Bioart uses
biotechnology to alter biological matter into a living art product.
Biotechnology can be used to test new cosmetic and medical products on living
organisms, often mice. This is the reason why conservation groups advocate
against these procedures and want restrictions on artists and scientists to
prevent overuse of biotechnology.
Bioartists manipulate genes and cells to change
the organism’s appearance. They claim to not harm or kill the animal via the
process by making living art (Miranda, 2013). I personally think that
bioartists should not mess with the appearance of an organism. There are
bioartitst that make their organisms look futuristic (Miah, 2012). Aside from
physically affecting the appearance of organisms, they are also used to test cosmetic
products affecting the human appearance.
The word ‘cosmetics’ is often a synonym for
make up, when really according to the Federal and Drug Administration,
cosmetics are ‘articles’ applied to the human body (Humane Society, 2014).
Biotechnology is the use of living organisms to develop or products. Which is
why before a new cosmetic or medicinal drug goes into the market, often it gets
tested on small rodents like mice. Why mice? Because a mouse’s genetic pool is
very similar to that of humans (Winstead, 2002). Over 700 mouse genes have counterparts with human genes.
These testing have triggered many conservationist groups to advocate against
what they call animal cruelty.
Although there are
people who find product testing positive, the organisms that are tested on are
left to die; they can no longer function properly. This is why some major
brands like Bath and Body Works have decided to not do animal testing (The
Baltimore Sun, 2010). These companies in a way help with the conservation of
these organisms and prevent from altering the genetic pool. On the other hand,
countries like China make it mandatory for all foreign cosmetic products to be
tested on animals (Humane Society, 2014).
Bioartists have a
passion for making art out of living organisms, and there is a border to how
far biotechnology can go. I stand in the middle of this situation; I am neither
for nor against these procedures. I can say that I would not want animals to be
abused and there should be restrictions, but yet again I would not like to put
on a lotion that would harm my body.
______________________________________________________________________________
Work Cited
Baltimore Sun,
“Alternatives to animal testing gaining ground.” Baltimore Sun. McClatchy-Tribune Information Services. 27 Aug.
2010. Web. 7 May. 2015.
Humane Society. “Fact
Sheet: Cosmetic Testing.” The Human
Society of the United States. 13 Mar. 2014. Web. 8 May. 2015.
Miah, Andy. “Bioart is
Changing the World.” HuffPost Arts and
Culture. Huffington Post. 7 Feb. 2012. Web. 8 May. 2015.
Miranda, Carolina A.
“Weird Science: Biotechnology as Art Form.” ArtNews.
Disqus. 18 Mar. 2013. Web. 7 May. 2015.
Winstead, Edward R.
“Humans and Mice Together at Last: Scientists compare mouse chromosomes 16 to
the human genome.” Genome News Network.
J.Craig Venter Institute. 13 May. 2002. Web. 7 May. 2015.
Hello Antonio! I totally agree with your argument that it is necessary to set restriction for the overuse of biotechnology. I think there should be a fine line between abusing animals and using biotechnology to create art work or benefit humans.
ReplyDeleteHello Antonio,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your post and I agree with you. I understand that we need to test "cosmetics" in order to know that they are not harmful but sometimes this does more harm than good. Leaving an animal to die is unethical and if they are going to test on them, then they should at least take care of them.
Best,
Alison Gomez