article is good because it conveys the how cutting-edge this topic is and how the artificial pancreas could become a device used regularly to treat diabetes.

“What Is the Pancreas? What Is an Artificial Pancreas Device System?” FDA U.S. Food and Drug Administration. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, n.d. Web. http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/HomeHealthandConsumer/ConsumerProducts/ArtificialPancreas/ucm259548.htm

• The pancreas is an extremely important organ in your body because it regulates the use of the hormones insulin and glucagon. Insulin helps lower blood sugar and glucagon helps raise blood sugar. However, these hormones malfunction in people with Type 1 Diabetes, which leads to blood sugar highs and lows. Type 1 is an autoimmune disease where the body attacks itself and thus depletes the body of insulin (beta cells). An artificial pancreas (AP) combines different technologies already in existence to make handling Type 1 Diabetes easier. A continuous glucose monitor, blood glucose monitor, algorithm, and insulin pump are all different devices that combine to form an AP. This source will help me define jargon. This source has reliable information because it is written by a well-known source the FDA.

 

 

 

 

In a controversial surgery led by Robert J. White, a team of neurosurgeons performed a head transplant on a living rhesus monkey. Paralyzed and only able to smell, hear, taste, and see for a couple days, the test subject met its end a couple days later. This surgery raised questions on whether or not a full head transplant should be performed on humans, which would both raise many ethical questions and save countless of lives. With talk of a head transplant being performed on an actual human, many state that it should not be done due to the outcomes of Dr. White’s surgery.

1. Nguyen, Tuan C. “What It Will Take For A Head Transplant to Work.”

Washington Post. WP Company LLC, 6 Mar. 2015. Web. 22 Jan. 2016. <http://search.proquest.com/docview/1661969649?pq-origsite=summon>.

 

Sergio Canavero is an Italian neuroscientist who is advocating for a full head transplant in the near future. His big, revolutionary idea, although, comes with many complications. How would one fuse the spinal cord together in order to connect the brain and body? How would one prove that this experiment is feasible? How would he respond to the ethical controversy of this experiment? Canavero already has a theory, called Project GEMINI, that may help him achieve the impossible. However, with so much skepticism and controversy about this subject, it may be hard for him or any others to perform such a revolutionary surgery.

2. “Gizmodo: The Crazy Science Behind a Proposed Head Transplant.”

Gizmodo. Gizmodo, 25 Feb. 2015. Web. 22 Jan. 2016. <http://search.proquest.com/docview/1658165306?pq-origsite=summon>.

 

In China’s Harbin Medical University, a team of researchers are planning to perform a head transplant surgery with long-tailed macaque monkeys. They plan to connect a fraction of the spinal nerve fibers, which should be enough for the monkey to maintain voluntary muscle movement and other crucial functions. However, there are many ethical problems and skepticism for this procedure. Whether or not this experiment will be successful, more knowledge and better technology need to be attained in order to successfully perform it on humans such as increasing the number of nerve connects, preventing the rejection of the transplant, and keeping the brain healthy.

3. Fingas, Jon. “Monkeys May Be the First Primates to Get Successful Head Transplants.”

Engadget. AOL Tech, 6 June 2015. Web. 26 Jan. 2016. <http://www.engadget.com/2015/06/07/monkey-head-transplants/>.

 

The possibility of a human head transplant would be revolutionary in the medical field, but it poses many philosophical and neuroethical complications. By performing one, the person may lose their personal identity, metaphysical and social status, and physical and emotional experiences. Despite these problems, Sergio Canavero plans to perform a head transplant by 2017 on Valery Spiridonov. It can be possible with new technology such as HEAVEN-GEMINI, which involves the cooling and cutting of the donor’s and recipient’s spinal cords to allow for fusion. It addresses in more detail how it is possible and what will happen post-surgery.

4. Pascalev, Assya, Mario Pascalev, and James Giordano. “Head Transplants, Personal Identity and Neuroethics.”Springer (2015): 1-8. Springer Science and Business Media Dordrecht. Web. 28 Jan. 2016.

Written by Dr. Sergio Canavero, himself, this article explains HEAVEN-GEMINI through his perspective.

Using Dr. Robert White’s head transplant on a rhesus monkey as an example, he explains and outlines in incredible detail how project GEMINI will allow for the complete fusion of the spinal cord and brain. Additionally, pictures are included in this source to make the procedure easier to understand. Canavero, further, supports his endeavor by explaining how Dr. White’s procedure was performed and compares it to project GEMINI. It is stressed that this procedure is very complex and extensive preparation is needed for it to be successful.

5. Canavero Sergio. 2013. HEAVEN: The head anastomosis venture project outline for the first human head transplantation with spinal linkage (GEMINI). Surgical Neurology International 4(1): 335–342.

This article explains in more detail about Dr. Robert White’s procedure with the rhesus monkey. Dr. White’s plan in this experiment was to completely cut off the monkey’s head intact and then rapidly stitch it to the neck of another beheaded rhesus monket. The monkey could eat, react to stimuli, and snarl when prodded, but the spinal nerve fibers were not connected. Due to this problem, it could not control anything below its neck and only lived for eight days. However, despite the outcomes of his surgery, White continues to relentlessly believe that a head transplant on humans is very viable.

6. White R.J.. 1999. Head transplants. Scientific American 10: 24–26.

This article explains a theoretical surgery in which a head/ brain transplant could work, but then states that it is no more than medical fiction. The reasoning is that all the material that broke does not regenerate and if the nerves did join, how can one be so sure they are connecting the right fibers? There are millions of fibers in the body. Therefore, it would be surgically impossible. If the surgery were to be successful, what would the identity of the individual be? Would the person be the donor, recipient, or a new third person? What would their memories be and who would it belong to? These may confuse the individual and cause stress.

7. Puccetti Roland. 1969. Brain transplantation and personal identity. Analysis 29(3): 65–77.

A chemical called polyethylene glycol that encourages the fat within the cell membranes to fuse together, is being used to fuse together the ends of the spinal cord. This technology will be used in Dr. Sergio Canavero’s human head transplant that will take place in two years. This article simplifies the HEAVEN-GEMINI procedure into short paragraphs, allowing the reader to have a better understanding of what will happen in the complex surgery. Additionally, this article states that Canavero expects the recipient to be able to move and feel their face when they wake up and be able to walk in a year.

8. Stoppard, Miriam. “Head Transplants.” The Daily Mirror: 42. Mar 27 2015. ProQuest.Web. 2 Feb. 2016 .

Sabrina Shah

Prof. Boyd

ENGL-105i

26 January 2016

Works Cited

“Stroma Medical Procedure – Stroma Permanent Eye Color Change Laser.” Stroma Medical Procedure – Stroma Permanent Eye Color Change Laser. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Jan. 2016. <http://www.stromamedical.com/page/physician-info>.

This source was relevant in describing the procedure of the eye color alteration surgery in digestible terms. It describes how the procedure is possible at all due to the layers of pigments of the eye (brown on top, blue underneath). The article continued to describe the non-invasive procedure that utilizes a laser that disrupts the first layer of pigment that causes the body to initiate a slow tissue-removal process of the upper brown-colored layer. Specifically, the patient eye is kept opened by a small device. Then the patient sits in front of the laser and their heads are stabilized. The patient is told to direct their eye toward a 1 cm x 1 cm animation that is 1 foot in distance away from their eye. The laser is activated, and the procedure is completed for that eye. The same steps are taken for the other eye, usually in the same day.

“New Procedure May Turn Brown Eyes Blue : DNews.” Discovery News. Discovery, n.d. Web. 26 Jan. 2016. <http://news.discovery.com/human/health/new-procedure-may-turn-brown- eyes-blue-150312.htm>.

This Discovery News article discussed in detail the science behind how the eye color changing process is possible and even quite simple. It talked about how researchers when attempting to create the process found a “sweet spot” of the eye to target with a laser so that the body would then take over the process of tissue degeneration on its own. The sweet spot is where the pigment can be agitated that catalyzes the tissue degenerating effect, without damaging the eye. The article also discusses that the laser is green in color in order to absorb the brown hue of the eye and how the results can be apparent over weeks. It tells of 38 tester participants who received the surgery in one eye in the Stroma lab in Costa Rica; and how the only real potential health threat is glaucoma.

Ceruti, P. “Iris Colour Change after Glaucoma Surgery Associated with Haemorrhagic Choroidal Effusion.” Nature. Nature, 4 May 2007. Web. 26 Jan. 2016. <http://www.nature.com/eye/ journal/v21/n7/full/6702862a.html>.

This article is different as it gives a different vantage point of the eye color changing process and the origins to its discovery. When this article was published in 2007 people were still unaware that the process was possible so when a man received treatment for glaucoma and his iris color altered it was a surprise to the medical world, and for the general population. The procedure (a laser to the iris), was unexpected to have caused the color change in the 56-year-old man’s eye (it altered from green and cloudy to clear and bright blue in hue). It also was a shock to doctors that it did this without hemorrhaging (rupturing blood vessels) the delicate surface of the eye.

“First permanent eye colour change surgery performed in India.” India Pharma News 29 Feb. 2012. Infotrac Newsstand. Web. 27 Jan. 2016.

This article gave an alternate method of eye color change surgery besides the STROMA laser method by implanting a colored lens inside the eye over the iris. In this alternate method there was a specific procedure done in India to a New Zealand woman who wished to change her eye color from brown to olive green; it was successful. The article also discussed that even though the surgery is believed to provide safe and permanent cosmetic benefits, it is not licensed in Europe and the U.S. due to the risks involved. Furthermore people are traveling to countries like Panama and India where it can be done without restriction.

Meenakshi. (2012, Jun 22). FIRST PERMANENT EYE COLOR CHANGE SURGERY IN INDIA. EHealth, Retrieved from http:// search.proquest.com/docview/1021749842?accountid=14244

This article mostly focussed on eye color change surgery as a solution to known medical issues. The article discusses how the lens implantation technique (used once so far in India), can be used for different people afflicted with defective eye color from albinism, coloboma or other birth defects, for example. It also demonstrates how the surgery can serve as a solution to these problems in people affected with these disabilities or illnesses, versus people who just want the surgery. The article helps to give more real life implications of the surgery, for more than just cosmetic uses.