At the University of Washington, the engineers and Nanofracture, a Bellevue, Washington company have designed a device that can contract human DNA from fluid samples in a simpler, more efficient and environmentally friendly way that is much better and more efficient than some conventional methods. Just by taking a swab of saliva from your mouth you can get your DNA ready for analysis in minutes. This device will give hospitals and research labs the opportunity to have much easier and faster ways of separating DNA from human fluid samples. This will help with genome sequencing, disease diagnosis, and forensic investigations! Extracting DNA is very complex, and the current procedure "is the equivalent of collecting human hairs using a construction crane." says Jae-Hyun Chung, a UQ associate professor of Mechanical engineering who is leading this research. It is an awesome opportunity to have this great technology made considering it is very complex to extract DNA. Having this technology to get the DNA quickly will be extremely beneficial. The new technology is a small, box shaped kit that is much smaller than what they use now, making it much more beneficial.
This article, New device can Extract Human DNA with Full Genetic Data in Minutes, was extremely interesting and informative. It did a great job informing me on the new technology being created at the University of Washington, with not too many words. The article also did a great job of explaining how this new DNA distinguisher is going to improve the ways we extract DNA today, and the process. One thing that could have been improved would be, they could have explained what the old technology was like in detail, so not only did we understand how the new technology will improve our methods, but also get a feel for how it used to be and how it is going to change.
"New Device Can Extract Human DNA with Full Genetic Data in Minutes."ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, . Web. 18 Nov. 2015.
13 comments:
Emme Kerj
Current event 8 comment
Lilly, I think you did a really good job explaining why his new invention is so significant to the forensic community compared to the older version of the DNA sampling. I also liked that you brought up the actual size of the new kit because that gives the reader another example of why it is so much better than the older version. I also agree with you that the article was very effective in explaining everything in not too many words.
I think that you could have mentioned that this new technique will also help with disease diagnosis since that will most likely be an important aspect of it. I also think that you could have emphasized how expensive it is to conduct DNA sequencing with the older technique since that also plays a big role in why this new kit is so much more efficient. I also think that you could’ve drawn a connection to how much better this new technique will be for labs working with cases since it will take less time for them to match DNA samples now, which can possibly speed up the investigation of a crime.
I was surprised to learn that the older technique takes 20-30 minutes to extract the DNA while the new one takes only up to 3 minutes since this is such a huge difference. I also wonder why no one has tried to perfect the technique earlier, especially considering how much money is spent on DNA extraction per year already. I also think it is really good that they will be able to produce about 1 million of these nanotips and microtips per year since this will make the new technique more available in the future which will save both time and money for forensic labs and investigations.
Works cited:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130506132100.htm
University of Washington. "New device can extract human DNA with full genetic data in minutes." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 6 May 2013. .
I think Lilly did a good job in summarizing the article. She had a good explanation and example on how human DNA can be separated from fluid samples in a more efficient way. She was also able to incorporate a quote into her review. The quote was placed into a context where it compares the difficulty of extracting DNA and collecting hair with a construction crane. Lastly, she made the review short and easy to understand.
One thing she could have improved was to make a couple of her sentences a bit shorter. She could have also explained the process of DNA extraction that was more complex and compare it to the much more efficient process.
It is good that there is finally an easier way to extract DNA from fluid samples because I knew before that DNA extraction had a complex process which took a while. Now that there is an easier and more efficient way to extract DNA, the process will be less time consuming and more beneficial.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130506132100.htm
"New Device Can Extract Human DNA with Full Genetic Data in Minutes."ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, . Web. 18 Nov. 2015.
Overall, I enjoyed reading this review because it well written and very informative. Lilly did a great job in telling us how this device helps hospitals and science in general. I like how she quoted experts in her review about how complex the procedure is. This allows us to have a better understanding of about how intricate it must be to extract DNA and how it was potentially made a bit easier because of this new technology. It was also very helpful that the tool was described so that we can imagine it. One thing that could have been improved is the fact that in the review it was not explained how exactly the procedure works, which would have been more interesting to read about. I would have liked to hear more about why it is environmentally friendly and Lilly’s opinion about how beneficial this device is. Also, there were a few grammatical errors that were distracting. I found it very interesting how this device is environmentally friendly and how this complex DNA extraction procedure could potentially be made a lot simpler.
Lilly, I really enjoyed reading your review of the article “New Device Can Extract Human DNA with Full Genetic Data in Minutes.” A few things stood out. One, I liked how you added a quote from an expert in this field. This gave your review more strength. Two, I liked your summary of the article. It was not too short that I didn’t understand it, and it wasn’t too long that I was overwhelmed. Three, I liked how you focused in on how this device can affect society and individuals. This shows how important this new device really is. Although your review was great, there are a few things you could do to make it even better. One, you could have explained the process of DNA extraction because I was a little confused by it. Two, I also would have liked to hear more about your opinion of this new device, and what you think its significance will be. Reading your review was the first time I heard about this device. I was fascinated by how many things it can help with: genome sequencing, disease diagnosis, and forensic investigations. Overall, I really enjoyed your review.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130506132100.htm
University of Washington. "New device can extract human DNA with full genetic data in minutes." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 6 May 2013. .
I think Lily explained well why the new invention is evolutionary to the forensic field when compared to the older version of the DNA sampling. She also brought up the significance of the size of the new kit, giving another example of why it is advanced than the older version. What I found effective of this summary was that she listed didn’t forget to explain to the readers what, when, and where the DNA sampling is used. At last, I agree with Lily how the article was concise and straight to the point.
Although Lily did a good job at summarizing the article, she could have mentioned that this new innovation helps determining disease diagnosis. I also think that she could have recognized how expensive it was to conduct DNA sequencing with the older design; highlighting the efficiency of the new design. Lastly, she could have described how this new technique will affect the lab work since it will lessen the time for forensic scientists to match DNA samples.
I enjoyed the article overall since it taught me many new aspects of DNA device. I was surprised to learn the significant efficiency of the new technique compared to the old one. The old one took 20-30 minutes to extract the DNA while the new one takes only up to 3 minutes since this is such a huge difference. Although I wonder why it took this long to advance the DNA device since they would have had enough funds to do their research. It was delightful news that they will be able to produce about 1 million of these nanotips and microtips per year enabling new techniques to be available in the future, saving both time and money for forensic labs and investigations.
I think that Lilly did a great job of reviewing an article that discusses something very new and exciting in the forensic technological world. Lilly did a good job of presenting the article with thorough details about how this new DNA swabbing technique could impact our modern society. I also thought that Lilly did a good job of inputting an exciting tone while at the same time maintaining a professional aspect. Lilly also did a good job of listing the benefits this invention has on hospitals and how it can help with genome sequencing.
If I were to suggest anything to Lilly, I would first say to look over at some grammar mistakes. Also, I think what could have been beneficial to Lilly’s review would be to expand more on the science of the invention and what instances this technique would be used for in real life situations. Other than that, I really enjoyed reading Lilly's review and found it refreshing to learn about not only our expanding technological advancements, but how they affect the forensic world.
This article was very well written and summarized. It was interesting to discover that engineers at the University of Washington have designed a device that is capable of contracting human DNA from fluid samples in a simpler, more effective and environmentally friendly way. This process consists of taking a swab of saliva from your mouth, and then you can get your DNA ready for analysis in minutes. This new method makes research labs’ jobs easier and speeds up the process of separating DNA from human fluid samples. It was also captivating to learn that this method can help with disease diagnosis. This new piece of technology is a small, box shaped kit, that is very beneficial.
Overall, this article was simply summarized and was easy to read, I think it could have been better if it included how they discovered this new and efficient method, and if is this the most commonly used process now, throughout all DNA research and investigation.
The most outstanding and interesting information I learned was, that in just minutes one can get their DNA analysis from just a swab of saliva.
"New Device Can Extract Human DNA with Full Genetic Data in Minutes."ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily. Web. 18 Nov. 2015.
Lily did a great job of explaining the significance of this new DNA discovery. DNA is, after all, crucial to forensic investigations and anything that can improve upon its retrieval and analysis is a fantastic innovation. She also effectively displayed why this faster and easier form of DNA analysis is so much better than the current method. She also included a wonderful quote from the article comparing current DNA analysis methods to “collecting human hairs using a construction crane." This was a particularly pertinent example that perfectly displayed the need for this DNA analysis.
In order to improve upon her article review, Lily could have gone further into how this new DNA test works. She only really went into its possible effects on our society. The review may have also benefited from talking about the current DNA analytical methods. Being able to learn about the two and see the specific differences would be interesting and help with comprehension as to why this is so important.
It was interesting to hear about how primitive our DNA analysis seems in this day in age. We need a faster and more efficient way to analyze DNA. There are times when rapid acquisition of evidence is crucial, and it looks like there is finally a way to meet this immediate need.
Lilly did a fantastic job presenting her review of the article with thorough details about how the new DNA swabbing technique could impact society. She also did a good job keeping the reader engaged throughout the review.Lily did a great job summarizing how the invention could benefit hospitals and help speed up the process of genome sequencing
Although the review was very interesting I would suggest that you look to fix the few grammar mistakes. Also, I would have found it very interesting if Lily went in depth into the specific science behind the new technique and how it differs from the current method.
Overall, I really enjoyed the review and find it extremely interesting that new techniques to process DNA samples are still improving upon each other. One can only think of what the future holds in on the forensic science front.
Lily did a really good job picking an interesting article, while also providing a great review. An aspect that I believe to be well presented was how she gave a deeper explanation on what the article never explained. This resulted in me taking more information away from the review and the article itself. Another aspect that I thought was well presented, was how she was able to explain how the device could be able to help us in the future and even now. And the last aspect I found to be well presented was the amount of details Lily was able to put into this review; it made it easier to understand what the point of the article really was. Although Lily did an outstanding job on this review, there are a few suggestions I would like to give that would've made the review perfect. Although I did take a lot way from this review... I was never able to find out what the name of the "device" was. This would've resulted in me fully understanding the topic at hand. The last thing I would like to suggest, is maybe in the future put more of your own opinion into the review itself. Something that I learned while reading this review is how hard it really is to extract DNA. In all, the article and review I read were great and I was able to take something away from it.
I thought that Lilly did a great job with her review of the article. One of the things I thought that she did well was presenting the information from the article. She presented it in an organized fashion so that it was easy to follow and understand for the reader. Another thing I thought that she did well was expressing her opinion on the article. In these article reviews it is easy for the reviewer to forget about sharing their opinion on the article, and perhaps how it could have been improved. Finally I thought Lilly did a great job making connections between the subject of DNA extraction and its great relevance in society. The most important part of these articles is finding why it is so important to the forensic world and regular society.
While Lilly did many things well, I thought that she could have improved on describing how exactly the DNA extraction process occurs a little more thoroughly, as it was a little bit confusing. Another thing that she could have done better is explaining how this new process can help with disease diagnosis, as this is a very positive and important factor for the process of DNA extraction.
Overall I was very impressed by how many things the process of DNA extraction can help with, and hope that this technique can be perfected and put to its best full use in the near future.
Works Cited:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130506132100.htm
University of Washington. "New device can extract human DNA with full genetic data in minutes." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 6 May 2013.
I think that lilly did a fantastic job at describing and giving a summary of the article that she chose. She presented the information from the article in a very professional way. Her masterful use of the English language in this piece truly gives the reader the feeling that they are in a science lab. This article about a new process of extracting DNA is very interesting. I think that Lilly could perhaps use information from other articles to create a more complete piece that leaves no question unanswered. The information was very well presented and described in a good mix of fact and opinion. Overall I would say that this a great current event.
Post a Comment