Unit 6: BioTech & Art

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2009/05/430993.html?c=on

Transgenics, mutilation, mutation, recumbence and selective breeding are no longer science fiction. They are actually happening! To boot, the vast majority of these practices are now considered artwork. Don’t get me wrong- some of these modern technologies have provided humans with plenty of good. For example, "genetic engineering can fight disease, reduce insecticide use and enhance food security” (Ronald). However, ethical guidelines need to be set among intellectuals across all disciplines because this new "artwork" is creating controversy.

http://www.hiddenglasgow.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1644&start=2700

The work of several modern-day artists is highly controversial. For example, Edward Cats' bunny “Alba” is "transgenic artwork", as the genes of a fluorescent jellyfish were inserted in a fertilized rabbit egg cell (Vesna). When the genes replicated, Alba began to glow like a jellyfish. While some believe this is abusing an animal, others see it as a unique piece of art. Other projects that sparked disputes among intellectuals are the "Harlequin Coat" by Orlan, which is made of skin cells (Vesna). In addition, the "Rat Laughter" project by Kathy High was controversial because of it sacrificed the lives of rats to make human advances (Vesna). 

http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/world-s-first-genetically-modified-human-embryo-raises-ethical-concerns

Biotechnology began over ten thousand years ago by hunter-gatherers who practiced "selective-breeding on plants and animals to improve their food value" (HighBeam Research). Yet the modern biotechnology has turned an innocent practice into something that could be extremely terrifying and threatening to the human race. Many people believe that "humanity is gaining too much power... over human destiny" (SCU). For this reason, there needs to be a strict standard set for artists and scientists who want to manipulate living organisms. The scientific world should not seek change or enhance the natural properties of any living thing, especially humans. The possible ramifications are too steep. While some say genetically-modifying a human could stop a certain disease, the opposite is also true; wiping out a gene pool could make us even more susceptible to a "hitherto unknown disease threat" (Bright Hub).

Citations:

COLE-TURNER, RONALD, Arntzen, Charles J.; Pitman, Susan; Thrasher, Katherine, M. Kunkel, COLIN BLAKEMORE;SHELIA JENNETT, Dennis N. Luck, Sherri Chasin Calvo, "Biotechnology." World of Microbiology;Immunology. 2003, "Biotechnology." UXL Encyclopedia of Science. 2002, Ralph Meyer, "biotechnology." The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th Ed.. 2014, "biotechnology." World Encyclopedia. 2005, "biotechnology." A Dictionary of Biology. 2004, "biotechnology." The Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English. 2009, and Michael Allaby. "Biotechnology." Encyclopedia.com. HighBeam Research, 01 Jan. 2003. Web. <http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/biotechnology.aspx>.

"How Genetic Engineering Can Fight Disease, Reduce Insecticide Use and Enhance Food Security: Pamela Ronald Speaks at TED2015." TED Blog How Genetic Engineering Can Fight Disease Reduce Insecticide Use and Enhance Food Security Pamela Ronald Speaks AtTED2015 Comments. N.p., 18 Mar. 2015. Web. <http://blog.ted.com/why-genetic-engineering-of-plants-is-vital-for-food-security-pamela-ronald-speaks-at-ted2015/>.

"Human Genetic Engineering Cons: Why This Branch of Science Is so Controversial." Bright Hub. N.p., n.d. Web. <http://www.brighthub.com/science/genetics/articles/22211.aspx>.

"Thinking Ethically About Human Biotechnology." Thinking Ethically About Human Biotechnology. Santa Clara University, n.d. Web. <http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/submitted/mclean/biotechframework.html>.

Vesna, Victoria. "5 Bioart Pt1 1280x720." YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaThVnA1kyg>.