Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Updated Uwrit Ab
Updated Uwrit Ab
Updated Uwrit Ab
Annotated Bibliography
Faisal Maniar
UWRT 1104
Annotated Bibliography
Maniar 2
Are CRISPR Babies Healthy? Enhanced? Speculation Takes a Disturbing Turn | Center
crispr-babies-healthy-enhanced-speculation-takes-disturbing-turn.
Summary: This source starts by talking about He Jiankui CRISPR experiments and how
the chinese government has confirmed the existence of these twins and how there were
explicitly no details on the condition of the two. The article then further goes on to say
speculations that the condition of the twins may not be in good health. According to He
Jiankui, he used CRISPR in order to change the CRR5 gene into its delta-32 variant,
which is a natural occuring mutation of the gene, but biologist Sean Ryder assessed that
the mutations that Jiankui made were not to the delta-32 variant, but rather a new
unknown variant with unknown significance, and while the mutation might have
produced the wanted result there are many unknown risks involved that we know nothing
about. Another scientist by the name of Robin Lovell-Badge claimed that the twins did
not have their CRR5 gene edited but rather other genes that hold unknown repercussions.
Also a neurologist claimed that CRR5 also has some effects on the brain, which had
Evaluation: This article was written by Katie Hasson who has a PhD specializing in
genetics of social and political aspects, which qualifies her to teach, write, and make
conclusions on human genetic editing. This article does show some bias when she gives
her opinions and you can see the bias but most of the article is based in fact, even pulling
quotes from other biologists and neurologists. The source is from a website that is run by
a organization called Genetics and Society. The article is trying to convey that the genetic
Maniar 3
editing of humans should not have happened and that there are far too many unknowns
and risks involved in the act, it then also goes and say that we don’t know the health
conditions of the crispr twins. The audience of this article are those interested in genetics
Usefulness: This source will most likely appear in my EIP as it provides relevant
information and addresses my topic. The article relates to my research as it sides with me
and provides evidence for what it claims. This source is like some of my other sources as
it also involves crispr and genetic engineering and compared to my other sources this is
The Real News Network, The Real News Network, 3 Feb. 2019,
therealnews.com/stories/chinese-scientists-human-genetic-engineering-
experiment-is-crazy.
Summary: The Real New Network Discusses He Jiankui’s experiments and his reasoning
for editing their genes while providing information on how the effects of editing an adult
and embryo is very different and risky. They go on to say that He was unjustified in the
act of editing the twins genes because of the risk. The video then goes on to explain
CRISPR and break it down and then says that what He has done is actually crazy and
Evaluation: This source is by the real news network and is a developed article from a
Usefulness: While this source is from a reliable source there is a lot of bias in the
opinions of the video participants strait up calling Jiankui crazy for doing what he has
done, and at the moment I am still deciding if I will use this in my EIP or not. The other
sources that I have are less opinionated while this one is based in opinion excluding the
Summary: In this source the author talks about how environmental and genetic
enhancements lead to the same result in the end, such as a boost in cognitive ability, but
with genetic enhancement, while u are making the child better off there are many risks
along with changing the genetic identity of the child along the way, which is why there
Evaluation: The source was very straightforward with it’s point as after it made its
argument and stated its cause it jumped straight into ethical and logical debate ton
Usefulness: This source does talk about the concern for human genome editing but it then
shifts into ethical and logical debate and because of this this source will most likely not
appear in my EIP as a source as rather than talking about the risk involved it talks about
should it be done because gene therapy is legal. Compared to my other sources this one
delves into ethics the most being my weakest link of the three sources that I have picked.