For my essay I will be researching the benefits of stem cell research, specifically embryonic stem cell research in order to show that funding should be increased.  In my research and essay I believe I will be able to prove that embryonic stem cell research is currently the most reliable option on the path to curing a wide array of ailments and diseases including loss of limbs.  Most scientists agree that the easiest way to obtain usable stem cells is through the utilization of embryonic cells.  The main reason that more funding has not been given is due to the alleged moral dilemma that this type of research faces.  While harvesting cells from fetuses may seem gruesome, the diseases that stand to be cured by their application are far more so.  Stem cells have been proven to have the ability to rejuvenate damaged tissue as well as the creation of entirely new tissues and it is widely believed that these methods are superior to conventional methods because they carry a far less mild “risk-benefit profile”.  Stem cells are a viable option in curing any disease or illness in which tissue has been damaged, some of which include diabetes, heart disease, spinal cord injuries and Alzheimer’s.  These diseases are debilitating and can often lead to death however funding for embryonic stem cell research is far from adequate.  The fact that stem cells may be used to cure or prevent these potentially fatal diseases should be reason enough to overlook any moral hesitations.

I will use the following list of resources to support my argument that funding for embryonic stem cell research should be increased by proving the capabilities of this incredible science:

1. The Science and Ethics of Induced Pluripotency: What Will Become of Embryonic Stem Cells

This article discusses why stem cells are better than traditional medicinal methods to cure/treat diseases and other illnesses.  It depicts the advances in stem cell research techniques and the changes to the field that have come within the last decade.  It also describes other means of modern regenerative medicine in an unbiased light.

How I intend to use it: I intend to use this article to describe why stem cells are a better, more productive way to treat and possibly cure or prevent certain illnesses.  In this way I will show that stem cell research deserves more funding than other areas of research.

2. Stem Cells: 10 Diseases They May—or May Not—Cure

This article describes the diseases that might someday be cured by stem cells.  It also explains why stem cells would be beneficial and how they would be utilized in each disease.  This article is also a great resource because it gives a slightly skeptical viewpoint that can be used for arguments against funding this type of research.

How I intend to use it: I will use this article to bring to light the terrible diseases that stand to be cured by stem cells in order to prove that more funding should be approved.  I will also use this article to identify counter arguments so I can debunk them using my other sources.

3. Assessing the Risk of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome in Egg Donation: Implications for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research.

This article provides information on why it is most useful to use stem cells derived from an embryo and how the source of the stem cell changes the properties of the cell itself.  It also explains the downfalls of the other methods of obtaining usable stem cells.

How I intend to use it:  I intend to use this article to show the reader why it is so important that the stem cells come from an embryonic source.  By examining why embryonic stem cells are the most useable and how other methods are far less productive I can support funding for this specific type of stem cell research.  I will also use this source in correlation with one other source (not listed here) to identify the counterintuitivity of this topic, in that embryonic stem cells have the potential to be a so-called “miracle drug” but because of a moral issue it has been extremely difficult to conduct the needed research.

4. Federal Funding of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research

This article contains the court case of Sherley v. Sebelius which was the main impetus behind the Dickey-Wicker Amendment that caused the ban on embryonic stem cell research (lifted by President Obama) and is still the cause of much argument surrounding this type of research.  It also contains a much more recent case that dealt with embryonic stem cell research.

How I intend to use it: I intend to use this article to give background information on the initial ban, and current damper on the funding given to embryonic stem cell research.  I will then counter the implications of this case with the scientific data gathered in my other sources.  This source will also be useful in identifying the moral dilemmas that have hurt the entire field.

5. The Man Who Grew Back His Finger Tip

This article describes the wonders of stem cells in the form of an amazing story of a man who grew back part of his finger that was removed in an accident.  This man grew back his entire finger in only four months using stem cells (in fact using an inferior method to embryonic stem cells).

How I intend to use it: I intend to use this as a concrete example of the power of stem cells in the field of regenerative medicine.  Due to the ban on embryonic stem cells during the time of his accident the stem cells of a pig were used which are inferior to human stem cells, this in mind I intend to show that the potential of the far superior embryonic stem cells is nearly limitless.  By showing how powerful and effective stem cells are I hope to prove the need for more funding.

Proposal:

The topic I have decided to research is steroids actually being a good thing for sports. I believe that my research will prove that making steroids legal in sports will benefit the athletes and the leagues. Anabolic steroids are performance enhancing drugs that are used to build muscle. They are not allowed in sports even though many athletes are using them. Many people are against steroids because they believe it is unfair or unsafe. They may also say that large amounts of homeruns increase ticket sales for baseball because it is uncommon and making steroids legal will make it much more common. I plan to research how making steroids legal is actually more fair by evening the playing field in a way, since many athletes are already using them. I will also hope to find that it would be less dangerous for athletes, because if they want steroids they will take them regardless. Therefore, having a doctor administer the steroids will at least make  taking them as safe as possible. More specifically I will be looking at these benefits in relation to professional baseball. I hope to find evidence on how it helps individual pitchers and batters as well as the sport as a whole. I plan to find evidence that it will increase ticket sales and interest in baseball. To refute the idea that large numbers of homeruns will be common I will provide evidence that even though more batters will be using steroids you still need a high skill level to achieve great numbers.

Sources:

1. Steroid Era: http://www.baseballssteroidera.com/list-mitchell-report.htm

Summary: This source provides evidence that steroids has been a problem in baseball for a while. It has a list of the players who have been suspended for, admitted to, and tested positive for steroid use. There is a summary for each player weather they were on the mitchell report, admitted to using steroids, or were suspended for using. It gives you an understanding of each specific case.

How I intend to use: I plan on using this information to show the reader that steroids are already being used by many athletes regardless of it being illegal. This will help to prove that making steroids legal is just evening the playing field for the athletes that follow the rules. This being because it at least gives those who follow the rules the choice to take steroids and try to reach the level of the athletes that have been cheating all along.

2. Hitting Aspect: http://webusers.npl.illinois.edu/~a-nathan/pob/BRJ-Steroids-v3.pdf

Summary: The source provides information on how steroids increase muscle mass. It proves the relationship between increased muscle mass and increased bat speed. It then ties increased bat speed into increased batted ball speed. To conclude it shows how batted ball speed directly correlates to home run production.

How I intend to use: I intend on using this source to prove the obvious; steroids increase the bat speed and hitting power of an individual. This will in result cause more home runs. Everyone knows that viewers like big hits and home runs. Showing that steroids increase home run productions will prove that steroids increase interest in the game.

3.  Negative Effects: http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/04/27/long.term.anabolic.steroid.use.may.weaken.heart.more.previously.thought

Summary: This source describes the negative effects of using steroids. It shows that the left ventricle is weaker in those who use steroids. The left ventricle is the hearts main pumping chamber. It describes the significant link between steroid use and heart impairment.

How I intend to use: Even though I am trying to prove that steroids should be legal in sports I will acknowledge the opposing argument. I will show the negative outcome of using steroids. This will provide me with a more complete understanding of steroids. Knowing the negatives along with the positives will allow reader to see the pros and cons and decide which has more better.

4. Don’t Inject: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=e7d340fe-ac10-4c55-b1d8-0914c072d7d4%40sessionmgr13&vid=25&hid=8&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=10831460

Summary: This source describes the dangers of dirty needles. Dirty needles are a huge cause of spreading infections and diseases. Dirty needles account for a third of all reported AIDs cases. They are also the reason most people who use needles long term get hepatitis C.

How I intend to use: I will use this article to prove my point that legalizing steroids is the safer than the current use of steroids. I will explain how athletes who want steroids will use them regardless and it is unsafe for them to inject them on their own. I’ll use this source to explain that making steroids legal and allowing doctors to be the ones to administer them is the safest. Even though taking steroids is not safe it is clear that some professional athletes will risk their health for more money and improved performance. Though making it legal will not make taking steroids completely safe it will at least make it much safer than before.

5. Mark McGwire: http://reds.enquirer.com/2000/02/06/red_griffey_payoff_is_in.html

Summary: This is a source that shows how ticket sales went up when Mark McGwire signed a three-year contract with the St.Louis Cardinals. The next year the Cardinals added 600,000 ticket sales. In the 1998 season the Cardinals broke their record for most fans in a season with 3.22 million fans. By acquiring McGwire and the attendance rising from the 1997 to 1998 season he produced about 5.5 million dollars in revenue.

How I intend to use: I will use this article on Mark McGwire to show that steroids benefit the MLB. It has been admitted by Mark McGwire himself that he used steroids. Mark McGwire increasing ticket sales shows that steroids will actually bring baseball more fans and a higher profit. I will provide this as a specific example of the positive effect of allowing steroids in baseball.

Proposal: Many people around the world have found themselves craving caffeine in one form or another. Recently, the most popular form of caffeine has become coffee, creating a recent boom in the industry. Starbucks is just one of America’s most prominent coffee chains and has changed the face of the coffee industry into a monopolization of the best international coffees, speciality drinks, sandwiches and store brand items. The growth of the company has also lead economists to believe that Starbucks has had a positive impact on both the American and Global economies. A “Starbucks theory” has even been created to show to correlation between the company’s fortunes and the health of the overall economy. For my research project, I plan to prove that the company has a positive impact on the national and international economy. However, I also plan to look at the pay of the international workers. There was a 2007 lawsuit that proved the Starbucks corporation did not abide to international labor laws and pay rates. I plan to research if, and why, this is still true. If Starbucks is one of the leading economic factors and is paying top price for premium international brews and other speciality items, then why aren’t they willing to pay their workers top dollar for these items? So, my research will primarily be focused on economics: why Starbucks is able to generate a large international income and help the growth of the economy but not able to support their international workers.

Source  1: <http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/03/05/8401343/index.htm> This article was found through Academic Search Premiere. It talks about the 2007 law suit between the Starbucks corporation and Ethiopia over trademark rights to coffee producing regions. “…  the Ethiopian government planned to force those who sell its coffee into licensing agreements.. but Starbucks got there first.” The article describes in full detail the work that an Ethiopian coffee worker does daily and the amount they get paid and the extra money that Starbucks pays on things such as packaging. The angst between the company and country is also quoted.

Use: I plan to use this source to talk about how the Corporation obtains coffee and treats its workers over seas. Working conditions in Etheopia were rated 170 out of 177 by the UN. It is a good source for antidotes, and proof of violated laws overseas and the poor working and pay conditions the workers receive; each coffee farmer nets about $120 per year. But, the corporation takes out about $20 in corporation and union fees; this does not include state sanctioned taxes. But, each farmer is then rewarded $6.50 for its “premium coffee farming.” The question is: do they treat their workers economically fair?

Source 2:<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2006/10/01/8387114/index.htm>

The source was found through the Academic Search premiere database and gives a detailed description of the number one selling coffees that are trying to oppose the Starbucks corporations and their economics.

Use: I attend to use this source as alternatives to the Starbucks Industry.

Source 3: <http://www.loansandcredit.com/loansandcredit-com-the-economics-of-starbucks_2011-02-16/Source 3:>

http://www.economist.com/node/1846165The source is a brief description of the salaries of Starbucks employees in America and some history of the coffee shops both national and international.

Use: To counter argue source #1. The second site will be used to support the fact that the company is creating international and local jobs, especially in urbanized areas.

Source 4: Will Your Recession Be Tall, Grande, or Venti?

A Picture of the Global Starbucks Economy

Starbucks’ Comprehensive Plan to Navigate Tough Economy, 2008

The above article(s) details the “Starbucks theory” which is similar to the McDonalds theory which states that by incorporating Starbucks Coffee shops into local and international communities, it is possible that the current recession the world is facing will deplete. The third source included is speech given by the current President of Starbucks.

Use: to prove the point that Starbucks is an essential unit in the global economy.

Source 5:  <http://www.economist.com/node/2361072&gt;

The above is a study done by The Economist that discusses the “crave” for coffee internationally. They compare it with the “big mac” study previously conducted by their publication.

Use: The source proves the “need” for quality coffee and also compliments source 4.1 in discussing the Starbucks theory in comparison to the McDonald’s theory of increasing international GDP.

Source 6: <http://www.economist.com/node/2042797&gt;

The source discusses recent coffee taxes, specifically on expresso.

Use: The tax will go towards helping underprivileged children in coffee bearing nations get an education. However, Starbucks along with many other coffee shop owners, are investing a large sum of money to prevent this tax from occurring.