Electric Cars are better than Normal Cars

Many people today assume that electric cars are a recent invention. It may come as a surprise to learn that the first electric vehicles were invented in the mid 19th century and held the record for highest vehicular land speed up to around 1900. However, the production and use of electric cars declined over the years due to their high production costs, short battery lives, and low top speeds. The interest in electric cars is slowly gaining prominence again in recent years mostly due to the environmental concerns raised by the substantial use of hydrocarbon fueled vehicles. Governments are shifting their focus, and electric cars are being more and better known as years go by and are also owned by a few people. It is time to recognize electric cars as the next generation of cars as it is not only better for the long run but currently better and safer than regular cars. The factors and features that make the electric car better than regular cars and why electric vehicles should be owned are now going to be discussed.

A reason why electric cars should replace hydrocarbon fueled cars is their consideration for the environment. Although it cannot be said that electric vehicles do not pollute the environment completely, they cause way less pollution than regular cars. According to studies already done by several environmental protection agencies, car emissions will be rapidly reduced overall if more people were to start using electric vehicles than normal cars (Dimitropoulos 2016). An electric vehicle produces zero direct emissions. Even plug in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), which have electric motors as well as gasoline engines, still produce much fewer emissions when they are using gasoline because they have been proven to be more efficient than conventional vehicles.

Unlike conventional vehicles that use non renewable energy sources, electric vehicles energy source is renewable. This is because electric cars use electricity and modern technologies. According to Gelmanova (2018), an electric car user just needs to connect to an electricity grid and recharge when they run out of fuel. A typical electric vehicle uses almost 0.2 kilowatt hours of electricity for every kilometer covered. A fully charged electric car can move continuously for between 6-8 hours before it needs to be recharged (Gelmanova 2018). Of course, these vehicles might be expensive to buy but they have been proven to cost less in electricity charges than normal cars cost on gas and fuel. Currently, global warming is a huge concern. Fuels products have been said to contribute the most in global warming as they produce a high percentage of carbon dioxide and methane to the atmosphere which are responsible for global warming (Dimitropoulos 2016). With the introduction of electric cars there is good news that global warming is likely to have a declining trend. This is because electric cars consume low levels of fuels so it minimizes pollution by alot .  

In terms of safety, electric cars have been tested and found to be much safer than regular cars. In the event that a regular car crashes its likely to catch fire more quickly than an electric car found in the same situation (Helmers 2017). This is because regular cars run on gasoline, a highly flammable chemical fuel. Currently,  regular cars hold the record of the most fatal accidents which have ended a large number of lives. Although the manufacture and supply of electric cars is low, it is worth knowing that the security of electric cars is not comparable to fuel cars. Moreover, an electric car needs way less mechanical components to run than a normal car since the manufacturing relies heavily on modern technology. This means that electric cars are less likely to get damaged, wear and tear, and the vehicles internal infrastructure uses less space. Most of the accidents occur due to wear and tear which rarely happens to electric cars. According to Gelmanova (2018), the engines of electric cars is highly efficient indicating low petroleum consumption. In case an accident occurs, it is not likely to be as bad compared to regular cars. Electric cars are more comfortable and secure than regular cars.

Electric cars also have a financial advantage over regular cars. Even though they are more expensive to buy than regular fueled cars, electric cars are cheaper to use and maintain in the long run. After purchasing electric cars, the maintenance costs are very low compared to fuel cars. The fact that wear and tear occurs slowly indicates that car to be cost efficient. Comparisons have revealed that the amount of money used to buy electricity used for charging an electric vehicle is about a third as much used to buy petrol for the same vehicle, per km (Herman2019). This makes electric cars more price friendly in long run. Furthermore, electric cars have fewer moving parts than regular cars, which make their maintenance easier and cheaper as they require less mechanical servicing. Buying  electric cars will fix the economy of multiple countries all around the world.

However, the idea of introducing electric cars into the motor vehicle industry has been criticized along the way. One group that is against this development said that the battery range of an electric car is extremely limited, stating that the current best range for an electric vehicle is the 85kWh battery Model S. the point here is that the efficiency of electric cars are compromised. But developers can guarantee that this limitation will not be around for long. Models are already being developed and tested that can allow driving for more than 200 miles before the need for a recharge. There is improvement but the batteries under development are smaller than expected, about the size of a laptop.

Another argument against electric cars is that a lot of time is required to recharge an electric car. It is said that most Americans have not yet gotten the idea of buying electric cars because they are afraid that recharging the vehicles will take up a lot of their time (Rus 2019). There is no electronic device that can charge instantly, not even the smallest most simple mobile phone. People all over the world who care about the environment might have to pay that price for some time. But that shouldn’t be a reason to worry. A lot of funds have been invested in battery technology research especially in decreasing charging times and increasing storage capacities. Recently big developments has been made that made a realization on improving lithium ion battery structure to gain charging speeds over twenty times faster than the current ones.

Probably the most known idea of electric cars is that they are too expensive. Many buyers complain that they cost way too much. However, the available data and information to support this argument is inconsistent. A year ago, the cheapest new electric car was going for 24,000 dollars. Today, the most affordable electric vehicle that could hold a family goes for roughly 30,000 dollars, which is lower than the average price of a new conventional car going for an average of 32,000 dollars (Wilberforce 2017). With these prices it is clear that the average American can afford an electric vehicle. Also, an electric car will cost one more than a regular car would in the long run. The concept is the same as building a new house and renting one.

Lastly, the most pointless argument against electric cars is that they are just as bad to the environment as regular cars. electric cars doubters often bring it up when all their other arguments have been backfired and countered. The case is based on a survey done at North Carolina State University, claiming that electric cars and hybrids would not reduce America’s air polluting emissions even if the cars made up 42% of all passenger cars in the States. But the survey was disapproved by a similar case by the Union of Concerned Scientists, which gave reliable counter argument results.

In conclusion, the electric car industry has realized recently that it is not only highly appreciated, but also highly required to the increasing cases of environmental issues. As written in this paper, the advantages of electric vehicles heavily outweigh the interests brought up by the critics of the industry. The large adoption of electric vehicles is linked to cost, since the price of gas and gasoline powered vehicles is assumed lower and both are available. But, as shown in this paper, improvements in technology are rapidly increasing and hopefully, the use of electric cars will soon take charge over regular vehicles. As is shown in this study, we believe that throughout the following decade mechanical progression and strategy changes will help indicate the progress from fuel controlled cars. Furthermore, the achievement and success of this depends on the international population of people and it is important that people will feel enhanced and active to drive an electric vehicle. Every person can have any kind of effect and make a change, so let us all go out and make a difference

Works Cited

Dimitropoulos, Alexandros, et al. “Not fully charged: Welfare effects of tax incentives for employer-provided electric cars.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 78 (2016): 1-19.

Gelmanova, Z. S., et al. “Electric cars. Advantages and disadvantages.” Journal of Physics: Conference Series. Vol. 1015. No. 5. IOP Publishing, 2018.

Helmers, Eckard, Johannes Dietz, and Susanne Hartard. “Electric car life cycle assessment based on real-world mileage and the electric conversion scenario.” The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 22.1 (2017): 15-30.

Herman, Renaud. How the introduction of electric cars is disrupting the car industry?. MS thesis. UHasselt, 2019.

Rus, C., et al. “Electric cars as environmental monitoring IoT Network.” IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. Vol. 572. No. 1. IOP Publishing, 2019.

Wilberforce, Tabbi, et al. “Developments of electric cars and fuel cell hydrogen electric cars.” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 42.40 (2017): 25695-25734.

Vaccine Controversy

In the past couple of years, vaccinations have become more and more controversial due to reports of the vaccinations being linked to disorders such as Autism. Due to this, many parents opt to not vaccinate their children, unknowing the effect that their decision can have on other children. The practice of immunization was introduced all the way back in China around 1000 A.D., but the modern vaccine was considered to be founded in the 1700s by Edward Jenner, who demonstrated immunity to smallpox after experimenting on a young boy (IAC, 2017). Although most of the diseases that were prevalent at that time in history have been eradicated now, there still are some that are lingering but being controlled mostly by immunizations. Vaccinations should be required for everyone because it reduces the chance of disease, prevents those diseases from spreading to those who are not vaccinated, and is cost-friendly when considered against the alternative. 

The way that vaccines work is that they train the “immune system to recognize and combat pathogens” (Pappas, 2010). Doing so reduces the chances of the pathogens spreading and causing an individual to get sick. Vaccines are made of dead or weakened pathogens, so they do not cause any harm to the body but the body still detects it as an enemy and produces antibodies to fight it in response. The body now knows what that threat is and knows exactly how to fight it if it infiltrated the immune system again. 

Vaccines do not just protect yourself. “Person-to-person infection is spread when a transmitting case comes in contact with a susceptible person” (Orenstein, 2017). Now, not all people that are not vaccinated are like that because of their family’s beliefs, but it is because they could be infants, young children, elderly, people with certain allergies, pregnant women, and people with compromised immune systems. “

For most the cost of vaccines is covered by insurance, but for those without it, it ranges from $40-$250 (Walgreens). Most insurances are required to provide vaccinations for free in their plans anyway, but due to either economic or societal issues, a lot of families do not have insurance. Although $250 per person for just one shot may seem like a lot, when thinking about the alternative being getting the disease and having to pay for treatment, it is definitely the better option. It costs roughly $1712 to protect a child from 16 different diseases. It costs $10000 to treat just a single case of measles. With a lot of the diseases, death is also always a plausible outcome, so it is for the better for not just yourself but for others, to pay that amount of money and stay healthy for a long time. 

The time period at which children get their vaccines just happens to coincide with the same time that traits of autism become more visible and prevalent, so a connection is made between the two. Studies have taken place, and none of them have found any proof that relates vaccinations to autism. So, vaccinate your kids to not just save them, but to save others too.

Works Cited

“A Brief History of Vaccination.” Immunisation Advisory Centre, 4 Apr. 2017, http://www.immune.org.nz/vaccines/vaccine-development/brief-history-vaccination.

Orenstein, Walter A, and Rafi Ahmed. “Simply Put: Vaccination Saves Lives.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, National Academy of Sciences, 18 Apr. 2017, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5402432/.

Pappas, Stephanie. “How Do Vaccines Work?” LiveScience, Purch, 1 June 2010, http://www.livescience.com/amp/32617-how-do-vaccines-work.html.

“Vaccines: Vac-Gen/What Would Happen If We Stopped Vaccinations.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 29 June 2018, http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/whatifstop.htm.

Is equestrian show jumping a sport

The word sport is defined as an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature. Show jumping is a sport that is unique and often misunderstood to be much easier than it actually is. To many people that do not understand the sport or have never even ridden a horse, it is often thought that horseback riding is only a hobby that requires almost no effort. While this may be partly true for a simple trail ride where a group of beginners sit on obedient horses, walking in a straight line behind a guide that makes all of the decisions, competitive show jumping is a completely different story. Show jumping is an intense and difficult sport in which the rider and their horse must jump over a complicated course in an arena of about thirteen jumps, making tight turns and galloping up to jumps that, at sometimes, are taller than the height of themselves. It is a difficult and intense test that takes years of experience to even come close to being successful. Equestrian show jumping is a legitimate sport due to the need for extreme physical and mental strength and ability to be able to work with such a large and strong animal.

            The equestrian sport requires a large amount of physical strength from all parts of the body. This includes the legs, arms, core, and back. Working with a twelve-hundred-pound animal is not an easy task by any means, and it requires strength and skills that take many years to develop. Horses have a mind of their own, and the rider must direct the horse on where to go, how fast to go, and how to jump the jumps. Many muscles are used in this sport, “The control it takes to use rein, leg and seat aids to influence a horse requires refined body awareness somewhat similar to a gymnast.” (Blocksdorf 2019). The use of the legs is a vital aspect of steering the horse, more so than simply using the reins to steer. These are subtle movements that actually require an enormous amount of effort, and the goal is to make the motions look effortless through one’s body language. Making such a difficult task look effortless entails balance and coordination. Being able to stay with the horse in one motion while it gallops through a course of five-foot-tall jumps is not easily learned, and this is where a great amount of core strength that goes along with this strenuous task. Overall, the physical strength balance and coordination required to ride a horse indicate that show jumping should be viewed as a sport.

            In equestrian show jumping, riding is not the only part that requires physical exertion; there is a side of horseback riding that is not done on the horses back. Taking care of the horse and of the barn is not an easy job either. Tasks including carrying heavy objects such as hay bales and water buckets, mucking stalls, and general cleaning of the stables contribute to the strength that an equestrian develops. It is said that “activities associated with riding burns energy at a moderate intensity. Horseback riding can burn hundreds of calories, as does grooming and saddling.” (Conrad 2014). What is not seen in this sport are the hours of labor that attribute to the well-being of the horse and ultimately the success of the rider.

            Arguably the most useful tool when horseback riding competitively is the use of the mind. To have success as an equestrian, one needs to have the ability to focus well and be incredibly accurate and precise in their decision making. One small wrong decision can result in a much bigger issue that can even, at times, become dangerous. There are many aids used in riding, and “The self-awareness, timing and accuracy of the application of aids have been related to rider safety, especially (1) rein pressure [tension and release], (2) leg stability and (3) balance and trunk stability” (Thompson 2015). Occurrences such as riders falling off or even horses flipping over can occur if the rider is distracted and doesn’t carry out a decision. This goes along with the aspect of quick thinking. Decisions, like in most sports, need to be made extremely quickly, almost as instinct, because there is not a lot of time to consider options of what to do next. Confidence is another aspect in riding that is vital and goes hand-in-hand with quick thinking. A rider needs to be confident in their decision making and commit fully to that decision, and if there is even the slightest bit of hesitation, their decision may not be fully carried out. This can result in big mistakes that may, again, cause danger to the rider and horse. Multi-tasking is at its extreme for equestrians, as there are an incredible number of things to think about while traveling around the course. Just like any other sport, an athlete’s mental game in show jumping has to be on point in order to perform at their best.

            Another obvious and important reasons horseback riding is a sport is the fact that it is in the Olympic games. Many people do not know that show jumping is a part of the Olympics, which may give one more reason to believe that it is not a sport. However, they are mistaken. Not only is it in the Olympics, but it is a sport that has been in the Olympics since the start. Horses have been involved in these games for hundreds of years, and it had been a big part of the history of it all. The most talented and most experienced equestrian show jumpers join team USA to represent our country in the most prestigious athletic competitions.

            There are many physical and mental aspects that prove equestrianism is not only a sport, but a difficult one at that. As previously stated, many people that do not understand the sport think the horse is the one doing all of the work and the rider simply just sits there. This could not be more wrong. While the horse is obviously working hard to get around a course of obstacles, it is a partnership between horse and rider that makes the rounds successful. Equestrian show jumping, while unique and unlike most other sports, is an extreme test of athletic ability and should always be considered a legitimate sport.

Works Cited

Thompson, K., McGreevy, P., & McManus, P. (2015, July 17). A Critical Review of Horse-Related Risk: A Research Agenda for Safer Mounts, Riders and Equestrian Cultures. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4598694/.

Blocksdorf, K. (2019, October 17). No, the Horse Doesn’t Do All the Work in Horseback Riding. Retrieved from https://www.thesprucepets.com/is-horseback-riding-really-a-sport-1886891

Certified Horsemanship Association: Benefits of Horseback Riding. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://cha-ahse.org/store/blog/The_Top_15_Benefits_of_Horseback_Riding.html.

Columbus Day

Background

            Columbus Day is the commemoration of Christopher Columbus when he “discovered” the Americas on October 12, 1492 by landing on what would be known as the Bahamas in present day. The celebration itself is a national holiday in the United States and is celebrated the second Monday of October. Columbus Day is a highly controversial holiday as opponents to the celebration believe that the commemoration itself honors a person who enabled the enslavement and genocide of the native people of the land. As a form of protest, there has been a rise in the demand to celebrate “Indigenous Peoples’ Day” instead of Columbus Day; several cities across the United States have begun adopting this day as the demand and acknowledgement of the events that have occurred in the past have risen. Countries in Latin America celebrate a hybrid of Columbus Day and Indigenous Peoples Day in order to commemorate the Hispanic ethnicity which would not have been created had it not been for the European discovery of the Americas. However, it is still considered to be controversial as it does not directly address the atrocities that indigenous people have faced as a result of colonialism. The key terms which will be used in order to present this argument will be the following: Racism is the prejudice and discrimination towards a person based on their ethnicity and/or race. Genocide is the intentional mass killing of a group of people based on their ethnicity, religion, race, culture, and/or nation. Colonialism is the policy and/or practice of the acquisition of land over a sovereign territory that and often the exploitation of it e.g. the Spanish Colonial Empire.

Research Question and Thesis Statement

The research question which will be used to present my argument will be the following; “to what extent does the celebration of Columbus Day ignore the atrocities that were done in the Americas as a result of European Colonialism?”

My thesis statement is the following: The celebration of Columbus Day negates the suffering and history of the native populations of the Americas and instead glorifies the perpetrator of a genocide making the celebration itself inherently racist.

Argument

The celebration of Columbus Day is disrespectful to the native populations of the Americas as it teaches a side of history that focuses on accomplishments Europeans have done as a result of colonialism. It ignores the years of brutal colonialism by European powers through enslavement, genocide, and illness. It is an example of avoiding remedying between governments and people in order to present a positive image of the nation.

            Possible remedies for the celebration of Columbus Day could go through with the renaming of the holiday to one that honors indigenous people. As an example, the city of Seattle on October 13, 2014 made the decision to rename Columbus Day as Indigenous Peoples Day. The mayor said it was to acknowledge the current and past hardships the Native Americans have gone through. Native Americans within Seattle view this as the ability to start fresh and begin celebrating a holiday that does not ignore the genocide of their people and capture of their land. This serves as an example for the commemoration of the native peoples and a triumph at inclusivity.

            In Latin America, it is often found that “Día de la Raza” is an alternative to Columbus Day in order to celebrate the multiculturalism of Hispanic people, often meaning the mix of Spanish and Indigenous peoples. This celebration is still viewed as slightly insensitive as it may celebrate the Spanish colonial era and may discard the indigenous peoples of the former Spanish Empire. However, it is viewed with less controversy as it is a celebration of two cultures and races mixing as opposed to the celebration of the man who created generations of ethnic cleansing.

            Lastly, another way to find a remedy to the insensitivity to indigenous peoples would be through education. It is often understood that in public schools in the United States, Native American history is often overlooked and erased. This ignorance leads to a feeling of entitlement by the white population of the United States regarding land and socio-economic status and leads to a willing ignorance and disregard for Natives. It is essential for public schooling systems teach about the genocide, removal, and cleansing of the Native American people in order to understand how the nation was built and to finally move forward in the treatment of indigenous people. To this day, the lack of understanding on Native issues leads to bounds of ignorance and often can lead to insensitivity, examples such as the Dakota Access pipeline and the Mauna Kea telescope would be better understood if Native American history was introduced in schooling.

Counter Argument

            Columbus Day is the celebration of the discovery of the Americas and the accomplishments of the world as a result of colonialism. The argument here would be that the world in which we live in currently would not exist had it not been for Christopher Columbus’s expeditions across the Atlantic Ocean. It argues that the world’s major accomplishments are a result of European colonialism. To an extent it argues that the atrocities which indigenous people endured was worth the worldwide advancements it would bring economically, culinary, and technologically. It also argues that in the United States, as the majority of the citizens are not of indigenous race, creating an “Indigenous Peoples Day” would not be inclusive of all races and ethnicities of the United States and instead the celebration of Columbus Day is the celebration of the migration of different ethnicities and cultures into the New World.

Works Cited

Indigenous Peoples Day Replaces Columbus Day in Seattle. Associated Press, 2014

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Columbus Day: American Holiday.”

Encyclopaedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Columbus-Day

Hitchmough, Sam. “’It’s Not Your Country Any More’. Contested National Narratives and the

Columbus Day Parade Protests in Denver.” European Journal of American Culture, vol. 32, no. 3, September 2013, pp. 263-283. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1386/ejac.32.3.263_1

Rachum, Ilan. “Origins and Historical Significance of Día de la Raza.” European Review of

Latin American & Caribbean Studies, no. 76, April 2004, pp. 158-159, EBSCOhost, doi:10.18532/erlacs.9685.

Study on the Essentiality of Influenza Vaccine

Influenza vaccines

            Health should be the most important thing for everyone in the world. In addition to treating diseases, prevention of diseases has become a top priority. Vaccines have had an important role in disease prevention, especially in terms of viruses. They were created almost 230 years ago, but there always has been a deadlock over the safety of vaccines. One of those vaccines, the flu shot, was created approximately 100 years ago. However, some people don’t want to have a shot for the flu. Is the flu shot necessary for everyone? Or another angle, do influenza vaccines really play a decisive role in the-fight against viruses? In the final analysis, people still do not know enough about vaccines and attach importance to them. Influenza is the most potentially serious disease recognized by people. It can cause many serious symptoms, even death. Millions of people are infected every year, and vaccination is considered to reduce the risk of influenza and even death (Key Facts About Seasonal Flu Vaccine, 2019). In Hong Kong, only 11.5% of children are vaccinated. Because of the influence of tradition and culture, the vaccination rate in mainland China is not as high as that in Hong Kong, so the probability of getting flu shot is even lower (Lau, Ng, Wu, Ma, & Lau, 2018). Many people think that influenza vaccine can lead to the occurrence of influenza. Others think that influenza vaccine is also a kind of medicine which is harmful to the human body. In the absence of influenza, they should not be vaccinated. Is that true?

Literature review

            Key Facts About Seasonal Flu Vaccine states the importance of influenza vaccination in several different ways through what is influenza vaccine, when to vaccinate, why to vaccinate, and how vaccines can resist influenza.

            In a very academic and professional way, Low coverage of influenza vaccination among Chinese children aged 12-23 months: Prevalence and associated factors conducts a systematic survey of children aged 12 to 23 in Hong Kong and in-depth research on the data.

What Are the Benefits of the Flu Shot states some benefits of the vaccine for children. Based on the analysis of other resources, the authors find that influenza vaccines have a strong basis for reducing the risk of illness in all children, and recommend that people pay more attention to influenza vaccines.

The data of the past five to ten years are systematically analyzed by What are the benefits of flu vaccination, and different populations are analyzed. The benefits of influenza vaccine are summarized.

Through a study in a journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases (CID), New CDC Study Shows Flu Vaccine Reduces Severe Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients studies the impact of vaccines on influenza outcomes in some influenza-susceptible populations, and makes a detailed analysis of the impact of vaccines on influenza outcomes.

Evolution of Influenza A Virus by Mutation and Re-Assortment is based on experimental data, theoretical basis and the mutation ability of influenza A virus that is systematically studied, which further proves the high mutation rate.

 In the Vaccine Effectiveness – How Well Does the Flu Vaccine Work, some special viruses, such as H3N2 and H1N1 viruses are elaborated, the effectiveness of vaccines is investigated, and a systematic survey of common viruses is conducted, and a conclusion about the effectiveness of vaccines against viruses is drawn.

Flu Vaccine Safety Information uses some details to strongly affirm the safety of vaccines, and refutes some rumors.

Discussion

The advantages of flu vaccination

Reducing the risk of getting disease.           According to the general survey in recent years during the influenza season, the flu shot reduces the risk of influenza-related deaths by more than half (51%) in children with potentially high-risk medical conditions and more than two-thirds (65%) in healthy children (Iannelli, 2018). In addition, because of the vaccines, adults’ risk of hospitalization in intensive care unit (ICU) could be reduced by 82%, and pregnant women’s risk of influenza hospitalization could be reduced by an average of 40%. Meanwhile, a 2018 study showed that among adults hospitalized for influenza, vaccinated patients were 59% less likely to enter the intensive care unit than non-vaccinated patients. (What are the benefits of flu vaccination? | CDC, 2019). Those are very important data. They reflect that influenza vaccines can be very effective in reducing the risk of influenza. In addition, the vaccines for people with low physical fitness, such as pregnant women, children, are more helpful.

Significantly reduce severe flu outcomes.  A better understanding of whether influenza vaccines can reduce the consequences of severe influenza, even if they do not prevent infection, is very final. Adults vaccinated had a 52-79% lower mortality rate than non-vaccinated hospitalized influenza patients. In addition to prevention of death, vaccination increases the rate of discharge from intensive care unit by 37% among people aged 18-49 and over 65 (New CDC Study Shows Flu Vaccine Reduces Severe Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients | Spotlights (Flu) | CDC, 2017).

The disadvantage of flu vaccination

Lack of accuracy in influenza vaccines.  Influenza viruses are known as RNA viruses. Because RNA viruses lack effective enzymes to synthesize new genes, they often have very high mutation rates (Shao, Li, Goraya, Wang, & Chen, 2017). Scientists can get more than 10,000 viruses by analyzing the different components of the virus and arranging and combining them, which is only influenza A viruses. Influenza viruses are also classified into three other types: B viruses, C viruses and D viruses. This will make vaccine development much more difficult, and the vaccine will become not well targeted.

Side effects of medicines.  Like other medicines, vaccines also have side effects. Because vaccines are developed by using the proteins of dead viruses to induce the response of the corresponding receptors in the human body, a series of biochemical reactions in this process are likely to cause the corresponding symptoms of diseases, such as cold and fever (Flu Vaccine Safety Information | CDC, 2019).

Comparing

            Although the effectiveness of vaccines is not as high as expected in the prevention of viruses such as A H1N1 and A H3N2, and in general, the effectiveness of vaccines is only 40% to 60% (Vaccine Effectiveness – How Well Does the Flu Vaccine Work? | CDC, 2018), vaccines significantly improve the quality of life and play a decisive role in the prevention and treatment of most influenza viruses. At the same time, it has been proved that the human body does not have an efficient defense mechanism against influenza viruses. On the contrary, when viruses invade the body, we are vulnerable to virus damage, and some of the consequences are serious or deadly. Indeed, vaccines, like most medicines, have side effects, such as symptoms similar to colds and fever. However, these symptoms are only short-term and insignificant relative to the flu that may follow (Flu Vaccine Safety Information | CDC, 2019).

conclusion

Indeed, flu shot also has a few side effects. But these reactions are actually short-lived, because the duration of these biochemical reactions is much shorter than that of viruses invading the human body when the human body produces the corresponding biochemical reactions. We don’t have to worry at all, and these biochemical reactions don’t happen to everyone. Therefore, we can confidently say that the flu vaccination is really necessary in our life, and we really need to get one to prevent the future disease.

Work Cited

Key Facts About Seasonal Flu Vaccine. (2019, October 21). Retrieved from:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/keyfacts.htm

Lau, J., Ng, C., Wu, A., Ma, Y., & Lau, M. (2018, October 10). Low coverage of influenza vaccination among Chinese children aged 12-23 months: Prevalence and associated factors. Retrieved from:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0205561

Iannelli, V. (2018, February 17). What Are the Benefits of the Flu Shot? Retrieved from:

What are the benefits of flu vaccination? | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2019, January 24). Retrieved from:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-benefits.htm

New CDC Study Shows Flu Vaccine Reduces Severe Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients | Spotlights (Flu) | CDC. (2017, May 25). Retrieved from:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/spotlights/vaccine-reduces-severe-outcomes.htm

Shao, W., Li, X., Goraya, M. U., Wang, S., & Chen, J. (2017, August 18). Evolution of Influenza A Virus by Mutation and Re-Assortment. |National Center for Biotechnology Information Retrieved from:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5578040/

Vaccine Effectiveness – How Well Does the Flu Vaccine Work? | CDC. (2018, October 12). Retrieved from:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/vaccineeffect.htm

Flu Vaccine Safety Information | CDC. (2019, September 17). Retrieved from:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/general.htm

Should a person who is terminally ill have a right to physician-assisted suicide?

Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia have been very contraversial topics for years. Society views suicide as a tragic act that should never be a choice taken by an individual. Some religions, such as the Catholic Church, even treat suicide as a sin. Because of these negative portrayals of suicide, people automatically think that physician-assisted suicide would have no benefits and therefore should be illegal. Physician-assisted suicide occurs when a physician facilitates a patient’s death by providing the necessary substance and information to enable the patient to perform the life-ending act. For example, a physician provides sleeping pills and information about the lethal dose, while aware that the patient may commit suicide. An individual who has less than six months to live should have the right to physician-assisted suicide becuase they have a disease that cannot be cured and will eventually lead to death. With the legalization of physician-assisted suicide, they have the ability to decide if they want to die a quicker and painless death.

Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia are often confused as the same thing but they have different definitions. Euthanasia is when a doctor is allowed by law to end a person’s life by a painless means, as long as the patient and their family agree (Brazier). The difference between the two is that physician-assisted suicide is providing the drugs that will end the patients life, while euthanasia is the actual action of ending the patients life at their request. Within this simple definition of euthanasia, there are two procedural classifications, passive and active. Passive euthanasia is when something that could preserve the patients life is not done, allowing them to die (Legg). Active euthanasia is when a doctor uses lethal substances to end a patient’s life (Legg). Active euthanasia is illegal throughout the United States, but assisted suicide is legal in Washington, D.C., Colorado, Oregon, Hawaii, Washington, Vermont, Maine (starting January 1, 2020), New Jersey, California, one county in New Mexico, and is de facto legal in Montana (Warraich). When it comes to physicians, the majority believe euthanasia is wrong. In a study done by M. E. Suarez-Almazor, a survey was conducted with a random sample of 1,240 individuals from the general population, 179 physicians, and 62 consecutive patients with terminal cancer (Suarez-Almazor). 50% to 60% of the public and terminally ill patients agreed with the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide, while 60% to 80% of physicians opposed it (Suarez-Almazor). Physician-assisted suicide is different from euthanasia because it puts the ultimate decision in the hands of patients and therefore distances the physician from the act. An ethical argument to justify physician-assisted suicide is mentioned by Daniel P. Sulmasy in his journal. He says, “A physician who writes any prescription is morally and legally implicated in its use, although the patient decides on its use.” Although many physicians continue to be opposed to physician-assisted suicide (despite its difference between euthanasia), the procedure is done for the patient and their requests. When a patient is terminally ill, in pain and aware they are going to die, they should be able to decide when and how they want to end their life.

Disregarding the definition of physician-assisted suicide, the word suicide throws many people off. People often think about the negativity of suicide and believe anything associated to it is wrong. Without proper education on the topic, the procedure is seen as a physician killing a patient, but in reality, the patient was going to die anyway so all the procedure is doing is avoiding the pain the patient would have gone through if they were to experience their natural death. Contradicting the negative view of physician-assisted suicide, it could be argued that a doctor’s fundamental duty is to alleviate forms of suffering in the best interests of the patient. The avoidance of physical pain, as an obvious example of suffering, might explain why assisted suicide would be both necessary and within the duties of a doctor to provide. The last few months of a terminally ill patient’s life are the most painful, therefore they should have the right to avoid them. Also, in addition to the pain patients go through, many patients also suffer a loss of dignity, often due to their lack of mobility. Many people believe they are not living life anymore when they have to be assisted to do everything, even the most simple tasks. Ending their life earlier than intended would not cut their life short in their eyes. 

Beyond this are additional fears of further debilitation and the emotional costs of dealing with chronic illness, both for the patient and for their relatives and friends. If the patient is not already at their lowest point, they become afraid of the possibility of becoming even worse than their current state. This not only affects them but it also affects their family members, therefore they start seeing themselves as a burden. This is one of the most common reasons behind the requests for assisted suicide (Frost). 

In addition to the patients negative physical and mental states, there are rights and limitations that help justify physician-assisted suicide. One of the main rights we have as United States citizens is the 14th Amendment, which states, “Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” (“Amendments”). It can be argued that making physician-assisted suicide illegal deprives individuals of their right of life and liberty. Terminally ill patients should have the liberty to do as they want with their last few months of their life. In a famous decision, Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, the Supreme Court established that the due process clause protects a patient’s liberty to refuse medical treatment, even if that refusal would ultimately lead to the patient’s death (“Is There”). This is constantly argued, with more people disagreeing that assisted suicide is constitutional, but with the way the 14th amendment was stated, the due process clause does protect a patient’s right to refuse treatment.

Going past individual’s rights, there are technical factors that coincide with the legalization of physician-assisted suicide. Treating chronically ill patients is very expensive. The price often increases in the final months of their lives, affecting the hospital and the people in charge of paying the medical bills. This could be avoided if a patient decides they would like to proceed with assisted suicide. 

Overall, there are many reasons why physician-assisted suicide should be legalized. It is a very controversial topic because of the fact that someone’s life will be taken away, leading people to dislike the procedure automatically. With this act, the physician is not killing the patient, they are just providing the means and lethal dose that will end the patient’s life. This should only be done when the patient is terminally ill, meaning they have less than six months to live. With the legalization of physician-assisted suicide, pain and suffering will be avoided, expenses for both the patient’s family and hospital will decrease, and the rights of individuals will be protected.

Works Cited

“Article Tools.” Journal of Clinical Oncology, https://ascopubs.org/doi/pdf/10.1200/JCO.1997.15.2.418.

Brazier, Yvette. “Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: What Are They and What Do They Mean?” Medical News Today, MediLexicon International, 17 Dec. 2018, https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/182951.php.

Frost1, Thomas D G, et al. “Should Assisted Dying Be Legalised?” Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, BioMed Central, 15 Jan. 2014, https://peh-med.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1747-5341-9-3.

“Is There a Constitutional Right to Physician-Assisted Suicide?” Findlaw, https://healthcare.findlaw.com/patient-rights/is-there-a-constitutional-right-to-physician-assisted-suicide.html.

Sulmasy, Daniel P. “Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide.” JAMA, American Medical Association, 18 Oct. 2016, https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2569775.

Warraich, Haider J. “Biting the dust with medical help: Should state law legitimize physician-assisted suicide?” Mar. 2019, https://www.jtcvs.org/article/S0022-5223(18)32314-6/fulltext

Political Correctness vs Society

There was a time when social justice was thought of as a respected cause, pursued by respected individuals, but now social justice and its practices are disliked by many. Through social justice, the world became a fairer place for everyone and it is still needed in the world, but not in the way it is being handled currently. The biggest downfall of today’s social justice movement is PC culture or Political correctness. Political correctness is a new concept that arose from the rise of current social justice. It is one of the biggest fundamentals of social justice, and it does more bad than good. Social justice and political correctness are so intertwined, that people mix them for what they represent and their goals. PC culture works because there is an illusion that PC culture is good and everyone agrees on its values. This illusion is from the fact that almost all media, from news to ads, and big tech companies, such as YouTube and Twitter support the PC agenda. PC culture is supposed to unite people and promote equality but all it does is divide people and promote more discrimination. Political Correctness (PC) culture is detrimental to society because it limits people’s freedoms of speech, it forces people against their values, and it normalizes mob mentality.

Many people don’t know what political correctness is or what the purpose is for having PC culture. Political correctness is using language that is the least offensive to a group, the group can be based on race, gender, culture and other markers (Roper). So what makes PC culture so bad? It goes against its own definition, which is to stop racism and promote equality. PC culture is practiced mostly by progressive people, who don’t like anything of the present and want a completely new type of world. They apply PC only to minorities. Minorities to them are anyone that is low income, female, and non-European descent. This is one of the basic reasons PC fails to be accepted by many people. PC culture is unfair to certain groups of people while trying to be a movement that promotes equality. This contradiction is fine by the people who practice PC culture. This contradiction in values continues on to every belief held by PC activists, and due to PC being widely accepted, if you don’t agree with them, then you and your views are bigoted.

The thing that makes a society successful is when everyone can have their own values and it doesn’t affect others negatively. What PC culture does is say some values are right and some are wrong, even when these values are respected by almost everyone. The reasoning they use to classify values is based on privilege. Privilege is something people have if they aren’t in a minority, there are many types of privileges, such as white privilege and male privilege. An example of PC going against values is the Gillette commercial, “The best a man can be” (Gillette). It is made by the men’s shaving brand, which focuses on non-traditional views on society. The commercial portrays masculinity as being evil, and all men as being bad for society because of their masculinity. This value can’t be more wrong, masculinity is a big part of society that is valued by both men and women, but now there is an ad saying masculinity is bad. Many viewers were outraged but this ad, sparking heated debates on forums and giving the video one of the most disliked ratios on YouTube. The ad affected many of the younger audiences, who are a major consumer of YouTube videos. They are too young to understand the difference between good or bad, but now this ad is telling them that being a male isn’t good. This can leave a big impression on their minds and affect them for the rest of their lives. This ad was also praised by the progressive left, and Gillette didn’t apologize after all the backlash because the purpose of the ad was to change people’s current beliefs. Many of the younger and older male audiences had been using Gillette products all their lives, but after this commercial came out, it went against their values so much that they boycotted their products. Women’s values are also challenged by PC culture. One of the biggest debated things is abortion, either you are for or against it. Both sides have good arguments about this topic, but PC culture shames women who are against abortion. They view this stance as being against women’s rights because banning abortion means forcing women to have children. The stance PC takes makes life seem as disposable, which can change the moral compass of society. For society to be good, life needs to be the most valuable thing, but PC culture doesn’t agree. If PC culture and the rest of society don’t agree, then how did it gain so much traction? It has to do with how PC culture started.

 Before PC culture, there was almost no consequence for being racist or saying jokes that would offend people. This made society unfair for the minorities, PC culture has since fixed that. In society now, if people say anything offensive, PC activists will immediately spread that around and criticize that person. This criticism can cause the person to lose their job, and it serves as an example for other racist and offensive people. This makes PC culture seem like the best invention of society, until you see how much more bad it does than good. Voicing valid opinions based on your values are seen as offensive by the PC activists, like the previous example on abortion. Now more people use social media than ever, and anyone can see what others are posting. People have to be careful not to share their values, this creates a sense of being watched, and limits people of their freedom of speech.

Freedom is the most valued thing in society, especially the freedom of speech or expression. Freedom to talk and share opinions is how society develops and progresses (Resnik). When the freedom to express yourself is taken away, it brings unrest to society and puts fear into the people living in that society. Look at any government that bans the freedom of speech, such as Saudi Arabia, versus a country known for freedom of speech such as the United States, most people will agree that Saudi Arabia isn’t an ideal society, while the United States is closer to it. PC culture is taking away this freedom that makes societies like the United States so great. In 2018, a girl on twitter showed a picture of herself wearing a dress that wasn’t part of her culture (Twitter Keziah). This outraged PC activist to the point that they made a word for this type of freedom of expression, “Cultural appropriation”. Cultural appropriation is when you do something stereotypical of other cultures when you aren’t part of that culture. What the girl did on twitter wasn’t trying to be offensive to the culture but showing appreciation of that culture. The PC activist harassed her and got some major news corporations involved, such as the New York Times, and CNN to report false information that portrayed her as a racist. PC culture says you can’t copy other cultures, which includes fashion, food, and other things. Copying culture is a way society can connect the people living in it, but PC culture wants to keep everyone segregated because they think copying other cultures is offensive to the people of that culture. The example the PC activists set deters others from showing recognition and appreciation for other cultures, which makes society less open to others. This doesn’t mean PC culture is bad, it is in theory a good system. PC culture can bring positive change in parts of the world that are still developing societies. PC culture in practice however takes things too far. They put more fear into society for doing the smallest things that don’t affect anyone. This fear they instill on the rest of society only works because of the large number of people who agree with PC culture.

PC culture is a collective idea that depends on its followers to establish. The only way for PC culture to affect anyone is if many people start agreeing and enforcing their ideals. Out of all the ideas PC culture has, nobody can truly agree on every single one they offer. So how do PC activists maintain a large number of followers? It’s through mob mentality. Mob mentality is when people come into a group, they are more likely to be influenced by the groups values than their own values. Mob mentality can be good for societies, such as how we all agree murder is bad. It can also be bad, such as the rise of Hitler. Hitler’s values weren’t something normal people would follow, but he got a whole country to follow them because a large group of people influenced others to follow his ideas. PC culture has values that aren’t good for society, such as cultural appropriation, restricting free speech, and restricting people’s values. PC activists might not have initially agreed with it, but being part of the group changed their views to something that they once thought was wrong, and they will change other people’s moral views into immoral ones. The moral compass of society can be drastically changed, and bad actions can be justified as being right, such as what Hitler did.

The only reason we have good actions and bad actions is through the stories and experiences of previous generations. These experiences have helped to shape the direction of our society’s moral compass. PC culture is changing that moral compass one issue at a time, from pointing in the right direction to the wrong one. Newer generations will think our new values are the right ones, they will keep changing that moral compass to fit in these wrong new beliefs, making them seem right. PC culture has proven itself to be detrimental to society because it takes away things that make a society good. PC culture is bad because it limits freedoms, forces change on people’s values, and normalizes mob mentality.

Works Cited

Gillette.”We Believe: The Best Men Can Be. Online Video. Youtube, 14 Jan. 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koPmuEyP3a0

Insider People are outraged this teen wore a traditional Chinese dress to prom. Twitter 22 Apr. 2019, https://twitter.com/i/moments/990988293939613698?lang=en

Resnik, David B. “Freedom of Speech in Government Science.” Issues in science and technology, vol. 24(2),2008. pp 31-34.

Roper, Cynthia. “Political Correctness.” Encyclopædia Britannica,Inc., 29 Mar. 2019, https://www.britannica.com/topic/political-correctn jkess.

Extraterrestrial Intelligence: An Unworthy Search

                 In December 2017, the New York Times published an article titled “Glowing Auras and ‘Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program,” describing a secret government program investigating reports by the military. They reported an encounter with an unidentified flying object during their daily duties. The media made a big fuzz with stories like UFOs and extraterrestrial encounters, while scientists trying to minimize the likelihood of an extraterrestrial visitation and alien theorists’ excitements. After reading this news, I believe people is getting harder and harder to come up with reasons to proof for ‘aliens’ are worth searching for. Why? No one so far can give the precise definition of what an extraterrestrial is. Researches in past decades consumed numerous fundings, but hardly make any progress. Also, people’s nerves can easily be stirred by reports and exaggerated aliens’ movies, which causes unnecessary panic among ordinary people.

        A lot of people think extraterrestrial lives can be easily defined because all the medias’ reports about UFO makes the existence of aliens sounds real. The obvious reason for this is the term ‘UFO’ is usually assumed to be the synonym of ‘aliens’, and even proof of extraterrestrial life. Let us pause a second and think about it, this is odd. UFO literally stands for ‘unidentified flying object.’ A UFO is not necessarily an alien from another planet. It is simply a flying object that cannot be explained away through conventional means or current scientific methods. Therefore, extraterrestrial lives can hardly be defined by scientific methods, even it is possible, people are already confused with false definition. How can research be worthy if the object’s definition is unclear to the researcher? 

        One of the most important scientific evidence to show so-called ‘extraterrestrial intelligences’ are not worth looking for is the level of their existence is questionable. The probability of alien creatures has the technological capability to set up interstellar communication is very low. What’s more, the chance of having a development of lives on an earth-like planet is very unlikeable. The basic idea is straightforward, ‘extraterrestrial intelligent beings’ do not exist. If they exist and possess the technology of interstellar communication, they would also have developed interstellar travel like we did, and thus would already be present in our solar system. Therefore, the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence is merely an assumption so far. In addition, another reason why scientists devoted their times into this research is wanting to communicate with alien species, what is the point of continuing the research when the species do not exist?

        Nowadays, medias and movie production companies are all exaggerating with stories of flying saucers and extraterrestrial encounters. 10 Cloverfield Lane released in March 2016 contains ideas that aggressive aliens taking over and colonizing the earth. The movie reached the box office of 110.2 million dollars. This movie exaggerated aliens’ intelligence level and aggressiveness by letting them create a biohazard, leaving the earth almost extinct. People who watched this movie commented “this movie is about speaking without breath and it scares. This is about deeper tension that what could happen is scarier than movie itself” (jigsaw-91,2016). While films like this don’t lead people to conclude that an alien invasion is certain, Hollywood studios have been making movies about extraterrestrial invasion since the 1940s. An article published in October 2018 “’Alien Invasion’ Radio Broadcast Terrified Listeners 80 Years Ago. Would E.T. Contact Cause Panic Today?” (2018) described a panic attack among audiences during a radio transmission prank in 2018. An actor posing as a news announcer interrupted a scheduled music performance. With a tone of rising alarm, he described telescope observations of “three explosions” on Mars. As the drama unfolded, performers acted as witnesses to describe UFOs and “strange creatures” firing a heat ray that had killed dozens of people. Even though at the very end of the program, there were reminders that it was theatrical, many people still tuned into the thought that the alien invasion was real, and there was a widespread panic caused by the prospect of an alien invasion. “Thousands of listeners rushed from their homes in New York and New Jersey, many with towels across their faces to protect themselves from the ‘gas’ which the invader was supposed to be spewing forth,” the Daily News reported the next day. Over the years, it has imperceptibly exaggerated the intelligence and aggressiveness of aliens, so this imperceptibly conveyed to the audience the idea that alien species is more advanced than human civilization, even though this was not the initial purpose of the film. What’s more, missions to search for extraterrestrial life are usually classified by government agencies. This gives unscrupulous media a chance to spread false rumors to increase their popularity.  Since people cannot get information from the government and other formal channels, they can only choose to believe media calumnies, which causes people to panic. Therefore, due to si-fi fiction movies about aliens and government’s ambiguous attitude and non-intervention about rumors, lead ordinary people into unnecessary panic and worry. If an activity already stirs so many attentions, yet still lack of satisfactory results to present to the public, this is a proof that this should call a stop.

        In space exploration,costs may be minimized in two ways: first, ‘out-of-date’ technology is used as much as possible to reduce the research and development costs. Second, resources which could be used for other purpose should be utilized as far as possible. A scholarly article by Patty et al. examine how “Circular Spectropolarimetric Sensing of Vegetation in the Field: Possibilities for the Remote Detection of Extraterrestrial Life” In the article, the scientists have successfully demonstrated the use of “circular Spectro polarimetry” can be used not only as a remotely applicable tool for vegetation monitoring on Earth, but also a machine for detecting the presence of extraterrestrial life. But I think even strategies like these used in space research is a waste of taxpayers’ money. According to Wikipedia, knowing there are Earth-like planets some 4 light years away, a distance we’re unlikely to cross any time soon, does not in any way alleviate the many terrestrial problems we face today. That argument gets even stronger when serious money is spent on space by a country like India, which launched a successful mission to Mars, but still has hundreds of millions suffering in poverty.

        For extraterrestrial exploration, it is a risky long shot that burns up money and might never, ever pay off. So, is searching for intelligent creatures on unseen worlds worth the candle? After all, are there better ways to use our monies and advanced technologies to try to solve other sever problems occurring in this world, such as starvation and homelessness. To begin with, there should be a clarification that space exploration is not paid for with citizens’ tax dollars in United States, where the most space exploration is conducted. Since 1993, when Congress cut off NASA’s exploration program, the search for signals from other societies has been funded by private donations. The Fund for UFO Research (FUFOR) was a UFO research group based on individual donations since 1919, FUFOR states its goal was to further the scholarly research of UFOs and the extraterrestrial hypothesis. Let’s not argue whether that was a heavy burden or not: the fact is it is currently zero. If a taxpayer doesn’t want to contribute to the government’s space exploration, then it costs the person nothing. However, this fact hardly put people in silence. People would argue why government don’t put money into medical research, reduce starvation and other humanity programs. In other words, some people are asking to put and invest all our money back into ourselves, nothing else. Well, it is good to think about self-investigation, but this cannot always be the case. Throughout the history of human development, even when people are dying of hunger in the streets, the country is struggling with national finance, some fraction of the nation’s resources have gone to seek new things or create new thing. There are always donors spend some monies on activities that for some people’s eyes, ‘useless for the society.’ The point here is that we are all doing things that we think is the best for us. If someone choose to donate money to a local LGBTQ+ foster agency, the person figure this might help people out. This is the same for people invest their money into space exploration. Either way, it is a good thing for society’s standpoint. 

Projects search for aliens generally do more harm than good. Although the exploration of the unknown reflects the progress of human civilization will never stop. However, under the premise of uncertainty about the definition of extraterrestrial life and the possibility of its existence, rushing to search has not only caused unnecessary panic among ordinary people, but also wasted a lot of money. So, in general, the search for extraterrestrial lives is not worthy.

Work Cited

“Alien Invasion’ Radio Broadcast Terrified Listeners 80 Years Ago. Would E.T. Contact Cause. Panic Today?” LIVE SCIENCE, 10 Oct. 2018, https://www.livescience.com/63958-war-of-the-worlds-aliens.html.

Cooper, Blumenthal, Kean. ‘Glowing Auras and ‘Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious      U.F.O. Program’. New York Times, Section A, Page one, Real U.F.O.s?, Dec 17, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/us/politics/pentagon-program-ufo-harry-reid.html

 “FUFOR – Fund for UFO Research.” Anomaly Archives, https://anomalyarchives.org/collections/files/fufor-fund-for-ufo-research/.

Jigsaw-91. “Much better than the 2008 “Cloverfield” movie, this is about a gripping & intense. story and raw tension rather than special effects and crushing things.” IMDb, 10 March 2016, https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1179933/

“List of Nearest Terrestrial Exoplanet Candidates.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nearest_terrestrial_exoplanet_candidates.

Patty, C.h. Lucas, et al. “Circular Spectropolarimetric Sensing of Vegetation in the Field: Possibilities for the Remote Detection of Extraterrestrial Life.” Astrobiology, vol. 19, no. 10, 2019, pp. 1221–1229., https://www-liebertpub-com.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu/doi/pdf/10.1089%2Fast.2019.2050 .

“10 Cloverfield Lane.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 21 2016, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Cloverfield_Lane.

The Evolution of Education

The SAT and the ACT, also known as the standardized test have been present in college admissions for a long time. Before their existence, colleges had specific test for admission, however, each test had a very different level of difficulty. For example, in the late 19th century, the admission tests for Harvard University and MIT were compared,  and it was concluded that they both evaluated completely different information with a really different level of difficulty. After many years, universities started to worry about the lack of uniform admission testing; therefore, the college board decided to take action in this issue. After working on different solutions, in 1925, they started developing a new test whose goal was to measure general intelligence. This test was very different to what the SAT looks now a days, nevertheless, it continued to develop through the years. 

    After many years of sample testing, a new need came, this being a new test specially for public institutions and for universities all around the US, due to the fact that the SAT was mostly used for selective colleges in the Northeast side of the US. Additionally, this test would also be used for placement instead of just for admission. After many years of sample tests, and many years of making necessary changes to both exams, they both were officially released to public use. As time went on, more universities started implementing this method as a measurement, until it became a requirement for most colleges.  

    Now a days, at least one of these standardized tests is required for admission, and these simple exams could determine if you get into the college of your dreams, or if you get rejected from it. However, in recent years, many questions have arisen regarding these tests. Are these tests made for everyone? Do these tests really measure a person’s intelligence? Should these tests really determine college acceptances? 

    Our society is modernizing, and as we change, so should our standards. Many aspects of our lives have been changing at an exponential rate, such as technology, entertainment, communication, and social media. As these evolve, so should education. Every single human being is different from each other in many aspects, it is just our nature. Our music taste is different, our preferences are different, our strengths and weaknesses are different, our talents are different, and so is our way of thinking and learning. Therefore, if all of us have different ways of learning and thinking, why should we all be tested in the same way?

    While these tests are a great idea in theory, they are definitely not practical exams in real life, and they for sure do not measure a person’s intelligence. While these tests measure a student’s “knowledge” in math, science and english; they do not measure any knowledge in art, history and even more important, they do not measure a student’s passion, creativity or personality.

These specific tests are known because they cause a gigantic amount of stress over students. Basically, their future depends on them, who could not be stressed over them? Therefore, the result of this exam could reflect a person’s ability to handle stress, instead of a person’s intelligence. Also, these tests are really time-limited, which means that the test is based on how fast you can “prove” your knowledge, instead of measuring your real knowledge. Some students may find this really easy, because they might handle stress easily, ad they might be fast readers and fast thinkers, but what happens to the ones who are not this way? They actually won’t have the chance to show their real knowledge, and they won’t have the chance to show what they are capable of doing in these specific subjects, just because they are not fast readers, or just because they put too much pressure on themselves to handle stress. 

Additionally, not every student has the opportunity to prepare for this test as they should. Depending on the location of the school, the country gives different amount of funds, which means that not every school has the same amount of resources or staff to prepare the students as they should for this important exam. Students who live in nicer areas or whose family has more capital, have a better chance of scoring higher.  Still, does this represent a student’s intelligence? It does not, and it is unfair that colleges measure students this way. 

Of course there is always the other point of view in the story. If colleges don’t measure students this way, how will they be measured? Is there an alternate way? Would it really be fair for students if all of them were measured in a different way? Of course these questions can come to someone’s mind, due to the fact that change is never easy, innovation is never easy, so introducing such a radical change can be hard at first, but the final product can be so rewarding, that it is worth it. 

The big question is, how coud colleges measure students if it is not by these exams? Wellm there are actually many other ways students can be measured without the need of standardized tests. In fact, highly selected universities around the country, such as UT Austin, American University, Arizona State University, the New York University have made the SAT and the ACT optional. These universities have started to think outside the box, and have started to confront the traditional model of evaluating students. They now focus more on the quality of the person, what moves them and what decisions they have taken throughout their life, with the resources available for them. 

This is the way students should be measured. The SAT and the ACT should not be banned, they could be used as a valuable source but just as a reference of the student, but they should not be used as a primary source or as an essential requirement to get into the university, mostly because there is no way of knowing what happened that day the student’s life. What if he or she had a big fight with his parents, what if he received bad news on that exact day? Many circumstances could have happened, and it would be unfair to judge a student by a number. Instead, colleges should start focusing more on the student’s essays, and deeply analyze their way of thinking. They should also focus on the personal questions each university does to their students, to analyze thoroughly if the student is a good fit for the profile the university is searching for. Also, universities should focus  on the student’s grades in high school, their APcores, and if they took advantage of all the resources available for them. 

Additionally, colleges should also analyze the extracurricular activities each student has accomplished. This could be used as a complete reference of the student’s personality, their interests, their relationships, their accomplishments, how they have helped the society, and more.This should be the main criteria for universities to analyze the student.

In conclusion, the standardized tests sound like the ideal reference to measure each student; however, they do not accomplish what they were invented for. These tests should only be used as a minor reference of the student, but they should not be used as a critical evaluation to analyze whether a student should be admitted or not, because they do not represent the students personality, intelligence, nor their ability to become  a successful person in the future. As we evolve, our education should evolve with us too, and us as the leaders of the future, should start to think outside the box, to make sure that our education system continues to grow with us. 

References:

  1. A (Mostly) Brief History Of The SAT And ACT Tests, https://www.erikthered.com/tutor/sat-act-history.html#y1959.
  2. Morford, Maria Carrel. “Standardized Testing Does Not Determine Intelligence.” The Odyssey Online, The Odyssey Online, 17 Oct. 2019, https://www.theodysseyonline.com/standardized-testing-does-not-determine-intelligence.
  3. Unigo.com, Author: “10 Colleges That Dont Require SAT or ACT Scores.” Unigo.com, 23 Oct. 2019, https://www.unigo.com/get-to-college/college-search/test-optional-colleges-10-colleges-that-dont-require-sat-or-act-scores.

Positive side of playing Video Games

            Video games are one of the most controversial subject in the 21st century, and lots of people have different beliefs on the effects of video games on its players. Some people believe that playing video games has no positive impacts and only glorifies violence and that video games are the main reason of violence in society. While it is important to discuss about violence in video games, it seems like that violence is the only thing that people are discussing about video games. I believe that most people are not acknowledging the positive impacts that video games have on to its players, mainly divided in three categories –gaining new experience, social life, and physical and mental training. One key aspect of video game is its diversity. There are thousands of different games each with its own characteristics, making it hard to find a result that represents the whole gaming community. Some of the negative effects and positive effects come from specific genre, while other genre of video games might have different results.

            Before discussing about the positive sides of playing video games, I want to discuss about the negative impacts that playinvideo games might have towards its players – which includes violence caused by video games, and addiction. Many studies regarding this topic seem to be contrary – while some studies found evidence that playing video games leads to these actions, other studies have proved otherwise.

            One of the major positive effect games provide is new experience. Since video games are done on computers, players can experience activities that are either too hard, too dangerous, or too expensive to actually experience in real life. With the introduction of VR, it has never been easier to explore unknown regions without even having to leave my own room. In addition to helping its players gain more experience to various activities, games help players be better at learning new things (Cognitive Benefits of Playing Video Games | Psychology Today). There are a lot of examples where simulation games can be helpful in future. In a research conducted by scientists from University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, students who regularly played videogames performed better at virtual surgery compared to residents at University of Texas Medical Branch (Teenage Gamers Are Better At Virtual Surgery Than MDs | Popular Science). This result strengthens the claim that video game players have increased accuracy and hand-eye coordination. Another similar study showed that although pilots outperformed the players on multi-attribute cognitive tests, video game players actually performed better compared to trained pilots on tests related to targeting skills such as identifying and tracking targets, while both showing similar level of landing skills (McKinley et al., 2011). This study further strengthens how playing video games (such as flying a drone or a fighter jet or spaceship of some kind) can actually be a practice for similar action in real life.

In fact, many people have been using simulators to train themselves. For many airplane pilots or Formula 1 racers, these simulators are a good way to train themselves even when they cannot ride the plane/machine at given time. For example, in Formula one where on track testing is very limited, using a simulator can be a safer and better way to train the drivers, and practice setting a racing line or practice overtaking. Because of the importance, in Red Bull Racing, there is around 50 members who work to make sure that the simulator is as real as possible (The Video Game That Trains F1 World Champions – CNN). Another positive side of using a simulator is that it is cheaper than operating an actual drone or a racing machine, while also improving pilot’s skills. In conclusion, video games not only provides more opportunities to its players, but also trains the player effectively.

            Another positive side of games include various communities and social life. Many parents believe that games cause students to stay in their room without developing any social skills, but that argument is very wrong. There are millions of different gaming communities, with many active members that share information and support each others in places such as Discord and Reddit. Whenever there is a big event in gaming community such as League of Legends World Championship or other events, gamers from around the world talk about these stories in a very active community. In a research where researchers analyzed thousands of online gamers, have found out that most of the gamers are not loners, and in fact video games can help enhance player’s social life (Taylor et al.). The reason why gamers are seen as antisocial is the result of pop culture stereotypes, which is false.

            Also, playing games has many physical impacts to the players, and those are not bad impacts. Playing video games helps players overcome dyslexia, ability to track moving objects while being disturbed by a lot of distractions, treatment of amblyopia, and improving visual contrast sensitivity (Cognitive Benefits of Playing Video Games | Psychology Today). Of many positive physical impacts that playing video game has, playing action video games improves its player’s contrast sensitivity, which allows for tasks such as driving at night (Video Games Improve Vision, Study Says). This is because of how in action games players need to locate their enemies but in doing so they train their eye to find a difference in color that is similar. Other previous research also shows that game improves more visual skills, for example tracking multiple objectives and focusing on fast moving events (Video Games Improve Vision, Study Says). This is especially true for action game players where a lot of things are happening around and to survive or meet the objective, the player has to understand the surroundings and what is going on, identify the dangers and pathways and objects then come up with a plan to meet the objective. Although gaming does not develop the physical abilities the same way going to gym does, it focuses on development of eye and its various abilities.

            Last but not least, video games help its players develop many brain abilities, such as concentration and creative thinking. Video games help its players develop attention, executive functioning, multi-tasking, reducing impulsiveness and increased mental flexibility (Cognitive Benefits of Playing Video Games | Psychology Today). A research by Chiappe and others (2013) has shown that 50 hours of experience on an action video game has improved the performance on multi tasking skills related to piloting an aircraft – keeping the target on line, checking the fuel levels, looking at the lights on the panels, and interacting with radio communication. This shows that through gaming, especially in those action games where the player has to do a lot of tasks in one time, brain develops and players are better trained for similar instances in the future. Another study by Green & Bavelier (2012) found out that action video games increases its player’s ability to locate the target quickly in between lots of distractions. Again, this skill is useful for a lot of real life situations where someone is looking for something, or driving. Not only game helps with using the eye better and providing more experience, it also increases capabilities of our minds so that we can be better at whatever we are doing, or we might do in the future.

            There are a lot of positive effects that video game has on its players. Once again, there could be some negative sides of playing video games. However, it seems that in current society majority of the discussion only revolves around the negative sides of video games. I believe that people should focus more on positive sides of the video games too, and work harder to have a better discussion with information that is accurate and depicts positive sides of video games such as helping players become more social, increased mental flexibility, reducing impulsiveness, multi tasking, being a effective method of practice and training, developing attention, executive functioning, various increased performance of eye and more.

Works Cited

Action Video Games Help Decision-Making. https://www.webmd.com/brain/news/20100913/action-video-game-help-decision-making#1. Accessed 21 Nov. 2019.

Video Games Improve Vision, Study Says. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2009/03/news-video-games-vision-correction-sight-medicine/. Accessed 21 Nov. 2019.

Teenage Gamers Are Better At Virtual Surgery Than MDs | Popular Science. https://www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2012-11/teenage-gamers-are-better-virtual-surgery-medical-professionals/. Accessed 21 Nov. 2019.

Cognitive Benefits of Playing Video Games | Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-learn/201502/cognitive-benefits-playing-video-games. Accessed 21 Nov. 2019.

The Video Game That Trains F1 World Champions – CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/01/motorsport/formula-one-red-bull-racing-simulator-feature/index.html. Accessed 21 Nov. 2019.

McKinley, R. Andy, et al. “Operator Selection for Unmanned Aerial Systems: Comparing Video Game Players and Pilots.” Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, vol. 82, no. 6, June 2011, pp. 635–42, doi:10.3357/ASEM.2958.2011.

Taylor, Nicholas, et al. “Public Displays of Play: Studying Online Games in Physical Settings.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, vol. 19, no. 4, Wiley Blackwell, 2014, pp. 763–79, doi:10.1111/jcc4.12054.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started