Demonstration speech response

After watching Alec’s demonstration video he critiqued I had some of the same opinions as him, and some that differed. The video he chose was called “Imagining the Tenth Dimension”. It described in great detail how to visualize the possible dimensions one could experience. I agree with Alec that the video helped explain the complicated visualizing components of different dimensions. However, the video didn’t blow my mind like he thought it did for him. Even though the video wasn’t within the time constraints (it went a little over) I think it was a good length. Not too long, but long enough to cover in depth the topic the video was explaining. I also believe, like Alec, that the visual aids were great. The video itself did not show the narrator, but only had visual representations. This worked so well in this video because of the complex topic. Visual representation was basically the only way to explain to an “uneducated” audience. All in all the video caught my attention and it was one I would not have viewed if not for Alec. This video would definitely be useful in a class such as calculus when one has to complete equations in different dimensions. I appreciated the uniqueness of the video and enjoyed watching it.   

Demonstrative Speech

The demonstration speech I found on youtube was one titled “how to build a solar oven”. I originally chose to view this video because it fit the time constraint running in at five minutes thirty two seconds, and the topic I felt was extremely interesting. I never have seen someone make a solar oven so the girl’s speech was very informative. I also enjoyed how she incorporated the fact that it is very inexpensive to make, so it can be accessed by people currently living without a home and in financial constraints. There were numerous things that I enjoyed about her speech, and also some things I believe could be improved for next time. I enjoyed how she constructed the solar oven during the actual speech. It made for a great visual aid and interaction with the audience. A solar oven is also a very unique idea, and I doubt another in her class thought to present the same topic. Finally she was spot on with the length of the speech. Some negative aspects of the speech about solar ovens were that the person presenting was really bad at eye contact, and talked in a robotic fashion. Eye contact is important because it is important that you address the audience to make the experience for personable. Instead of talking like a robot she should have made her speech with more flow (sound natural). She also should have dressed business casual to create a professional atmosphere. Finally the speech really needed for repetition. There were numerous steps involved with the process of making a solar oven, and there was no way to remember them all. Repetition would have eliminated this issue. All in all her speech was interesting and informative. If she fixes the minor details, the speech will be perfect!

Response to Megan's medicine and ethics blog

In Megan’s blog about ethics and medicine, she discussed issues revolving around birth control. Birth control is a widely used pharmaceutical in the United States (80 percent according to her blog)! The issue with birth control lies with the fact that some people feel as though it is an abortion pill. The positive aspects are obviously the fact that it prevents unwanted teen pregnancy. I liked how Megan brought up current issues about the topic of birth control in her post. Although the elections have past, when she wrote this blog they were up and coming. It made the issue relevant, and allowed people a chance to give their voice on the issue of birth control. I also agree with Megan’s stance on this issue. I feel as though any woman has a right to birth control if she wants it. If birth control was out lawed I feel that abortions would actually go up, because contraceptives would not be as readily available. Also birth control gives a woman power and peace of mind to know that they are protected.

The articles that Megan used were also very informative. I liked how she found two different articles relating to the two different opinions on the issue. She expressed both side’s view and really came full circle with the issues. Overall birth control has morality conflicts, however I think they can be overcome if people allow it to be a personal choice. If you don’t like it, don’t fill out a prescription for it.      

Ethics and Medicine

A current issue in our world concerning ethics and medicine today is stem cell research. Stem cell research aims to cure wide spread diseases like cancer using stem cells, in particular embryonic stem cells. Because these cells have the ability to turn into any tissue, the hope is that replacing diseased tissue with stem cells will cure the sick.  Ethics come into play because some groups of people believe an embryo should be seen as a human being, and therefore should not be “murdered”. I know about this issue because news about the last few years has been everywhere. It is one of those issues that no one can, or ever will agree on. I feel like the people for stem cell research are misrepresented. Most against the issue do not know the science behind stem cell research, and fight against it without taking the chance to learn.

From looking at the website http://www.isscr.org/public/ethics.htm, I learned a little more about the pros and cons concerning the morality issues of stem cell research. The main opponents to the research appear to be catholic church groups, whereas the proponents come from a scientifically educated back round. The article states that although one would be using an embryo, they are all donated (no one would ever have to enter the uterus, and “take”). However embryos are still being used so one would still be killing a human being. In my opinion I feel as though the side for stem cell research is more compelling because there are so many potential possibilities with this research. I believe the benefits out weigh the moral issues. They are using a tiny clump of cells, a blastocyst, for research, not a grown baby. We have the potential to unlock amazing medical feats with stem cells, and I do not think it should be halted.

Reponse post 2

I believe Alyssa brought up a really important issue in her post "Asthma in Children". She discussed how minority children have a greater risk of dying from asthma than a white child. This is due to lack of healthcare, and environmental injustice (polluting factories not dispersed evenly, only in minority and low income communities). Before reading her post, this issue was something that never crossed my mind and I agree with Alyssa that these things need to be discussed and changed. I also learned from her post that this issue is also due in part to genetics. It makes you wonder why certain diseases are more likely for certain types of people compared to others. In response to her blog she also brought up important issues concerning our nations health care system. I am not super familiar with this topic but know it is extremely hard for certain people to obtain health care. Seeing that health care is a necessary part to staying healthy it makes me upset that it is not open to everyone.

I do not have asthma so this article was also informative for me because I did not know much about the disease. Statistics like this need to change, and I'm glad people such as Alyssa are spreading the word. If people are not invovled issues will never be changed for the better.

Technorati search engine

The search engine Technorati lets one search for blogs and blog related content. I used it to discover blogs concerning my informative paper topic, deforestation. The author of the blog I found is a man named Ronnie Cummins. He has been posting on this site at least once a month since December of 2009. The reason I chose this particular site was because I believed the information that it provided, and the author is a reliable source. Ronnie Cummins is the founder/director of the organic consumers organization. His organization is dedicated to sustainable agriculture, and national and global campaigns working towards this issue. The author utilizes hyperlinks to other websites in his posts and utilizes pictures to illustrate his point.

When I used this search engine to find a specific blog post related to deforestation I discovered one written by Gordon Brown, the former prime minister of the United Kingdom. This post came from the blog “The Huffington Post”, and was written October 10 of this year. It discussed climate change, and the effects deforestation has on this ever present issue in today’s society. This post differs from my research paper because it takes a more persuasive attitude. The author is for new low-carbon technologies and uses statistics to prove his point rather than just present information. I also feel like because Brown is so familiar with politics and world issues he has a right to argue his point. In other words he is an expert on the topic and is educated, so I feel more inclined to believe him. In my persuasive paper I will have to complete more research than Brown did due to the fact I will be unfamiliar with my topic.

All in all, the search engine Technorati was very helpful and easy to use. This was the first time I have ever explored the website and did not encounter any issues with it.

Speech evaluation

During my demonsrative speech I discussed, and attempted to teach others the beginning positions of ballet. There were some things about my speech I felt confident about, and other things I believe that needed a lot of improvement. First I will start with what I feel needs to be improved upon for next time. I think I could have projected my voice slightly better (it may have been hard for people to hear me). Also My time management was not so fantastic. I was around a minute under which is a pretty good chunk of time. Finally I feel as though after watching my speech on video that I could have made eye contact with more people, and not the floor. What I feel went really well during my speech was demonstrating something that probably not alot of people knew much about. I feel as though it was educational, and interesting. I also feel that I had well planned out visual aids (pictures of myself in different positions, and pointe shoes). One thing that I struggled with personally was the fact that because my speech was on the first day, I did not really know what to expect. I hope next time I will not be as nervous, and feel slightly more confident! However, all in all I feel as though I did a good job.

Response blog

I agree with Madison's point of view on the topic of organ sales. she believes no one should be able to put a price on a life. She brought up a different perspective that I did not think about. The fact that the people recieving the organs would have to purchase them in an auction type setting. This would in turn create internal competition among the sick, instead of the current list (top priority recieves the organs). The people who may be in more need for the organs may not recieve them due to money issues. However the issue of having rights over your body still come up. Even though this is ethically/ morally wrong, how can someone tell another what to do with their own bodies? Whether to legalize organ selling or organ purchasing remains a unknown. Whatever happens it will create controversy and I still think after reading a different blog that both sides have valid points. However, Madison, to me, proves that being morally responsible is a better choice than being greedy(money hungry). Everyone will have different opinions on the topic and I don't think there is really a right answer. Whether one looks at Madisons perspective, my own, or the author of the required article, different and valid points will pop up. They all have valid points.

Organs For Sale?

In most countries it is illegal to sell your organs, but legal to donate them to the sick and dying. Should people be allowed to sell their own organs if it is what they desire? In my opinion a person should have legal rights over their own body. However, your organs are obviously an important aspect to a healthy life. I understand the reason why someone would want money for giving up something inside of their body, but I don't know if I agree with giving up your organ for the sole purpose of receiving a profit. Giving up your organs should be to benefit another human being, not your pocket book. Again though this choice is up to the individual, and probably should not be decided upon by the government. Even if the original reason for selling an organ is selfish, it would lead to benificiary elements (eventually ending up inside a sick person).
After reading the BBC news editorial by Martin Wilkinson I realized he had some pretty valid points. As I said above, I agree the benefits for the recipients would be worth it. If people did not have to wait as long on transplant lists, I am sure many lives would be saved. This unquestionably is a benefit. However, no matter how one looks at the situation, moral ethics come into play. Legalizing the organ market would create controversy. There is no way around that. People either have to decide if they have legal rights over what they do with their bodies, or if they want other people making that decision for them. Another point he brought up relates to what I discussed in the previous paragraph, the money issue. Would poor people be the most accepting of the new law because it would be a source of profit for them? Is that ethically okay?

Post 1 Obstacles in writing/reading TILOHL

First off I believe Henrietta Lacks' story is extremely important for people to read about. It brings up issues about morality, doctor patient consent, race, poverty, and the issue surrounding the lack of compensation Henrietta's family received. The public needs to know that many important medical discoveries and medications stem from cells that were basically stolen from this woman's body. Although Henrietta has passed on, her contributions to the whole of human life should not be ignored, and in a way it has. For instance her family live in poverty even though her cells have produced millions, while the doctors who have used her cells in research live in wealth. Issues like this need to be brought to the attention of the public or nothing will ever change.

Because the author, Rebecca Skloot, wrote The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks for all audiences I'm sure she faced numerous challenges. She had to provide correct factual information as well as touch the average person with emotion, and interest in her writing. I know I would have a problem reading this book if it were written in medical journal format, and I think I speak for most of the public on that point. I also believe Skloot had challenges in deciding what to put in the book, and what to leave out. After ten years of research I am positive she had an overwhelming amount of data.

Finally as a reader I anticipate having challenges regarding the anger I will probably feel while reading the book. The lack of education Henrietta's family had about the situation still confuses me. I also feel as though I will not fully comprehend the extent of how much her cells have done for the scientific community. I know they have helped with things like the pollio vaccine, and the effects of the atomic bomb, but will the book explain the process of these discoveries?