Works Cited for Group Presentation

• Hipkin, L.J., The xy female in sport: The controversy continues. Br Journal Sports Medicine, Vol 2, No. 3, pp. 150-156, 1993.
  

• Lemke, T., Beyond genetic discrimination. Problems and perspectives of a contested notion. Genomics, Society and Policy, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 22-40, 2005.
  

• Wiesemann, C. Is there a right to know one’s sex? The ethics of ‘gender verification’ in women’s sports competition. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2011.
  

• Wonkam, A., K. Fieggen, R. Ramesar. Beyond the caster semenya controversy: The case of the use of genetics for gender

Critiques of Group Presentations

	Group 1: Erica Herzig and Ariel Hart Topic: Epigenetics of Aging	Group 2: Andrew Smith, John Whittingham, and Chelsea Hewitt Topic: Anti-Aging	Group 3: Laura Libby, Chelsea Corarito, Miranda Black, and Julianna Dearr Topic: Eugenics	Group 4: Johnathan Niles, Stephanie Bamberger, and Jessica Brosch Topic: SCIDS
Organization	Organized clearly	Organized well	Organized very well	A little confusing
Topic relevancy	Very relevant and specific to course	Very relevant and discussed in class in-depth.	Very relevant and also discussed in class.	Topic very relevant to the class and even discussed in our textbook.
Background research	Did a lot of background research since this wasn't a topic really covered in class	Incorporated material from class nicely with more research.	A lot of background research done and incorporated class material	Could have referenced more than one case study
Presentation organization	Very clear and structured	Very clear	Organized very well, all members had an opportunity to speak.	I was confused by who was supposed to be presenting
Language use	Language a little confusing, but that was mainly due to a lack of knowledge on the topic	Everything was explained in a clear manner.	Very clear and explained concepts from class well.	Very clear, but I was confused when they were discussing the genetics aspect
Eye contact/voice variability	Lack of eye contact, but I could understand them.	Some eye contact made, could have been more. Could have also talked louder.	Eye contact was great. Could hear them well.	Some members of the group made adequate eye contact, but not all. Some could have talked louder as well.
Distracting mannerisms	None.	None	None	Jumped around a lot. Kind of distracting.
Time management	Presentation was pretty long.	Good.	Time management was good.	Tried to fit to much information into a short amount of time.
Collaborative effort	Good, but could have used more people in the group.	Seemed to have collaborated.	Worked well together.	Seemed to have known an equal amount of the material.
Responses to questions	Answered questions accurately	Answered questions to the best of ability	Answered questions thoroughly	No questions asked
Well documented	No, explained nicely	Yes	Yes	No, very insightful
Creativity	Topic was very creative	Topic not as creative since discussed a lot in class	Topic somewhat discussed in class, but creative in their expansion	Presentation was creative, lots of nice pictures
Interest/enthusiasm	Showed interest in topic	Somewhat interested	Pretty interested	Very enthusiastic
Peer evaluation	Sat	Sat	Sat	Sat
Bibliography	In-depth	All sources displayed	Abundance of sources	Sources all pertinent to topic

	Group 5: Zoe Kenney, Flavia Grattery-Musinsky, Andrea Ortiz, and Michael Salgado Topic: Hermaphrodites	Group 6: Molly Swift, Kate Evarts, and Brie McLemore Topic: Sex testing in Sports	Group 7: Anna Gioseffi, Allison Whitcomb, Daphne Hudson, Kyra Berman-Gestring Topic: Klinefelter Syndrome	Group 8: Hannah Brown, Varvara Suarez, Brandon Berry, and Mar Echevarria Topic: Thalidomide
Organization	Not all members appeared organized, but overall, the group seemed organized	We were very well organized	Group was very organized, which was evident through their well-timed, fluid, and relevant presentation.	Group appeared to be well-organized and very prepared.
Topic relevancy	Topic very relevant, and only discussed briefly in class. They did a good job expanding.	Very relevant to the course, especially through our correlation of gender and genetics testing, especially when utilized in unethical ways to instill sexism and perpetuate a sex binary.	Very relevant to the discussions we've had about the many factors that determine sex and the the rejection of the binary.	Definitely relevant because it was something that was mentioned in both class and our textbook.
Background research	Did a lot of background research, and even referenced sources I've discussed in other classes	We did a lot of background research, which was evident because our topic was not covered in class.	Appeared to have done a lot of background research, especially since they were covering a topic that wasn't talked about in class in-depth.	Picked a topic that was already discussed in class, but expanded on it greatly through the use of much research.
Presentation organization	Organized and structured well, flowed nicely.	Our presentation was organized well, with all information fluid and relevant.	Organized in a very fluid way. All the information provided was of importance and it was structured in an easily understandable way.	Organized well, but probably should have started with with more in-depth background of thalidomide and its effects.
Language use	Explained concepts well and were very aware of correct terminology	Had difficulties with the use of “sex testing” or “gender verification,” which could have lead to confusion for others.	Everything was explained in a clear manner and the presenters made sure to use correct terminology, especially for such a sensitive topic.	Accurate language utilized, all terminology easily understood.
Eye contact/voice variability	Lack of eye contact for some, but overall, they spoke loudly enough so everyone could hear	We believe we made eye contact and spoke clearly/loudly. We might have spoken a little quickly though.	All presenters spoke in a very clear and steady tone. Most presenters made eye contact with the audience.	Not much eye contact, but spoke clearly. Some members could have spoken a louder.
Distracting mannerisms	None	No distracting mannerisms, we all attempted to be respectful to our fellow presenters and audience members.	No distracting mannerisms. The presenters stood off to the side quietly when not presenting, making it easier for the audience to pay attention to the presenter.	No distracting mannerisms during any of the presentations. All presenters were respectful to one another.
Time management	Long presentation	We probably cold have managed time better; attempted to fit a lot of information into a small amount of time.	Managed time very well because they fit a lot of information in a small amount of time	Presentation was pretty long and probably could have been much shorter.
Collaborative effort	Yes, except for one member of the group who didn't say anything.	All team members worked together in finding sources, structuring the powerpoint, and ensuring our presentation was fluid, relevant, and sensible.	All team members seemed to work together, evident by the fluidity of their presentation and how all of their research pertained to one another.	Collaboration was evident by the fluidity of presentation and how presenters related their information to one another.
Responses to questions	Gave in-depth and accurate responses to questions	No questions asked.	Answered questions to the best of their knowledge. Some questions posited were not exactly answerable, but they commented to the best of their ability.	Answered questions accurately and clearly.
Well documented	Topic well-documented, but definitely misunderstood. They did a good job explaing it accurately	Topic was very well-documented in the media and very pertinent to recent events.	All information was well-documented on their powerpoint and all information they stated supported this information.	Topic was an already well-documented one, but they provided more information that we hadn't covered in class.
Creativity	Topic was approached in a creative manner that made it interesting	Topic was creative, especially through our use of documenting how genetics has become a major issue of gender and sex in the mainstream.	Very important topic and they creatively applied it to this course, especially through the media representations	Creative issues, especially how topic pertained to genetic ethics.
Interest/enthusiasm	For the most part seemed interested.	We were all very interested in our topic and we feel that it showed in our presentation.	All presenters seemed to be interested in their topic.	Very interesting topic chosen.
Peer evaluation	Sat overall	Sat	Sat	Sat
Bibliography	All sources listed and there were a lot used.	We accurately and clearly listed all of our resources	Very in-depth listing of resources and they seemed to have utilized a lot of sources	Resources listed clearly and even separated by topic (ex.biological/legal), which was very helpful

Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act

Implications of the Genetic Discrimination Act (GINA)

The Genetic Information Discrimination Act (GINA) was passed in 2008 in order to protect individuals from being discriminated against in either employment or health insurance due to their genetic information. Title 1 of GINA states that insurance companies can't deny coverage to healthy individuals due to a predisposition to a genetic disease or the prevalence of a genetic disease in an individual's family history. The bill also prohibits insurance companies from charging higher premiums for individuals that have a genetic disorder. Title 2 of GINA forbids employers from discriminating on the basis of genetic information in all aspects of employment, which includes firing, hiring, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoffs, training, and fringe benefits.

Within GINA, genetic information is determined as the following: information about an individual's genetic tests or the tests of their family members, information about a genetic disorder that either an individual or their family member is inflicted with, reasons for inquiring about genetic services, or the genetic information about an individual's fetus, whether it was carried to term or not. GINA Title 1 and 2 works to ensure confidentiality of all genetic information.

The bill's co-sponsor, Senator Olympia Snowe, referred to GINA as “the first civil rights legislation of the 21^st century.” She might have been right. As evident through the films Forgiving Dr. Mengele and Miss Ever's Boys, genetic information has historically been misused to meet disastrous ends. The documentary Forgiving Dr. Mengele recounts the story of Eva Mozes Kor, who was subjected to torturous experiments during the Holocaust, alongside her twin sister. Kor and her sister were among 1,400 other twin pairs who suffered from such experiments in the name of “science.”

This movie exhibits a clear example of when genetic information can be misguided and used to inflict harm, and not benefit society. This is one of many cases in which research participants, whether voluntary or forced, are abused. GINA seeks to mend this occurrence by protecting individual's genetic information, which will possibly encourage more people to voluntarily undergo genetic research.

Not to mention, GINA also seeks to ensure equality for genetic research, which is a realm that generally goes unnoticed, but has major implications. Genetic information, especially as it pertains to health, has historically not been considered a private ordeal. It was commonly believed that health insurance companies, who pay for individual's coverage, or employers, who supply benefits in the form of health insurance, had a right to know about people's genetic information. For insurance companies, it was believed they had a right individual's genetic information in order to not waste money on providing coverage for those who had a higher predisposition for certain ailments, thus, making insurance pricey. Employers, on the other hand, claimed a right to access genetic information because they were both supplying insurance, but also because they believed this sort of information spoke to an individual's ability to fulfill their duties.

GINA seeks to reject this notion, instead placing the civilians and employees rights first. However, it must be stated that the bill does have some flaws. To begin with, it does not ensure an individual's rights over the results and access to their genetic information. The bill also fails to protect genetic information from reaching a 3^rd party and doesn't apply to the military, which can limit access to insurance for many individuals serving. The bill is still a great landmark for prohibiting genetic discrimination, which has commonly gone unnoticed, resulting in many abuses and misguided research.

Works Cited

"Genetic Discrimination." US EEOC Home Page. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 21 May 2008. Web. .

"Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008." National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) - Homepage. National Institutes of Health, 16 Jan. 2011. Web. .

Kleim, Brandon. "Genetic Discrimination By Insurers, Employers Becomes a Crime." Wired Science. N.p., 21 May 2008. Web. .

Stem Cells: Lecture Series

Stem Cells and the End of Aging

Lecture four of the stem cells, cloning, and regeneration lecture series discusses how stem cells can be utilized in anti-aging measures. The lecture discusses, in-depth, the use of stem cells in regenerating heart cells, especially after a heart attack. Although the heart is crucial within the human body, it is severely lacking in stem cells. Due to this, it is hard for the heart to constantly rejuvenate itself, especially after a heart attack which severely depletes cardiac tissue, which can result in further damage.

While tissue loss due to trauma is problematic for the human heart, it is the inability to reproduce this tissue that is really probelematic. Interestingly enough, other organisms can regenerate their own heart muscles, such as Zebrafish. Due to an inability to produce myocardium, the human heart lacks this capability. However, much research has suggested that it is possible for a human heart to strive in a foreign host. The mechanisms of this are not as well understood, but the procedure has been successful in the past.

Although this procedure could potentially save millions who suffer from heart attacks and heart disease, there is not much support for such measures. The surgery is costly, there is still a lack of understanding about the human heart, and there is simply not enough hearts to meet the high demand. However, allowing for stem cell research could solve all of these problems. Stem cells could allow for more research that doesn't involve direct human subjects, allowing for scientists to gain more knowledge on this procedure. Also, if stem cells could result in cloning of human hearts without much input, there will be more hearts in supply, which will inevitably lower the cost.

Confronting A Genetic Legacy

Confronting a Genetic Legacy Assignment:

Why Is Breast Cancer In Men Hardly Discussed?

In Western culture, breast cancer has been commonly associated with women, therefore appearing to be a disease solely inflicted upon females. However, every year, men are also diagnosed with breast cancer and suffer from the exact same tumors and even the breast cancer gene. However, these men are rarely discussed in breast cancer literature and discourse. The reasons for this could be due to the lower risk of breast cancer for men, especially when compared to prostate, lung, and liver cancer, which are common in men from all racial groups. The lack of information regarding men and breast cancer could also be a result of the common misconception that men can not be subjected to breast cancer due to a lack of breast tissue.

These perceptions, which are held by many, are false and misguided. Every year, approximately 1,970 men will be diagnosed with breast cancer, 390 of which will die. Although the risks posed to men is evident, it is still much higher for woman, who are 100 times more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer. However, this realization is further problematic for men, who are reluctant to be tested for breast cancer due to the perceived low-risk, or no risk at all. This has lead to delays in diagnosis for men, allowing the cancer to progress. When men are diagnosed with breast cancer, it can still metastasize, spread to other body parts, at the same rate as in women. Also, men who are diagnosed with breast cancer actually have a slightly lower survival rate as women who are diagnosed at the same stage. This is generally due to the lower lifespan of men and the many other health problems men can experience. Not to mention, a family history of breast cancer has also been linked to a higher risk of prostate cancer in men, which men are already at high risk for.

Works Cited

Rosen, Leo, and Gloria Rosen. "What Is Breast Cancer in Men?" American Cancer Society :: Information and Resources for Cancer: Breast, Colon, Prostate, Lung and Other Forms. American Cancer Society, 09 Feb. 2011. Web. .

Warren, Barbour S., and Carol Devine. "Breast Cancer in Men." Breast Cancer and Environmental Risk Factors. Program on Breast Cancer and Environmental Risk Factors in New York State, 06 May 2003. Web. .

Children of Men Essay

Genetics in Children of Men

Are the genetic issues of the film portrayed in a realistic manner relative to the known science?

In the movie Children of Men, the human race is faced with an imminent threat as the word is faced with an infertility epidemic, resulting in no children being born in over 18 years. The causes of infertility are not explained within the film, but it has been speculated that it was the result of a bioweapon. While infertility is prominent in many societies, for both men and women, the question is whether such a widespread occurrence could realistically take place. Dr. Mousa Shamonki of the UCLA School of Medicine has speculated that radiation and fertility killing microbes could cause widespread infertility, but there is still doubt over whether it could stop reproduction altogether. Some scientists have doubted the prospect of worldwide infertility, arguing that some populations would be immune and, therefore still have the ability to reproduce. This could have been the case with Kee, who was an immigrant from Africa. Since many cultural factors, such as anti-immigration measures, were also operating throughout the film, there is a possibility that there were more people immune, but did not have the chance to reproduce.

How are social norms reflected in the use of genetics?

In the film, the audience is presented with a bleak depiction of contemporary society. Most countries have disintegrated and entered into a state of anarchy and peril. Britain, which is presumably the only government in tact, is now totalitarian and fascist. Britain has also adopted a strict anti-immigration policies in reference to the flood of immigrants due to worsening living conditions throughout the world. As a result, immigrants are sent to refugee camps and forced to reside in ghettos. This is supposed to depict the lack of hope and morale the human race experiences when faced with certain extinction. This is a fairly accurate reflection of social norms if one takes into account immigration policies that exist today. Many in the United States argue against Mexican immigrants due to what they consider to be a lack of resources, whether it be in employment or housing. If situations were to become more dire, it is not hard to speculate that society would become more desperate, resulting in even worse treatment for those that are already less well off.

Is the outcome of the film consistent with what we know about genetics today?

The prospect of widespread, worldwide infertility is not completely consistent with what is know about genetics today. However, the prospect of negative population growth is not entirely far-fetched. Currently, both Germany and Japan are experienced a decrease in reproduction and population. Whether this is due to infertility or cultural factors is difficult to discern though. Evolution is generally negative, instead working to ensure that populations do not over exceed their carrying capacity, resulting in an overall depletion in the human population. Reproduction and infertility work to ensure that the human population increases at a steady, acceptable rate in order to strive within their environment.

Family Tree Exercise

Brie McLemore

Family Tree

Family Tree One:

Starts with Ed

• Ed's sons are Leo and Toby
  

• Leo's Sons are Fred and Nick

• Toby's son is Sam

Family Tree Two:

Starts with Ned

• Ned's son is Alex

• Alex's sons are Noah and Zach

Ned and Ed shared an ancestor three generations ago