“In 2022, the first 3D bioprinted human tissue was implanted in patients, a major milestone,” said Adam Feinberg, a professor of biomedical engineering
Opens in new window and materials science and engineering
Opens in new window and co-author. “So now it is no longer a question of if we can bioengineer new tissues and organs, but rather when we can translate that to the clinic and achieve FDA approval so everyone can benefit.”


Controversial viewpoint:
1. it violates divine command / religious morals ( unnatural )
2. high cost incurred and may not be accessible to everyone in the healthcare sector 


QN: how far do you agree that 3D bio printing is necessary to improve health care globally ?

She told the BBC: "This is a prime example of our increasing vulnerability in the face of high-tech, smart and connected devices which are proliferating in the healthcare and biomedical sectors.

"These are not like off-the-shelf products or services that we can actually own or control. Instead we are dependent on software upgrades, proprietary methods and parts, and the commercial drivers and success or failure of for-profit ventures."

Ethical considerations around such technology should in future include "autonomy, dignity, and accountability", she added.

Importantly, when you think of data, you might think of formal studies in which demographics and representation are carefully considered, limitations are weighed, and then the results are peer-reviewed. That’s not necessarily the case with the AI-based systems that might be used to make a decision about you. Let’s take one source of data everyone has access to: the internet. One study found that, by teaching an artificial intelligence to crawl through the internet — and just reading what humans have already written — the system would produce prejudices against black people and women. Another example of how training data can produce sexism in an algorithm occurred a few years ago, when Amazon tried to use AI to build a résumé-screening tool. According to Reuters, the company’s hope was that technology could make the process of sorting through job applications more efficient. It built a screening algorithm using résumés the company had collected for a decade, but those résumés tended to come from men. That meant the system, in the end, learned to discriminate against women. It also ended up factoring in proxies for gender, like whether an applicant went to a women’s college. (Amazon says the tool was never used and that it was nonfunctional for several reasons.)

*Food for thought: Given that it is known that there is bias in algorithms, why do we (instituitions, companies, governments etc.) still continue to use (and rely on) them?

 Just because a technology is accurate doesn’t make it fair or ethical. For instance, the Chinese government has used artificial intelligence to track and racially profile its largely Muslim Uighur minority, about 1 million of whom are believed to be living in internment camps.

Relevant controversial issues:


Also consider Intersectionality  (intersecting and overlapping social identities- which could prove to be empowering for some, yet oppressing for others)

key points :
- unfair treatment towards refugees, especially in their vulnerable state where they cannot voice out
- goes against UNHCR’s policy on protecting personal data
- May potentially put returning refugees at greater risk for discrimination in Myanmar

pros :
For many of these refugees, it is the first time they have an identity card. The biometric, fraud-proof cards are being issued jointly by Bangladeshi authorities and UNHCR to all verified refugees over the age of 12. Accurate data will help agencies in their programme planning and be able to target assistance where it is needed most, particularly for people with specific needs, such as women and children taking care of their families and people with disabilities.

cons :
With little meaningful power or representation, refugees have time and again been shut out of decisions as to how biometrics should be rolled out, what data gets shared with whom, what the risks are, and how they should best be mitigated, During registration processes, even the basic step of explaining what is going on does not appear to be a priority, let alone a wider consultative process.