Movie: Lorenzo's Oil: an absolutely must-see for everyone
Hey, so my first movie post is going to be about the terribly emotional 1992 film Lorenzo's Oil. It is about a kid who suffers the neurological disease adenoleukodystrophy (ALD). Because this disorder is so rare, there was effectively no treatment for the disease, so the kid's father decided to take matters into his own hands.
I don't want to give away anything about the movie (other than the fact that it is spectacular), but I'd like to discuss some of the really interesting points about the film (I will try to steer away from plot to prevent spoilers).
First off, I really appreciated the discussion this movie provided about the disease. Though it did assume a layman audience, it discussed the disease at the molecular level, which gave the disease context and gave the audience a good understanding of the condition. Another thing that this discussion does is reach out to non-scientists and say, in a way, "this information is important, and everyone should be able to understand it, regardless of their background." One issue that I have with science in general is the extreme educational barrier to understanding it. There is a lot of jargon and vocabulary that isolates science from the rest of society. This movie does something which I have a lot of respect for: it made this information accessible. This feat is accompanied by another statement that the movie makes, or rather another question it brings up, "who should practice science, and in what way should they practice it?" There seems to be a self-imposed prerequisite to discussing or even attempting to understand science: having a degree of some sort in the field. Also, I'd like to bring up the assumption that having a degree gives a person absolute authority in the topic of their degree over a person who does not (Of course that person, in a sense, is an authority on the topic, but a question we might all ask is do they have absolute authority?).
This film answers the question of who should practice science by depicting the way laymen, the boy's father and mother who are not doctors, become authorities, in a way, in a specific field of medicine, ADL. Without much previous knowledge in the area, both became experts through extensive reading and critical thinking about the cause and potential treatments for ADL.
We can learn from this movie that everyone is affected by science in some way in their lives, whether they are interested in science, they have some experience with health or disease, or they read a piece of news about genetic engineering, and instead of shying away from this interaction, the general public has the option of pursuing their questions. In many cases, a member of the general public can and should take their understanding of science into their own hands and disregard the formal educational barrier to understanding biology.
Apart from being an amazing story and a beautiful film, this movie has something to teach us, and encourages us to ask questions about the relationship between science and the general public: how much can a non-scientist understand science? how should we approach rare conditions (should we focus our support on only common diseases)? how important is it that the general public have a working understanding of science?
**Image from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104756/?ref_=nv_sr_1
I don't want to give away anything about the movie (other than the fact that it is spectacular), but I'd like to discuss some of the really interesting points about the film (I will try to steer away from plot to prevent spoilers).
First off, I really appreciated the discussion this movie provided about the disease. Though it did assume a layman audience, it discussed the disease at the molecular level, which gave the disease context and gave the audience a good understanding of the condition. Another thing that this discussion does is reach out to non-scientists and say, in a way, "this information is important, and everyone should be able to understand it, regardless of their background." One issue that I have with science in general is the extreme educational barrier to understanding it. There is a lot of jargon and vocabulary that isolates science from the rest of society. This movie does something which I have a lot of respect for: it made this information accessible. This feat is accompanied by another statement that the movie makes, or rather another question it brings up, "who should practice science, and in what way should they practice it?" There seems to be a self-imposed prerequisite to discussing or even attempting to understand science: having a degree of some sort in the field. Also, I'd like to bring up the assumption that having a degree gives a person absolute authority in the topic of their degree over a person who does not (Of course that person, in a sense, is an authority on the topic, but a question we might all ask is do they have absolute authority?).
This film answers the question of who should practice science by depicting the way laymen, the boy's father and mother who are not doctors, become authorities, in a way, in a specific field of medicine, ADL. Without much previous knowledge in the area, both became experts through extensive reading and critical thinking about the cause and potential treatments for ADL.
We can learn from this movie that everyone is affected by science in some way in their lives, whether they are interested in science, they have some experience with health or disease, or they read a piece of news about genetic engineering, and instead of shying away from this interaction, the general public has the option of pursuing their questions. In many cases, a member of the general public can and should take their understanding of science into their own hands and disregard the formal educational barrier to understanding biology.
Apart from being an amazing story and a beautiful film, this movie has something to teach us, and encourages us to ask questions about the relationship between science and the general public: how much can a non-scientist understand science? how should we approach rare conditions (should we focus our support on only common diseases)? how important is it that the general public have a working understanding of science?
**Image from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104756/?ref_=nv_sr_1