added essay three ugh

3 files changed, 160 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/markley/Makefile b/markley/Makefile
index 6911aaf..d67ae31 100644
--- a/markley/Makefile
+++ b/markley/Makefile
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 .POSIX:
 
-all: essayone.pdf essaytwo.pdf
+all: essayone.pdf essaytwo.pdf essaythree.pdf
 
 %.pdf: %.tex %.bib
 	pdflatex $*.tex
@@ -9,4 +9,4 @@ all: essayone.pdf essaytwo.pdf
 	pdflatex $*.tex
 
 clean:
-	rm -f essay{one,two}{-blx.bib,.{aux,bbl,bcf,blg,log,out,pdf,run.xml}}
+	rm -f essay{one,two,three}{-blx.bib,.{aux,bbl,bcf,blg,log,out,pdf,run.xml}}
diff --git a/markley/essaythree.bib b/markley/essaythree.bib
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e2313a8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/markley/essaythree.bib
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+@Book{Lacks,
+    Title="The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks",
+    Author="Rebecca Skloot",
+    Year = 2010,
+    Publisher="Crown",
+    ISBN="978-1-4000-5217-2",
+}
+@Article{Nature,
+    URL="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02494-z",
+    Title="Henrietta Lacks: science must right a historical wrong",
+    Year = 2020,
+    Publisher="Nature",
+}
+@Article{Callaway,
+    URL="https://www.nature.com/news/hela-publication-brews-bioethical-storm-1.12689",
+    Year = 2013,
+    Publisher="Nature",
+    Author="Ewen Callaway",
+    Title="HeLa publication brews bioethical storm",
+}
diff --git a/markley/essaythree.tex b/markley/essaythree.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..eca073b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/markley/essaythree.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+\documentclass[12pt]{article}
+\usepackage[letterpaper,headheight=15pt]{geometry}
+\geometry{top=1.0in, bottom=1.0in, left=1.0in, right=1.0in}
+\usepackage{setspace}
+\doublespacing
+\parskip=0pt plus 2pt minus 2pt
+\usepackage{times}
+\usepackage{fancyhdr}
+\pagestyle{fancy}
+\rhead{Rohrer \thepage}
+\cfoot{}
+\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}
+\renewcommand{\footrulewidth}{0pt}
+\setlength{\headsep}{0.5in}%top of page to bottom of header
+\addtolength{\headsep}{-12pt}%max height of header
+\usepackage{xcolor}
+\usepackage{hyperref}
+\usepackage[style=mla,backend=bibtex]{biblatex}
+\defbibheading{bibliography}[\bibname]{\newpage\centerline{Works Cited}}
+\hypersetup{
+    colorlinks,
+    linkcolor={red!50!black},
+    citecolor={blue!50!black},
+    urlcolor={blue!80!black}
+}
+\addbibresource{essaythree.bib}
+\begin{document}
+{\parindent0pt\obeylines
+Holden Rohrer
+Markley
+English Composition II
+11 Oct 2020
+}
+\centerline{\large\bfseries Henrietta Lacks and Medical Ethics}
+\iffalse
+Henrietta Lacks's immortal cells normalized the idea of in-vitro
+research and in-vitro therapies.
+Research on human biology is less haphazard and more...
+Thesis: Generically, new research technology 
+Question: How did Henrietta Lacks's cells affect how I think about
+disease or being healthy?
+Answer: The image of "cells" being the thing that makes you unhealthy
+makes germs more concrete? Lol no that's the germ theory of medicine.
+They affected how I think about research
+Question: How did the speculum affect how I think about disease or being
+healthy?
+Answer: Sanitary medical instruments became more important. Women's
+health was considered more serious?? Specialized instruments were
+normalized??
+\fi
+
+{\itshape The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks} investigates the medical
+and personal timelines of Henrietta Lacks's immortal HeLa cells.
+Their discovery essentially created the field of in-vitro (in a
+laboratory environment) research and therapy.
+New vaccines, cell-culture techniques, and the technology to grow stem
+cells in a petri dish were all invented because of HeLa.
+But HeLa also helped construct a more ethical research paradigm, under
+the doctrine of informed consent.
+Generally, new avenues for research require new limits to be put on
+them, and HeLa and the technologies it's helped produce have been no
+different.
+Gene sequencing, for example, has emerged as a great new frontier, but
+brings with it the baggage of genetic privacy, as was discovered by the
+Lacks family in 2013.
+The widened options new research technologies bring reveal ethical
+blindspots or create new ones, and the subsequent backlashes build new
+norms protecting the health of participants, like informed consent.
+
+``Illegal, Immoral, and Deplorable'' describes one such backlash.
+The respected physician Chester Southam feared ``Henrietta's cancer
+cells could infect the scientists working on them,''
+\autocite[127]{Lacks} so he tested his theory on subjects he lied to,
+injecting them with Henrietta's cells to see if the subjects got cancer.
+In at least one subject, ``Henrietta's cancer cells metastasized.''
+\autocite[128]{Lacks}
+Southam rationalized his violation of subjects' bodily autonomy by
+claiming his trials weren't meaningfully injurious, but three doctors
+saw a striking similarity to Nazi medical experiments prosecuted during
+the Nuremberg trials.
+The Board of Regents ``found Southam and Mandel guilty of ``fraud or
+deceit and unprofessional conduct in the practice of
+medicine,''\thinspace'' \autocite[134]{Lacks} causing the National
+Institute of Health to establish that ``all proposals for research on
+human subjects had to be approved by review boards''
+\autocite[135]{Lacks}.
+This sort of experiment was neither viable nor ``necessary'' before
+HeLa, meaning HeLa was crucial in bringing attention to this ethical
+crisis.
+The novel technology of HeLa led to an abusive experiment being revealed
+to the public, and the NIH and others stepped in to protect patients
+from being unknowingly included in studies like this.
+
+The backlashes against new technology aren't always entirely rational or
+altruistic, however.
+Generally, backlashes aim to protect the public from a perceived harm,
+real or not.
+``SCIENTISTS CREATE MONSTERS'' \autocite[142]{Lacks} headlined in the
+early 60s, attacking somatic cell fusion, another technology made
+possible by HeLa.
+``Cell sex'' let researchers ``begin mapping human genes to specific
+chromosomes,'' \autocite[142]{Lacks} develop ``cancer therapies like
+Herceptin,'' \autocite[142]{Lacks} and ``identify the blood groups that
+increased the safety of transfusions.'' \autocite[142]{Lacks}
+But the fact that this technology fused different species was alarming.
+The prohibition wasn't institutionalized like informed consent, but
+mouse-human hyrbids still held stigma.
+Many new technologies garner similar responses, but the backlash
+rarely sticks if the criticism is invalid.
+% improve
+
+The book centrally contends with another rights issue---what control the
+Lacks (and medical patients, in general) deserve over their cells. 
+The historical conflict can't be resolved because her cells can't be
+taken differently: ```They were taken in a bad way but they are doing
+good for the world,' [Alfred Lacks Carter] says.'\thinspace''
+But many of the injustices that occurred after her death can: ``doctors
+and scientists repeatedly failed to ask her family for consent as they
+revealed Lacks’s name publicly, gave her medical records to the media,
+and even published her cells' genome online.'' \autocite{Nature}
+Because full genome sequencing has been made so cheaply available, a
+researcher, without asking the Lacks, published HeLa's genome in 2013.
+``The work would become a bioethical lightning rod''
+\autocite{Callaway}.
+The incident raised questions about genetic privacy and scientists'
+awareness that cell lines might even be deanonymized in the future.
+The development of genome sequencing raised new questions intrinsic to
+the technology like ``can a genome be deanonymized?'' and ``should the
+genomic data be protected?'' but it also dredges up the same old
+concern: what rights the Lacks have over Henrietta's cells.
+The author chose to unpublish it and, with the Lacks's approval,
+republished it with restrictions.
+This microcosmic justice shows that new techniques and technologies
+amplify existing problems and create entirely new ones, but the
+public criticism received solves or mitigates those same problems.
+
+\printbibliography
+\end{document}