Professor
Vesna reiterates that BioTechnology and Art is a
controversial topic. After researching the many different aspects and areas
that are involved with biotechnology this makes complete sense because there are so many perspectives that are taken into account
and the amount of things that could be created are incredible. "Nature is a
fascination for artist"(Vesna Lecture). As tech and science evolves biotech genetics is
expanding into our bodies and environment, which brings artist into laboratories
which dive into going into the cellular tissue level of organisms.
Joe
Davis who was the pioneer of Bio Art first explored animals in bio art. He
opened the eyes and kickstarted the research of many curious human beings. I've always
heard about how they use mice for research purposes although I never realized
the depth of actions that are taken place. The fluorescent bunny by Eduardo Kac
also known as Alba is one experiment that blew my mind. The EGFG was inserted
into fertilized egg cell that eventually grew into Alba. Because Alba is a
albino rabbit and has no pigment she was injected with a green fluorescent gene
found from a jelly fish. This is a prime example of BioTech Art. The ability to
combine two completely different animals genes and create something so unique
is genius. If this is going to help advancements to medical treatments in
humans and other animals then it seems to be doing something beneficial for
all.
The downfall is the negative perspective from
the animal protective rights association. When I was in high school I watched
the movie Food Inc. It baffles my mind the amount of hormones and different
chemicals and unnatural genes that are injected into these animals in order to
make ends need for the rest of the populations food industry. What seems so
wrong is when they explained how they are not feeding corn to cows who by
evolution are supposed to be eating grass. The fact that scientist have managed
to redesign a chicken to have bigger breasts in order to produce more white
meat is insane. The government’s role about with all this has a lot to do with
the controversial concept called GMO. 
The last area I want
to touch on from this week is the idea of “designer babies”.
Although
society is not yet fully bale to “order their children” to be made with certain
characteristics this is definitely in the running with the growing advancements
of biotechnology. The ethical reasons to do this are a huge roadblock.
Personally, I do not think that you should choose whether your child has blue
or brown eyes, athletic or not and tall or short. Everyone is made uniquely and
special they way they are and that is the way society should keep it. BUT,
there is no stopping these biochemist and scientist in the labs researching
ways to create and pick certain genes for the future children destined to be
born. BioTechnology and Art this week has been extremely informing and
interesting to research and I truly cannot even imagine what the future
holds.
Sources
Algar,
Nicholas. "Designer Babies: Ethical Considerations." Actionbioscience.
1 Apr.
2006. Web. 4 May 2015.
<http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/agar.html>.
Ghose,
Tia. "Children to Order: The Ethics of 'Designer Babies'" LiveScience.
TechMedia
Network, 13 Mar. 2014. Web. 4 May 2015. <http://www.livescience.com/44087 designer-babies-ethics.html>.
Kac,
Eduardo. "GFP BUNNY." GFP BUNNY. Dobrila, Peter T. and
Kostic, Aleksandra
(eds.), Eduardo Kac: Telepresence, Biotelematics,
and Transgenic Art, 2000.
Web. 4 May 2015.
<http://www.ekac.org/gfpbunny.html#gfpbunnyanchor>.
Leake,
Lisa. "Some Highlights from the Food, Inc. Documentary - 100 Days of Real
Food."100 Days of Real Food. 28
Apr. 2010. Web. 4 May 2015.
<http://www.100daysofrealfood.com/2010/04/28/some-highlights-from-the-food-inc-documentary/>.
Miranda,
Carolina. "Weird Science: Biotechnology as Art Form." ARTnews.
18 Mar.
2913. Web. 4 May 2015. <http://www.artnews.com/2013/03/18/biotechnology-as art-form/>.
"TheTruth
About Your Food with FOOD, INC. Filmmaker Robert Kenner." YouTube.
YouTube. Web. 4 May 2015.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Oq24hITFTY>.
Hi Danielle,
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with you on one aspect of this week’s materials that biotechnology is incredibly interesting and may lead to medical advancement, we are still unable to fathom. However, when we use this awesome power, which is expanding all the time, for something purely for uniqueness and or new and shocking visuals are we really using our abilities for the best purposes? I mentioned in the first week how I have always bounced back and forth between the arts and sciences, as I played the violin for a decade, wrote poetry for fun, and tried my had at drawing and painting in high school and now I am a psychology major and I’ve always excelled in my sciences classes, even as a child. So I am not trying to say we shouldn’t have art, I just don’t think we should pursue modifying genetics until we are aware of all of the consequences. A perfect example of this is the “designer dogs” that are so popular right now. It doesn’t surprise me that they are popular just by looking at them, but once you do even a small amount of research on these teacup pups you will be inundated with the information about how unhealthy these pets are and you learn that their breeding is extremely risky for the mother and the puppies because they are so small. This is a perfect example of why we should not rush into genetic modifications of people, animals, or food. Although, these dogs are adorable they are not likely to live a “normal” or healthy life because of all of the issues involved with simply being the size they are. In my opinion, it is not ethical to continue creating living things we know are not healthy just for profit, status and aesthetics. Concerning biotechnology and art, we should all approach with caution because, like the teacup dogs, we could be seeking an aesthetic that is desirable, but at what cost?
Hi Danielle, I have also watched the documentary Food Inc when I was in high school, so I understand that in the United States, the federal government did not adequate enforcement of the food that we eat, often times, animals suffered because of such lack of regulation. Nowadays, many experiments are conducted in the name of science that hurt animals. On the other hand, there are people abused animals for the comfort of human lives. I just think that nowadays, the boundaries between what is humane and inhumane are blurred by institutionalism and profitably, whenever something is found profitable, there are people who do not care about lives and nature, to commit horrendous crimes against lives just for money, and it is indeed a really sad thing for humanity. I recently saw a Korea angora rabbit cruelty commercial, which really makes me think about all the animals that are suffering because of human consumption, so I really hope that this kind of abuse will cease to assist one day, where every human being can learn that every life is precious and deserves respect.
ReplyDeleteHi Danielle, I have also watched the documentary Food Inc when I was in high school, so I understand that in the United States, the federal government did not adequate enforcement of the food that we eat, often times, animals suffered because of such lack of regulation. Nowadays, many experiments are conducted in the name of science that hurt animals. On the other hand, there are people abused animals for the comfort of human lives. I just think that nowadays, the boundaries between what is humane and inhumane are blurred by institutionalism and profitably, whenever something is found profitable, there are people who do not care about lives and nature, to commit horrendous crimes against lives just for money, and it is indeed a really sad thing for humanity. I recently saw a Korea angora rabbit cruelty commercial, which really makes me think about all the animals that are suffering because of human consumption, so I really hope that this kind of abuse will cease to assist one day, where every human being can learn that every life is precious and deserves respect.
ReplyDeleteHey Danielle,
ReplyDeleteI too watched the movie food inc. a few years back. This to me is the most baffling of all the resources from this week. I cannot understand how huge food manufacturing companies can get away with injecting chickens and cows with hormones, and antibiotics. I especially found it shocking how dominating corn is in the American food system. There are so many positives to Biotech, but I definitely agree with you, giving animals hormones and antibiotics to produce more food is absolutely a downfall of this science.
Your mention of designer babies reminded me very much of the movie GATTACA. The movie describes a future in which society can make designer babies and normal children are seen as inferior. In the movie, children that aren't selected for the best health are seen as having a handicap and are offered limited opportunities. The main character goes to incredible lengths to prove himself to his brother (who was a designer baby) and achieve his dream despite having "inferior" DNA. The movie raises many ethical questions about designer babies, though the biggest question is whether normal children should face discrimination. If choosing the best genes does one day become possible, I think we will all have to be mindful of the disadvantage and prejudice that could result.
ReplyDelete