Eng 1020- RJA #14: Annotated Bibliography, Part 2

Roleff, Tamara L, ed. Cloning: opposing viewpoints series, United States of America: Thomson Gale, 2006. Print.

This Series is extremely helpful because it gives information about cloning from different perspectives. In order to fully argue any topic, it is essential that we know what arguments are being held by the opposition. This book emphasizes on this particular point, and gives for each different topic related to cloning different consecutive perspectives. The Thomson Corporation is a world leader in e-research and educational publishing for schools, businesses, as well as libraries. They are highly reliable and trustworthy and its quality has been honored by the Dartmouth Medal, as well as receiving the CODiE award for the excellence in their work. This book covers twenty different topics, which have each one of them a different author, which are making reference to another authors work. Since it has been reviewed by a lot of different people working for Thomson Gale, I would assume that all the information provided is accurate, but above all this book is extremely enlightening.


Engdahl, Sylvia, ed. Cloning: contemporary issues companion, United States of America: Thomson Gale, 2006, Print.

The editor of this book, Sylvia Engdahl is the author of fourteen different books that vary from the range of science fiction anthologies, novels, and non-fiction books. She has received a Phoenix Award, a bronze medal in 2008 from “Independent Publisher Book Awards”, as well as a Christopher Award for some of her excellent publications. Although she has proven to be an excellent publisher, she also worked with an extremely good publishing company: The Thomson Corporation which is a world leader in e-research and educational publishing for schools, businesses, as well as libraries. They are highly reliable and trustworthy and its quality has been honored by the Dartmouth Medal, as well as receiving the CODiE award for the excellence in their work. This book covers 25 different topics in regards to cloning, and gives half pro information and half con, which have proven to be very beneficial when in need of different perspectives on an argument.


Ruse, Michael and Aryne Sheppard, ed. Cloning: Responsible Science or Technomadness? Amherst, New York. Prometheus Books. 2001. Print.

Michael Ruse is a professor of Philosophy at Florida State University, and is the author of a well distinguished books, Taking Darwin Seriously and editor of Philosophy of Biology, and Bit Is It Science? Aryne Sheppard is a former graduate student at the University of Guelph, and works doing research, as well as on problems of conservation. In this book, the reader will find most of the information with regards to cloning to be focused on the hypothetical idea of “cloned humans”. Although I will not be addressing human cloning in my paper, this book has been beneficial because it also gives light to the religious concerns with respect to cloning. The Publishing company: Prometheus Books, has shown success and professionalism in their works for over 40 years. It produces no less than 100 new titles per year and has already more than 2,000 books in print. Prometheus Books also has international distribution, rights, and sales representation throughout the world, with domestic and foreign expansion ongoing, and with titles translated to more than 50 different languages. This book therefore should be extremely accurate and reliable.


Dictionary.com. 2009. LLC. Web. 22 November 2009.

I have used Dictionary.com, an Ask.com service, for formal definitions of therapeutic cloning as well as reproductive cloning. Both the definitions of therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning were provided by The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005. which is a well known and reputable dictionary. Dictionary.com is a multi-source dictionary search service produced by Dictionary.com, LLC, a leading provider of language reference products and services on the Internet. It is not a publisher, but more of like a library which collects definitions from numerous reliable dictionaries. Both of the definitions coincided perfectly with all my research on both of the subjects, therefore I am satisfied to conclude that dictionary.com is a reliable source for information.


FDA.gov. 2009. FDA U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Web. 22 Nov, 2009.

The FDA partners with stakeholders to address critical public health needs and bridge scientific gaps. I have used information provided by them in regards to the safety of food coming from a cloned animal or its offspring. They also provided with up to date and relevant information in regards to policies regarding cloned animal food. The FDA is certainly a reliable source since it is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation. The FDA is also responsible for advancing the public health by helping to speed innovations that make medicines and foods more effective, safer, and more affordable; and helping the public get the accurate, science-based information they need to use medicines and foods to improve their health. Therefore I maintain that it is a reliable source of information.


Hansen, Brian. “Cloning Debate” CQ Researcher.14.37 (October 22, 2004): n. pag. Web. 22 November 2009.

CQ Researcher is one of the first place librarians encourage students to look for reliable sources of information in any current topic or issue on a scholarly level. It has been publishing since 1923 and has received the American Bar Association's 2002 Silver Gavel Award for a nine-part series on liberty and justice issues, as well as the prestigious Sigma Delta Chi Award for Journalism Excellence in 1999 for a ten-part series on health care. “Cloning Debate” from Hansen has given me more information in current issues against cloning, such as political views, which I have been able to use in my paper.