OUR OPINION ABOUT SOMATIC GENE THERAPY:
We believe that Somatic Gene Therapy is something that should be tested more and then be extensively used. Although in the past there have been deaths, those are outweighed by the outstanding results shown in other patients.
However, we believe that we should still test and study this form of therapy so that in the future it is even more successful.
We feel that once the techniques involved in Somatic Gene Therapy are refined to the point that the benefits outweigh the potential problems, there is no reason to treat this procedure any differently than other medical procedures.
We would even support more widespread use of somatic cell gene therapy after the techniques had been perfected in more serious disorders.
Many view this therapy as 'playing God' this is somewhat true, but we already do organ transplants which are basically, morally the same thing.
Some of the people affected by these genetic diseases can stop suffering if we use this method to 'correct' the affected genes, and thus, our future generations will have more chance of living a life disease free with this therapy.
We believe that Somatic Gene Therapy is something that should be tested more and then be extensively used. Although in the past there have been deaths, those are outweighed by the outstanding results shown in other patients.
We believe that Somatic Gene Therapy is something that should be tested more and then be extensively used. Although in the past there have been deaths, those are outweighed by the outstanding results shown in other patients.
However, we believe that we should still test and study this form of therapy so that in the future it is even more successful.
We feel that once the techniques involved in Somatic Gene Therapy are refined to the point that the benefits outweigh the potential problems, there is no reason to treat this procedure any differently than other medical procedures.
We would even support more widespread use of somatic cell gene therapy after the techniques had been perfected in more serious disorders.
Many view this therapy as 'playing God' this is somewhat true, but we already do organ transplants which are basically, morally the same thing.
Some of the people affected by these genetic diseases can stop suffering if we use this method to 'correct' the affected genes, and thus, our future generations will have more chance of living a life disease free with this therapy.
We believe that Somatic Gene Therapy is something that should be tested more and then be extensively used. Although in the past there have been deaths, those are outweighed by the outstanding results shown in other patients.
ANALYSIS OF SOURCES:
SOURCE 1:
Thomas Wirth, 2011, Current and emerging therapeutic strategies (Online) August 23, 2011.
Available at: www.intechopen.com/books/brain-tumors-current-and-emerging-therapeutic-strategies/gene-therapy-of-glioblastoma-multiforme-clinical-experience-on-the-use-of-adenoviral-vectors
Determining the credibility of the source:
- Authorship: The author is Thomas Wirth who is not very well known. It is not created or supported by a university, organisation etc., therefore hindering its credibility. Sources used have not been cited and the source itself dates back to 2011, therefore, meaning that some information may be out of date and inaccurate. Rating: 3/5
- Purpose: More than one view is presented, however it is more on the against side, showing some, but not many, bias views. It is not shown who funded the source. Rating: 3/5.
- Audience: This source is not written for a particular audience, however, there are parts that may not be easy to understand by just anyone. It is not evident what sources the author values. One would expect to receive accurate and recent information after reading this source. This is shown, however, not that much as you can see the source is a few years old. Rating: 3.5/5
- Use of Media (photos, videos, etc.): No forms of media were used as this source is a book. This hinders its quality, engagement and limits the interactivity of the source. Rating: 0/5.
- Language and Detail: There is a substantial amount of scientific terms used to describe information, therefore meaning that it is not easily read or understood by many. However, it does use a lot of detail. Rating: 3.5/5.
SOURCE 2:
Tony McGleenan, 1995, Journal of medical ethics (Online). Available at: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1376832/pdf/jmedeth00299-0032.pdf
- Authorship: The author is Tony McGleenan, who is not very well known. This source is clearly issued by government program or department.
This source dates back 20 years, which takes away from its reliability and accuracy in some areas of information. Rating: 3/5.
- Purpose: No bias views are evident in this source. This means that the coverage of the topic is not limited by views. The government is funding this source. Rating: 5/5.
- Audience: This article has been directed at the general public. The author's valued sources cannot be determined.
- Use of Media: There is no media used in this source other than photos, these photos have been described in the text. These photos adds to the engagement and aesthetics of the source, however, there aren't any other forms used. Rating: 2.5/5.
- Language and Detail: The language used is detailed and understandable. This means there is a potentially larger audience too. Rating: 4.5/5.
SOURCE 3:
The Open University, Gene Therapy, July 08, 2013. Available at: www.open.edu/openlearn
- Authorship: The author of this source is not shown, however, we can see that it has been issued by a university.
- Purpose: There is no bias views in the source which adds to its credibility and means there is more information given, more accurately.
- Audience: I believe that there is enough evidence to suggest that this source is directed at students. The authors' most valued source is popular media (YouTube videos, etc.).
- Use of Media: The university uses YouTube, videos and photos to make the website more approachable and interesting to students and the public. Rating: 4/5.
- Language: The language used is legible and easy to understand. The content is detail, up to date and accurate. Rating: 5/5.
SOURCE 4:
Gene Therapy, 25 March 2015. Available at: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_therapy
- Authorship: On this website users make accounts and can then edit articles on the website. Therefore the source's author(s) is not known.
The source is extremely recent, however, in this case it doesn't add to the credibility as we know that anyone with an account can edit the website. Rating: 0/5.
- Purpose: There are no bias views shown, this may be because many people have added their own information to the website, so there are many different views.
- Audience: This article has been written for anyone to read. The valued sources of the author(s) cannot be deduced, as no sources were cited.
- Use of Media: There is frequent use of cited photos talked about in the text. However, that is where it stops. Rating: 2.5/5.
- Language and Detail: The language used is easily understood by anyone. However, the source is lacking much detail. Rating: 2/5.
SOURCE 5:
Kathi Hanna, National Human Genome Research Institute, March 2006. Available at: www.genome.gov/10004764
- Authorship: The author is Kathi Hanna who is a known biologist. It is also issued by a research institute, adding to the credibility of the source.
- Purpose: No bias views are presented, therefore meaning that there is more coverage and information given about the topic. This source is funded by the National Genome Research Institute. Rating: 4/5.
- Audience: This source may be directed to university students, or high level secondary students as there are substantial amounts of scientific terms used. Rating: 3/5.
- Use of Media: There is a good use of pictures which are talked about within the text and are cited. Rating: 2.5/5.
- Language and Detail: The language used is not easily understood by just anyone, the source is directed at students and fellow scientists, therefore, the langauge and scientific terms used are harder to be understood by the general public. The detail is very evident and adds to the credibility and accuracy of the source. Rating: 3.5/5.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF SOURCES:
- Thomas Wirth, 2011, Current and emerging therapeutic strategies (Online) August 23, 2011.
- 2007, Gene Therapy and Genetic Engineering (Online). June 08, 2011
- Tony McGleenan, 1995, Journal of medical ethics (Online). Available at:
- Chris Wharam, 1999, Human Gene Therapy (Online). Available at: www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~mcclean/plsc431
- The Open University, Gene Therapy, July 08, 2013. Available at: www.open.edu/openlearn
- Kathi Hanna, National Human Genome Research Institute, March 2006. Available at: www.genome.gov/10004764
- Gene Therapy, 25 March 2015. Available at: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_therapy
- Types of Gene Therapy. Available at: www.genetherapynet.com/types-of-gene-therapy.html
- American Medical Association, Gene Therapy. Available at:
- www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medicalscience/genetics-molecular-medicine/current-topics/gene-therapy.page?
- University Of Leicester. Available at: www2.le.ac.uk/departments/genetics