Writing a research paper on implantation, evolution, and ethics - seeking input
Hello, my name is Jen Larsen, and I am an undergraduate student writing a research paper about human evolution, implantation, and the future of the human body. My general thesis (for now) is that human evolution is no longer happening in the traditional sense, therefore we must accelerate implant research in order to provide control over the unforeseen changes that we may be causing on ourselves.
I am going to argue that implantation is not being researched radically enough in the medical community, since it primarily targets individuals with disabilities or medical needs, and that since each individual with a need is distinctly different, there is not enough broad-based implantation work being studied to provide an overall system that can adapt to every body without specific study. Intelligent implantation systems are needed for all, and we can't get the data we need just on case-by-case basis from single, unique implantations on the disabled.
I will argue that FDA approval is too slow, doesn't allow doctor discretion when using devices, and doesn't allow (or does it? I honestly can't tell) implantation on able-bodied individuals. Since able-bodied implantation is happening anyway (cmon, look at gianormous breast implants, why are those ok but a magnet is considered weird?) , the best thing to do is accept it since it does provide valid information that the scientific community can use to advance implantation for the good of everybody.
I will also argue that preventing people from altering their body however they wish just because it seems "weird" or "gross" (words used by fellow students when I posted my research proposal) are not valid objections, because aesthetic senses of the norm are subjective. Besides, if we say one implant is "gross" because it's not natural, why do we have non-anatomically correct prosthetics such as the blades used by leg amputees? Why is natural a requirement for the abled and functional, but not natural acceptable for the disabled? It seems arbitrary. But unfortunately, I can't just make a single paragraph saying "anyone who thinks this is seriously narrow minded and stupid" so I am having probably the most trouble finding academic sources to counter these arguments to use. This is probably indicative of a larger problem with the scientific community and society as a whole.
So I am basically looking for input from people who have experience with implantation, since I myself am such a squeamish baby that I don't even have a piercing or tattoo. I fainted when I had single ear piercings done.
So what is your perspective? Are my thesis and ideas are rubbish? (That would be nice to know too before I am completely finished with my paper!)
Thank you for your time in reading this and your input.
Sincerely,
Jen Larsen
Tagged:
Comments
Chironex - The evolution bit I reference is from this amazing book co-written by a Harvard Statistician and geneticist called "Evolving ourselves". It is snappy and full of great facts to depress the crap out of everyone you know, a surefire way to kill any party. But if you like synthesizing big pictures from tons of data from lots of sources, it is wonderful to read.
The FDA approval - they did some streamlining 2 years ago and supposedly have ways you can track their progress, but I have yet to figure out how that actually works, even though it's on their website. I do know that at the time they did the supposed streamlining, the way they want clinical trials set up in the US is extremely expensive and difficult to do compared to trials in Europe. They also rely a great deal more on non-doctor input than doctor input. (http://issues.org/27-3/p_citron/). Why is there no global input regulatory agency so all the data can be pooled from all over the world? That doesn't even make sense. It's not like we have dramatically different requirements for implants or do clinical trials much differently, and more data is always better. Hey I think i will propose that.
Thanks for the comments! It's nice to be able to talk to someone about this stuff without hearing "gross" or "weird" because.. cmon, who has the right to say what senses are "wrong" to have or what shape of a body is "wrong?"