My Sources

This blog will be about 10 of the sources I used when making the podcast.

 JRod2 "Cite Your Sources"04/23/2012 via wikimedia. Public Domain Dedication License

Source 1

Where: This source comes from National Catholic Register which is a online catholic newspaper. Being Catholic it is likely going to be biased against creating human-animal creations as that goes against the ideology of the Catholic Church.

Who: The author of this article is Celeste McGovern. She writes a lot about child restriction policies and abortion. She tends to only tell one side of the story, the side that usually is promoting the Christian views. This says that if I were to use this source I would have to know that this is likely one side of the story and that I should search for the other side.
When: This was published on February 4th, 2016. Also around that time Obama released the budget for 2016. A big part of this story is federal funding and the lack of it for this kind of research.
What: This source provided a lot of background for the ethics of this study. It showed a new group of people who were against the mixing of human and animal genes.

Source 2

Where: This source comes from MIT Technology Review which aims to inform its viewers on the world being shaped by technology. They appear to have no affiliations and are unbiased.
Who: The author is Antonio Regaled who is a senior editor dealing with biomedicine. He seems to be for medical advances so he would support this groundbreaking type of medicine.
When: It was published on January 6, 2016. Nothing relevant seemed to happen at this time.
What: This source provides me with a lot of the numbers behind my controversy. It also lists a lot of names I will be referencing.

Source 3

Where: This source is published in the genetics section of the University of Utah.
Who: It is by the University of Utah and it just states facts which makes me think they are unbiased.
When: It offers no publication date.
What: It is important because it is what I will be using when I introduce the old stem cell battle versus the new one.

Source 4

Where: This source is from the center of genetics society.
Who: It is by Dennis Normile who is also a writer for science magazine. A lot of his writings are about foreign science issues which increases his credibility for this source.
When: This article was on June 19, 2013. There was a federal reserve board meeting this day.
What: This article is important because it talks about one of my primary stakeholder's and his previous work.

Source 5

Where:  This is a press release from the National Institutes of Health. They are unbiased and federally funded.
Who: It was said by the National Institutes of Health which is the top researching agency in the world.
When: This was released on September 23, 2015 after the board of the National Institutes of Health met with some of the primary researchers behind the planting of stem cells in animal embryos.
What: This article is important because it has sparked outrage amougnst the researchers. It stated that NIH would not be funding any of their work which means they are missing out on a lot of money.

Source 6

Where: This is an article released on Discovery News. They tend to be unbiased and report the facts.
Who:  It was said by Tracy Staedte who is a senior producer for Discovery News. She also writes for Slate, Earth Magazine, Astronomy, Scientific American, and Technology Review. The fact that she writes for a lot of respected papers increases her credibility.
When: It was published on January 11, 2016 there was nothing of relevance that happened that day.
What: This source gives me a lot of information on the science behind my controversy. It was also the original article that made me interested in this topic.

Source 7

Where: This article was published on info wars. They are run by Alex Jones who is primarily conservative.
Who: It was written by Michael Synder who openly talks against pornography and video games. He is not an unbiased source.
When: It was published on May 20, 2014. There was a major E-coli outbreak at this time. This topic talks a lot about animals so this could have had a potential effect on this article.
What: This source does a great job of citing other sources for my topic. Although what Michael says is opinion based he does provide a lot of facts and news stories that I use for my podcast.

Source 8

Where:  This article was published on Scientific American which is a neutral science based newspaper.
Who: It was written by John Rennie who was the seventh editor and chief of Scientific American. He appeared on the History Channel which increases his credibility.
When: It was published on  June 27, 2005. Nothing significant happened at this time.
What: This article talks a lot about the ethical issues and the laws behind stem cell research.

Source 9

Where: It was published on Slate which is owned by the Washington Post.
Who: It was written by Daniel Engber who is a columnist for Slate. He is Democratic and does not support the science in my controversy. He is a animal rights activist.
When:  It was published on May 13, 2013 and there was nothing significant going on at that time.
What: This article gives good insight on the ethics behind the debate. Instead of talking about the problems with the science, which plenty of articles do, it talks about the animal rights issue.

Source 10

Where: It was posted on The Age which is a newspaper in Australia.
Who: It was written by Richard Gray which I could not find anything about on the internet.
When: It was written on April 4, 2011 and there was nothing significant going on at this time.
What: It provides a short anecdote that I plan on using in my podcast.