Definition Rewrite-rowanstudent

Posted on April 29, 2019 by rowanstudent2

By definition, a placebo is “a harmless pill, medicine, or procedure prescribed more for the psychological benefit to the patient than for any psychological effect.” While a placebo is used to create a mental state that does in fact promote well-being and healing, it can be argued whether it is “harmless.” Remedies for physical illness benefit from a positive mental outlook, at the same time a pessimistic outlook can make people feel increasingly sick. Even terminally ill patients can alleviate their suffering if they commit to a belief in their own cure. While no reputable physician would lay hands on a patient and advise him or her to assign a cure to a higher power, providing patients with a placebo has much the same effect in patients whose commitment to the curative power of the therapy is strong enough. The placebo effect effectively deceives patients into believing that they are receiving medication to heal them while leaving the actual work to their psychological systems. In addition to this, the inconsistency of studies regarding what’s called the placebo effect and the ethical issues surrounding the use of “illusionary medicine” by medical professionals create a moral ambiguity surrounding placebos and their uses.

The placebo effect has been around for many years, but with the use of deception and ignorance, people don’t even notice it. A placebo should cause “clinical improvement” according to the Journal of Neuroscience. Typically, this treatment is used for cases dealing with the psychological part of the body. People that benefit more from it usually have a sort of expectancy. They expect that whatever is inside this pill, will make their pain go away. When patients are unaware they are taking a placebo and believe they are taking “real” medicine, the placebo effect usually has a positive outcome. But what happens when they know it is a “fake” drug? Harvard Medical School Professor and Director of the Harvard-wide Program in Placebo Studies, Dr. Ted J. Kaptchuk did a study on people with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). This is a condition that causes pain in the abdominal area and diarrhea or constipation. It is more a disorder than a disease because it’s not as severe. Half of the study is getting an “open-label” placebo, while the other gets no treatment at all. The results showed that there was a vast improvement with the placebo group’s symptoms even though they knew they were taking a placebo. This group also fell that their symptoms were lessened in severity and relief was much more prominent, which in turn improved the quality of life. So is it better for the patient to be given an “open-label” placebo or to not take one at all? Or is there a more beneficial effect on a patient who receives a placebo without their knowledge? According to the results of this study particularly, an “open-label” placebo gives patients a better benefit to their symptoms than ones who didn’t take anything at all. Keep in mind that this was a study for just IBS, which means not all open-label placebo treatments will work for every disorder or disease.

What happens when you give a placebo to a person with Parkinson’s disease? A disease that involves the central nervous system, motor functions and dopamine production. For this study, patients were given a placebo, but were told that it was an antiparkinsonian drug that would help with their movements. They were injected with a saline solution that had no confirmed effect. Neuronal activity in the subthalamic nucleus was recorded before and after the procedure. The people who felt an effect showed actual bursting activity of neurons in the body, while the non responsive group, didn’t show anything. Now this raises the question of does a placebo show psychological changes, which causes physiological relief? In other words, if a placebo is only supposed to be therapeutic, is it possible that a person’s mental abilities are strong enough to make themselves cured? Placebos may in fact just be dependent on each patient. The patient who has the desire to feel better will have more of a lasting effect than the one who doesn’t even when both take a placebo.

The Journal of Neuroscience did studies on different mechanisms of the placebo treatment. “The study of the placebo effect, at its core, is the study of how the context of beliefs and values shape brain processes related to perception and emotion and, ultimately, mental and physical health.” Fabrizio Benedetti says that if we want to see how a placebo affects a person in a psychosocial context, the placebo has to act as if it’s a real treatment. The patient will most likely listen to the doctor’s order, so a sham treatment is given to them in place of the real deal. In their mind, they believe it is effective. The response that the patient gives depends on each independent person. Since a placebo isn’t supposed to have any physiological outcome, it depends on the mind of the patient.

“It has been defined as the ‘positive physiological or psychological changes associated with the use of inert medications, sham procedures, or therapeutic symbols within a healthcare encounter'” according to Franklin G. Miller. There are many mechanisms on how to go about a placebo treatment. The most positive one in patients is the one referred to as “response expectancies.” Brain imaging techniques are being used to reveal the neurophysiological part of these expectations and the different mechanisms underlying placebo effects in many ways that depend on each individual. A National Institutes of Health requested applications that stated, “understanding how to enhance the therapeutic benefits of placebo effect in clinical practice has the potential to significantly improve healthcare.”

It is required to trick patients into thinking their health will improve. This creates an ethical concern for medical professionals. While some argue that placebos don’t require the use of malignant deception. The “major driving force” as Miller recalls is “response expectancy.” A common aspect of research focuses on deception. Some may say it is necessary to deceive patients by manipulating their expectations. The therapeutic outcomes reveal positive results after modifying patients’ assumptions. Both scientific methods and ethical standards are considered when using deception.

References

Benedetti, F., Mayberg, H. S., & Christian S. Stohler, J. Z. (2005, November 09). “Neurobiological Mechanisms of the Placebo Effect.” Retrieved from http://www.jneurosci.org/content/25/45/10390.short

Kaptchuk, T. J., Friedlander, E., Kelley, J. M., Sanchez, M. N., Kokkotou, E., Singer, J. P., Lembo, A. J. (2010, December 22). “Placebos without Deception: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Irritable Bowel Syndrome.” Retrieved from https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0015591#references

Marshall, M. (2016, June 23). “A placebo can work even when you know it’s a placebo.” (H. LeWine M.D., Ed.). Retrieved from https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/placebo-can-work-even-know-placebo-201607079926

Miller, F. G., Wendler, D., & Swartzman, L. C. (2005). “Deception in Research on the Placebo Effect.” PLoS Medicine, 2(9), 853–859. https://doi-org.ezproxy.rowan.edu/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020262

Posted in Definition Rewrite, Portfolio RowanStudent, rowanstudent | Leave a comment

Definition Rewrite–daphneblake

Posted on April 29, 2019 by daphneblake25

Ocean Pollution is More than you Think

The official definition of ocean pollution is, “the presence in or introduction into the ocean of a substance or thing that has harmful or poisonous effects”, but the damage it does to the economy, and sea life and how it trickles down from one person to the ocean expands way past the page. The detrimental effects of ocean pollution and the various ways it impacts the world can be interpreted by the image of a tree. We only see the beautiful, tall 70-foot tree, but that result takes an average of ten to thirty years to manifest itself in front of us. The same goes for ocean pollution. The floating island of trash along the northern region of the pacific ocean that’s now 600,000 square miles didn’t get that way over night. The effects of ocean pollution are created through a series of events that start really small. An individual single-use straw that gets discarded on the beach gets drawn into the ocean from the tides and stuck in a little sea turtle’s nose, or gets broken down into microplastics that are consumed by larger fish, damaging sea life which in turn hurts the sea food market and a source of food to humans. This is a representation of what ocean pollution really is how prominent the issue is in our societies and communities.

A scientific study from “Earthwise” proved that sea animals eat plastic because it looks like food. To a hungry sea turtle, a floating plastic bag resembles a jellyfish. And while it is easier to pick out the larger plastics on a beach cleanup, the ones you can see aren’t the most harmful. The ocean pollution that does the most damage are the ones too small for us to see. OceanService.noaa.gov” states; “Plastic debris can come in all shapes and sizes, but those that are less than five millimeters in length (or about the size of a sesame seed) are called “microplastics.” These are the most harmful because it lures sea animals in without them knowing. According to the “National Geographic”,  animals eat ocean plastic because it smells like food. This is because as plastic breaks down into the ocean, Algae, (a primary food source for many sea birds) begin to accumulate on it. Then the animals are led into a horrifying trap because they’re consuming the plastic along with the Algae and it’s ultimately killing them. This is a large contribution to the reduction of sea life and shows that ocean pollution is more harmful than the eye can even detect.

The factors that cause microplastics vary, but each one contributes to the issue significantly in different ways. The most common one is the human contribution. This aspect includes the plastic and other recyclable material found on beaches, riverbanks, or anywhere near large bodies of water. The human contribution to ocean pollution is the hardest to end because it’s the hardest to control. Research found by “Keep America Beautiful” reported that people litter on the beach every 12 paces. Based on an observation that they did, their findings proved that out of 1069 people, 43% said they littered for lack of trash cans. A possible solution would be to put a trash can every 12 paces, but then it spreads to large corporations dumping toxic chemicals into oceans. This is something that’s done regularly without any oversight or checks. Ocean pollution should be reported about on a higher level because so many people contribute to it without even realizing it. For instance, not recycling plastics, papers, and metals contributes to ocean pollution because regular things in the trash either gets dumped in junkyards on land or floating islands of trash in the ocean. By using material that gets broken down into microplastics is making an impact because we all know where it’s going to end up, but this may not be a problem solved at the general public level since it’s a flawed system embedded in our way of living. My solution to this incident would be to use edible straws to shave a portion of plastic from the ocean. I believe that the production and mandatory use of edible straws would decrease the plastic waste from single use plastic straws that gets broken down into microplastics in the ocean which would reduce ocean pollution. “Conserve Energy Future” lists all the causes of ocean pollution. They include: sewage, which enters the ocean directly, toxic chemicals from Industries, Land Runoff, Large Scale Oil Spills, Ocean Mining, and Littering. Making the effort to replace the plastic to something we know would be disposed of without harming the ocean is a help to the issue because all of the listed factors contain human interference, but the human participation for the advocacy of the depolluting of oceans is very minimal.

Many people believe that it’s not their fault regarding ocean pollution, or any because they’re not intentionally throwing trash and plastic on the floor with the intent to harm the environment or sea life. But as aforementioned, even using plastic is contributing because it’s a material that never breaks down completely and most of its remains end up in the ocean or in junk yards. Also, not advocating against ocean pollution is a form of contributing to it as well because if there aren’t people trying to make a difference and show actual concern for the environment, no changes are going to be accomplished. Another reason for not recycling is always the cost. The cost and time refurbishing used material is too expensive and there is little to no profit in it for clear plastic material. But the cost for a building a new planet is definitely more expensive and time consuming than recycling. So ocean pollution is a combination of a variety of factors. It initiates at the individual level, but other factors such as oil spills and toxic chemical dumps from large companies makes a lot of damage in a little bit of time. Ocean pollution can be defined as anything placed in the ocean environment that is considered harmful, but unpacked, it means so much and is encompassed with many aspects and levels that aren’t always taken into consideration when evaluating ocean pollution.

References:

Liittschwager, D., & Liittschwager, D. (2019, January 18). Jellyfish are the ‘snack food’ of the sea-and that’s a good thing. Retrieved March 11, 2019, from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/2019/01/many-ocean-creatures-surprisingly-eat-jellyfish/

US Department of Commerce, & National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2016, April 13). What are microplastics? Retrieved from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/microplastics.html

Causes and Effects of Ocean Pollution That Are Destroying Our Planet. (2019, April 09). Retrieved from https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/causes-and-effects-of-ocean-pollution.php

Shows, N. P. (2016, November 21). Home. Retrieved April 28, 2019, from https://earthwiseradio.org/2016/11/why-do-animals-eat-ocean-plastic/

Animals Eat Ocean Plastic Because it Smells Like Food. (2016, November 09). Retrieved April 28, 2019, from https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/11/animals-eat-ocean-plastic-because-of-smell-dms-algae-seabirds-fish/

Schultz, P., & Reid, S. R. (2009). Executive summary: Litter in america 2009 national litter research findings and recommendations. Retrieved April 28, 2019, from https://www.kab.org/sites/default/files/News&Info_Research_LitterinAmerica_ExecutiveSummary_Final.pdf.

Posted in daphneblake, Definition Rewrite, Portfolio DaphneBlake | Leave a comment

Rebuttal Rewrite-Chavanillo

Posted on April 29, 2019 by chavanillo

Sneaker Obsession Is Wrong

In the past year, there has been a dispute about how sneakers are something more than just a shoe. Professionals and others believe that sneakers are actually changing teens life’s for good not bad. Kevin Smith, is an American filmmaker, actor, comedian, comic book writer, author, and pod-caster, and he believes that we must see the good side of sneaker obsession and how is  not really a big deal. In his 2014 article, “ The Science Behind Our Sneaker Addiction” Smith reminds the readers that generation to generation sneakers obsession is something teens can’t resist. It’s causing problem and even relationship and friendship issues. To prove and analyse his point that sneakers are not a bad obsession and that it helps you, Smith argues that since sneakers are a big part of teens life these days is considered beneficial and normal. Therefore, Smith claims to let teens stay with their sneaker obsession because it makes them be more sociable and more confident to themselves. I agree with Smith when he says that sneakers make teens more sociable, but I say that it doesn’t change the fact that it still causing problem and even increasing death rate and robbery. It’s also affecting our financial responsibility and our own identity.

Smith says that being obsessed with sneakers is actually a good thing because it increases personal value when they get the sneakers. Even Dan Cherry a advertising executive in New York, says that  shoes express teens individuality that makes other teens go towards him or her to know them better. They see them as cool kids. However, the parent network “Family care” in 2019 article “What’s up with your son and sneaker obsession”  as a recent search they state that “ Also keep in mind that boys often have judgments about who has the right to wear these shoes. As in, if you wear them but you can’t hold your own athletically, boys are going to make fun of you to your face or ridicule you behind your back.” Like when I was in 7th grade I really didn’t care about what shoes I was wearing I was more focused on my clothing and every time boys always bullied me and said things behind my back, even did rumors to start fights with me because I was just hanging a lot with girls and not boys. To add on, sneakers these days show your personality and that is scary because you wear a pair of sneakers to feel part of a group but at the end they will make fun of you because that’s not you and because of this reasons having sneakers or not having them is the same kind of rejection.

In Smith’s eyes he is sure that teens obsession with sneakers will lead them to great and better socialization and a better life. In Spite of these, we could say that teens are getting comfortable purchasing expensive shoes not having in mind how many deaths are happening just because of expensive sneakers. Like Marc Bain a Fashion reporter said in his article “1,200 people are killed each year over Sneakers” says,  “An estimated 1,200 people die over sneakers every year, according to a video posted Nov. 14 by GQ magazine.” This is something we really have to worry about, sneakers are now becoming a death issue, Americans are killing each other for some shoes. What does that say about us! As you can see this has already started to be a mental health situation. Even though sneakers express our individuality, we have to think to ourselves when it comes to which one I should buy or wear? In this case we should always be aware who we are around with and having this pair or that pair of sneakers will do me good or bad.

Of course, Smith makes a fair point when he says that sneakers express teens individuality and personality making them feel part of a group and not left behind. The more people we see with new sneakers the more we want them too. He is also, right that sneakers have changed people’s lives. Most teens dedicate their time and money on new pair of sneakers to be happy and feel part of something. However, I am still not convinced by Kevin Smith or Den Cherry arguments that Sneaker obsession is making teens be more sociable and happy even showing personality. Instead of obsessing on sneakers we have to control ourselves. The only way to really stop all of these problematic issues and only look into the bright side is if we change. We could reduce the amount of deaths and problems , but it will only happen if we change as people. Also, the way we think. You know how different life would have been if we help each other as brothers and sisters?

All in all, I believe we have to be focused on arguments like Smith’s. While he does point out that a sneakers obsession is really beneficial when it comes to socializing and showing teens individuality, I found his argument misunderstood. I say this because he is to focused on what teens feel inside and what other think about them, instead of really seeing what’s happening in the world. Deaths, bullies, thieves, suicide because of depression and more. Parents are also worried according to the Intelligence For Your Life website about how their kids are going to turn up to be and really worried about their financial status. This could all be fixed, we could have the shoes we want to feel like we part of something, but it doesn’t have to turn into a obsession that could change the way we are living. A person should control their own life and not let fashion especially shoes be the ones controlling it.

Resources

Bain, Marc. “1,200 People Are Killed Each Year over Sneakers.” Quartz, Quartz, 23 Nov. 2015.

Family Circle. “What’s Up with Your Son and His Sneaker Obsession?” Family Circle, Family Circle, 16 Apr. 2015.

Intelligence For Your Life. “Teenage Boys Are Obsessed With Sneakers.” Intelligence For Your Life, Intelligence For Your Life, 5 July 2017.

Smith, K. (2016, October 20). The Science Behind Our Sneaker Addictions. Retrieved January 30, 2014, from https://www.complex.com/sneakers/2014/01/science-behind-sneaker-addiction

Posted in chavanillo, Portfolio Chavanillo, Rebuttal Rewrite | Leave a comment

Causal Rewrite–Daphneblake

Posted on April 29, 2019 by daphneblake25

A Polluted Ocean Makes for a Polluted Economy

To expand on the issue, the negative effects even span out to the economy. The first image that enters the mind at the thought of the phrase “ocean pollution” probably isn’t a destroyed economy, but that’s exactly what the result will be. Everyday, millions of people litter the ground with plastic, paper, and metals that get transferred into the ocean or into massive areas of land. This process is what ultimately will lead to a destroyed economy. As previously stated, microplastics are a huge cause of the reduction of sea life because it’s harder to detect by sea animals and its interrupting the cycle of the way animals eat. The “United Nations Environment Programme” reported that “Over 1 million seabirds and 100,000 sea mammals are killed by pollution every year. This decreased population of sea life will ultimately cause the economy to take a hard hit. Due to the fact that the material of plastic doesn’t ever fully break down back into the earth, microplastics become difficult to see, especially for hungry fish searching for something to eat. These fish that intake the pollution in the ocean get eaten by bigger fish and when these sea animals wash up on land, they have things like bottle caps and straws inside them that never fully got digested into their systems.

Seafood is a huge part of the global food economy whose future is threatened by the devastation caused by plastic pollution. According to Worldwildlife, “Approximately three billion people in the world rely on both wild-caught and farmed seafood as their primary source of protein. As the largest traded food commodity in the world, seafood provides sustenance to billions of people worldwide.” There aren’t going to be anymore people consuming seafood if all the sea animals are either dead from ocean pollution or have hundreds of bits of plastic inside them. Ocean pollution serves as a direct hit to the seafood market which in turn hurts the economy due to the fact that all those people who were once redistributing their money into society will decrease because the seafood market will not exist anymore. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration states the extreme benefits that the fishing industry give to the economy. Not only did it generate over two-hundred billion dollars in sales, but it also creates 1.6 billion jobs. Without the fishing industry, not only will this be detrimental in economic matters, but the total unemployment line will increase. Both money and jobs will be lost. And these factors are at stake from the steady rise in ocean pollution.

The seafood market is an example of a direct correlation to how detrimental ocean pollution can be on the economy, but there are other examples that aren’t as blatant. The beach market is also a huge contributor to the economy. The beach is one of the most desired locations for vacations. The endless stretch of sand, the beautiful vast and relaxing waves, and the feeling of excitement and satisfaction as the two come together before one’s very own eyes. These year long dreams will be slowly diminished if ocean pollution stays at a steady increase. The National Geographic reports that “Every year, tens of thousands of people worldwide volunteer for the Sisyphean chore of picking up trash from beaches. The largest effort is conducted every September by the Ocean Conservancy, which in 30 years of cleanups has collected 300 million pounds and more than 350 types of items.” They go on to quote Nicholas Mallos, the leader of these cleanups who says, “I have been on beaches in Hong Kong, Saint Helena in the South Atlantic, and Indonesia where you can watch plastics and debris in the barrel of each wave crash onto the beach. Literally, the trash starts getting replaced as soon as you pick it up.” The attraction for beaches is to escape reality and relax, but who can relax when the reality of the world’s ecological problem of ocean pollution is waiting for you at every beach? According to the U.S Census Bureau’s Statistical Abstract of the United States 2012, Table 1240, 58.67 million people went to the beach in 2010. These numbers are going to drastically drop after the beaches become so filled with plastic that no one wants to visit them anymore. Again, the question may arise of how this affects the economy, well, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration points out how Tourism and recreation account for 72 percent of the ocean economy’s total employment and 31 percent of its GDP. These numbers prove how ocean pollution causes various harsh results for our world economically.

The beach and the seafood market both contribute greatly to the economy, but what about the costs of ocean pollution that the world may not have to pay right now, but in the future. Based on the current state of our planet, the future of mankind is at state, all due to ocean pollution. Planetaid.org presents the information that the ocean “provides over 70 percent of the oxygen we breathe and over 97 percent of the world’s water supply.” But everyday the ocean is the unfortunate recipient of manmade pollution. The world is essentially destroying itself. Because of the road us humans are going down now, there are going to be a plethora of environmental costs the world is going to try to fix when it becomes close to too late. There are a lot of things humans hold as significant to life. People say tangible objects such as technology and clothes are essential to living, but when we don’t have a planet to live on, we’re really going to be in deep water. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimates how much it will cost to clean the oceans. They state that “At a cost of $5,000-20,000 per day, it would cost between $122 million and $489 million for the year. That’s a lot of money—and that’s only for boat time. It doesn’t include equipment or labor costs.” But that’s just the cost of it today, who knows the estimated costs in the future if people continue to pollute the ocean. Ocean pollution is a direct causal problem to a destroyed economy, from seafood to beaches to future repairs. This is a serious detriment to the world’s finances, recreation, and most importantly, to our lives.

References

United Nations Environment Programme. (1970, January 01). Marine litter: Trash that kills. Retrieved March 31, 2019, from https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/9691

Fox, B. (n.d.). Sustainable Seafood. Retrieved April 4, 2019, from https://www.worldwildlife.org/industries/sustainable-seafood

N. (2017, May 9). U.S. fishing generated more than $200B in sales in 2015, two stocks rebuilt in 2016. Retrieved April 4, 2019, from https://www.noaa.gov/media-release/us-fishing-generated-more-than-200b-in-sales-in-2015-two-stocks-rebuilt-in-2016

US Department of Commerce, & National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2008, October 08). How important is the ocean to our economy? Retrieved April 4, 2019, fromhttps://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oceaneconomy.html

Parker, L. (2018, October 10). Beach clean-up study shows global scope of plastic pollution. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2018/10/greenpeace-beach-cleanup-report-highlights-ocean-plastic-problem/

Blog. (2014, March 24). Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://www.planetaid.org/blog/how-ocean-pollution-affects-humans

Posted in Causal Rewrite, daphneblake, Portfolio DaphneBlake | Leave a comment

Bibliography-rowanstudent

Posted on April 29, 2019 by rowanstudent2

Annotated Bibliography

1. Anderson, B. J., Woollard, G. A., & Holford, N. H. (2001, October). “Acetaminophen analgesia in children: Placebo effect and pain resolution after tonsillectomy.” Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s002280100367

Background: This article describes the effects of Acetaminophen analgesia and
placebo in children undergoing outpatient tonsillectomy. Acetaminophen is a brand of analgesic used to relieve pain. These children were randomly selected from a group of 9±3.0-year-olds with a weight of 37.9±16.6 kg. They were to respond with a pain score after taking either the drug or placebo after a certain period of time of 4-8 hours. The results showed that even in high dosage, the acetaminophen didn’t have much of an effect than a lower dosage of the same drug, and that it came with side effects such as nausea and vomiting. The placebo had a higher pain reduction than the acetaminophen. Even when combined, the pain reduction was less than the placebo effect by itself.

How I Used It: This article provided a case study in which placebos were used. I used the example of the acetaminophen and placebo trial to provide statistics and proof that placebos are better medicine than actual prescribed drugs.

2. Benedetti, F., Mayberg, H. S., & Christian S. Stohler, J. Z. (2005, November 09). “Neurobiological Mechanisms of the Placebo Effect.” Retrieved from http://www.jneurosci.org/content/25/45/10390.short

Background: For the placebo effect to actually work, patients must try different mechanisms. There should be some sort of expectation of clinical improvement and Pavlovian conditioning. This learning procedure is also known as classical conditioning in which a stimulus is only activated when a previously neutral stimulus occurs. Typically, placebos are used in studies that involve pain, but some have succeeded in topics such as the immune system, motor disorders, and depression. Basically, the Journal of Neuroscience digs into the simple neurobiological effect of the brain to expect a certain positive result when a placebo is involved.

How I Used It: This article gave me information on how placebos are much more effective when there is an expectancy of clinical improvement. It helped my point of stating that placebos work better if patients have the right mindset that they will actually work.

3. Bishop, F. L., Jacobson, E. E., Shaw, J. R., & Kaptchuk, T. J. (2012, January 18). “Scientific tools, fake treatments, or triggers for psychological healing: How clinical trial participants conceptualise placebos.” Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0277953612000160

Background: In clinical trials, placebos are a must so that there are no bias towards the results. There are many different perspectives patients have on placebos, but the ones that really matter are the ones that actually experience the effect. This article contains a study in which 12 people with Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) were interviewed 3 times on their conceptualization of placebos.
There were four ways in which the participants thought of placebos: “placebos are necessary for research; placebo effects are fake; placebo acupuncture is not real acupuncture; placebos have real effects mediated by psychological mechanisms.” The most positive outcome of this study was the fact that some of the patents thought that placebos were good psychological healing mechanisms. But the negative outcomes were how some of the participants saw placebo responders as “gullible.”

How I Used It: I used only the part of how many people conceptualize about placebos to add to the fact that there are different perspectives on why placebos work and don’t work. Given the results, it gave a clear picture that either patients believed placebos worked or didn’t work.

4. Boozang, K. M. (2002). “The therapeutic placebo: The case for patient deception.” Florida Law Review, 54(4), 687-746. Retrieved from
https://heinonline-org.ezproxy.rowan.edu/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/uflr54&id=716&men_tab=srchresults&t=1556592990

Background: The use of deception makes the therapeutic placebo seem like a myth and a real treatment. Florida Law Review believes that there should be no effect on one’s health. Some physicians believe placebos work and make their patients feel better, but they were not so sure how they worked. It goes on to talk about the relationship between the physician and patient, and how it’s affected by whether a placebo works on the patient or not. Proof of a powerful placebo will cause the medical world to question the practice of medicine.

How I Used It: I barely used this journal except for the sole fact to show how the practice of placebos became big and popular, and physicians started to advocate for the power of the placebo. It presented the different possibilities and opinions that can come out of placebos.

5. Kaptchuk, T. J., Friedlander, E., Kelley, J. M., Sanchez, M. N., Kokkotou, E., Singer, J. P., Lembo, A. J. (2010, December 22). “Placebos without Deception: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Irritable Bowel Syndrome.” Retrieved from https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0015591#references

Background: The treatment of placebos influences minor symptoms greatly only with the help of deception. Dr. Kaptchuk tests the results of open-label placebo versus a no-treatment control on patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS). There were two groups who were randomly selected to do a three week trial. The one group were given an inert substance, like a sugar pill, to relieve symptoms of IBS, and the other group didn’t receive a treatment at all, but instead interaction with their providers that involved mind-body self-healing processes. The open-label placebo group produced higher scores than the no-treatment control.

How I Used It: Just like some of the other articles I used, this one gave me another example of when placebos were in a trial. Only this time, it was an open-label placebo meaning the patient knew that they were given a placebo, which is very counterintuitive, since it is thought to be that placebos only work with deception.

6. Marshall, M. (2016, June 23). “A placebo can work even when you know it’s a placebo.” (H. LeWine M.D., Ed.). Retrieved from https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/placebo-can-work-even-know-placebo-201607079926

Background: First, the article talks about what patients are given when getting fake treatment for their symptoms. Placebos may take the form of pills, injections, or procedures to test if the real treatment works just as well as the placebo. “To complicate matters, there is a documented ‘placebo effect,’ which means that some people actually respond to a placebo even though it shouldn’t have an effect on the body. This has been thought to be largely due to their beliefs or expectations that they are getting the real treatment and not the fake one.”

How I Used It: This article went along with the previous one about the IBS open-label placebo. It further described why it worked, and how open-label placebos may be a new strategy for health providers. I used this information to support the IBS trial so that my reader can have an explanation as to why open-label placebos are more effective.

7. Meeuwis, S. H., Van Middendorp, H., VeldHuijzen, D. S., Van Laarhoven, A. I. M., De houwer, J., Lavrijsen, A. P. M., & Evers, A. W. M. (2018). “Placebo Effects of Open-label Verbal Suggestions on Itch.” Acta Dermato-Venereologica, 98(2), 268–274. https://doi-org.ezproxy.rowan.edu/10.2340/00015555-2823

Background: Placebo effects are outcomes that positively affect the patient even when it is known they are taking a placebo in the form of an inert substance. “This proof-of-principle study investigated for the first time whether open-label placebo effects on itch can be induced by verbal suggestions alone. Ninety-two healthy volunteers were randomized to experimental (open-label suggestions) or control (no suggestions) groups.”

How I Used It: The link only provided me with an abstract of the report, but it was enough for me to put in my essay that even open-label placebo verbal treatment can give better results than a control group that received no verbal suggestions.

8. Miller, F. G., Wendler, D., & Swartzman, L. C. (2005). “Deception in Research on the Placebo Effect.” PLoS Medicine, 2(9), 853–859. https://doi-org.ezproxy.rowan.edu/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020262

Background: There are many mechanisms on how to go about a placebo treatment. The most positive one in patients is the one referred to as “response expectancies.”
Brain imaging techniques are being used to reveal the neurophysiological part of these expectations and the different mechanisms underlying placebo effects in many ways that depend on each individual. A National Institutes of Health requested applications that stated, “understanding how to enhance the therapeutic benefits of placebo effect in clinical practice has the potential to significantly improve healthcare.” 

How I Used It: The article had many points about how the placebo works most effectively when patients expect an improvement out of the treatment. It supported my point about the effectiveness of a placebo.

9. Schaefer, M., Sahin, T., & Berstecher, B. (2018). “Why do open-label placebos work? A randomized controlled trial of an open-label placebo induction with and without extended information about the placebo effect in allergic rhinitis.” PLoS ONE, 13(3), 1–14. https://doi-org.ezproxy.rowan.edu/10.1371/journal.pone.0192758

Background: According to many studies, the placebo treatment influences the improvement of several symptoms. In some cases that we typically see, the use of deception is necessary for the placebo to work, but in recent studies, there was evidence that showed the positive results of open-label placebos. In the trial of the symptoms in allergic rhinitis, the results revealed that open-label placebos improved the allergic symptoms more than the control group that received nothing at all. The optimistic point of view on placebos may not improve the results of open-label treatments, but instead improve the quality of your mental capacity and life health.

How I Used It: Open-label placebos are what makes my essay counterintuitive. This article gives me more evidence that open-label placebos have positive results. I barely used the actual trial, and used more of the results of the trial since that is the most important part because it shows that effect of the placebo effect.

10. Shapiro, A. K., M.D. (2018, April 30). “Factors Contributing to the Placebo Effect.” Retrieved from https://psychotherapy.psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.1964.18.s1.73

Background: Psychological factors were of importance back then and even now in the practice of medicine. Physicians relied on the psychological results from the patient, which drove them to try new types of treatments. The placebo treatment dates all the way back to the writings of Hippocrates and Galen. Medical treatment back then was unscientific and sometimes dangerous, but somehow these treatments seem to give positive results. Today, we now know that the effectiveness of these procedures and treatments were the cause of psychological factors.

How I Used It: I used the small section of the paper about the history of the placebo effect, and how it came to be such a commonly used treatment.

Posted in Bibliography, Portfolio RowanStudent, rowanstudent | Leave a comment

Reflective-Jets1313

Posted on April 29, 2019 by jets1313

Core Value 1. My work demonstrates that I used a variety of social and interactive practices that involve recursive stages of exploration, discovery, conceptualization, and development.

I would say that over time in this class, my writing has improved. I have learned how to properly support my claims and how to research topics that will ultimately help my thesis. Another lesson I have learned is that my opinion isn’t always right and that there are probably a lot of ways my claims can be denounced. I have found that it is extremely important to explore other peoples opinions even if they disprove yours. A work of mine that proves this is my “Rebuttal”assignment because it shows reasons why my thesis is wrong. This research that I did to find counterarguments helped me to find more ways to protect my thesis and opinion from being ruptured and collapsing. Meetings with not only my professor but other students helped immensely to stay on track and complete assignments to the best of my ability. The entirety of the blog we use is a means of social interaction. It allowed my professor to give me feedback virtually instantly, it provided me with resources from other authors, it allowed to see and evaluate the work of other students, and most importantly it helped to develop my skills in both reading and writing.

Core Value 2. My work demonstrates that I read critically, and that I placed texts into conversation with one another to create meaning by synthesizing ideas from various discourse communities. 

Gathering and deeply analyzing sources provided me with a multitude of quotes that I utilized to support and further my claim. After thoroughly examining each individual source I interpreted the information and included it into my white paper. Allowing me to fully and clearly understand the text. Not only did the strategy of critical reading make it much easier to translate quotes into elements such as my research paper but it helped me to develop a new way to look at and understand other authors work, a deeper and more constructive way in which helped me to formulate my own ideas or hypothesis. I believe that my “White paper” is a great example of core value 2 because it shows the sources and research I did to help me along the way.

Core Value 3. My work demonstrates that I rhetorically analyzed the purpose, audience, and contexts of my own writing and other texts and visual arguments.

By researching other peoples ideas on the same subject as my own, I am able to see other perspectives and how I can strengthen my claim. I am able to provide solid textual evidence that explains that while I am aware of other peoples positions on the matter, I can fully and knowledgeably support my claim. I believe in my “Research” assignment I was able to show how I am capable of seamlessly using several texts to help the reader visualize my meaning. I believe in this assignment I was able to analyze different theories and ultimately support mine and expunge the rest.

Core Value 4: My work demonstrates that I have met the expectations of academic writing by locating, evaluating, and incorporating illustrations and evidence to support my own ideas and interpretations.

I feel that I am properly able to evaluate works, including ones we have analyzed in class. I am able to use evidence in a way that will not only support my claims and opinions but will also disprove others. I also feel that I am able to visualize and understand works that are not written as we were assigned to do in the “Visual Rhetoric” assignment. I feel as though this is a great example of being able to evaluate scenarios that are not always textual or audible and make them understandable for a reader. Further, conducting my own research helped me broaden my knowledge on my topic making it much easier to formulate unique interpretations and understandings of the text and incorporate it into my research paper. I found it very useful to always keep in your mind your claim when reading other authors work to ensure that any quotes that I saw and and wanted to cite in my paper truly emphasized and supported my claim and left little space for argument. Also another strategy I utilized to ensure the quotes I incorporated where strong illustrations of my claim was to put all of the strongest quotes I found directly next to each other before adding them and evaluating to see if theses statements all uniquely supported my claim and was not redundant information.

Core Value 5. My work demonstrates that I respect my ethical responsibility to represent complex ideas fairly and to the sources of my information with appropriate citation. 

Consistency is very important when trying to accurately represent ideas and cite information. I think not only ethically but morally it is also my responsibility to have academic integrity when completing my assignments. I think my “White paper” is a great example of this core value. I did end up using all of the resources in my white paper and I believe that it was a great tool that helped me keep all of my sources in one place. Also, the white paper gave me a guide to properly represent my reasoning for their occupations in my final assignment since all of the sources each has a summary or what they should be used for. Further I ensured that I followed all guidelines provided me to when It came to citing. After all research paper can not be built with out utilizing the works of other authors, making it vital to always correctly cite and give credit to the findings of the authors work I constructively utilized.

Posted in jets, Portfolio Jets1313, Reflective | Leave a comment

Annotated Bibliography–Daphneblake

Posted on April 29, 2019 by daphneblake25

Shows, N. P. (2016, November 21). Home. Retrieved April 28, 2019, from https://earthwiseradio.org/2016/11/why-do-animals-eat-ocean-plastic/

Background: This website explains that due to the fact that around 8 million tons of trash enter the ocean every year, more and more sea animals are at risk from the damages of the plastic. The article begins by saying how scientists have known for years that animals eat plastic because it looks like food and it’s invading their home. But the site goes on to explain how to strong smell from the plastic can lure animals in as well.

How I used it: I used the website for a scientific study the article talked about. The study proved that sea animals eat plastic because it looks like food. This helped me make the point that to a hungry sea turtle, a floating plastic bag resembles a jellyfish.

US Department of Commerce, & National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2016, April 13). What are microplastics? Retrieved from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/microplastics.html

Background: This website is a small article on what microplastics are. It explains in detail how the research of microplastics is being conducted right now with different organizations such as the marine debris program.

How I used it: I literally just used this article for the of sentence at the beginning of my paper to define what microplastics are.

Causes and Effects of Ocean Pollution That Are Destroying Our Planet. (2019, April 09). Retrieved from https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/causes-and-effects-of-ocean-pollution.php

Background: This site was very descriptive with talking about what is ocean pollution and the different causes for it. So not only does it give the definition, but it names the 11 major causes for ocean pollution such as litter and sewage.

How I used it: I needed to list the causes of ocean pollution to explain how my hypothesis could work in fixing littering and this article assisted me with this.

Animals Eat Ocean Plastic Because it Smells Like Food. (2016, November 09). Retrieved April 28, 2019, from https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/11/animals-eat-ocean-plastic-because-of-smell-dms-algae-seabirds-fish/

Background: The National Geographic explained how sea animals not only eat the plastic that’s in the ocean because it looks like food, but they’re being lured in to eat it because it smells like food as well. The Algae that most seabirds eat gravitate to the broken down plastic and this leads the animals to eating it.

How I used it: I used this website because I wanted to further explain the detrimental effects that pollution has on the world. This new study reported by scientists shows that the effects of ocean pollution are deeper than we can see so it was very beneficial.

Schultz, P., & Reid, S. R. (2009). Executive summary: Litter in america 2009 national litter research findings and recommendations. Retrieved April 28, 2019, from https://www.kab.org/sites/default/files/News&Info_Research_LitterinAmerica_ExecutiveSummary_Final.pdf.

Background: This website was more of a research and data finding journal. It explained the research of two professors and how they observed and surveyed different people regarding their interactions with littering.

How I used it: I used the data collected from this research to show how humans littering has become a problem we can no longer handle because it’s so hard to regulate and control.

United Nations Environment Programme. (1970, January 01). Marine litter: Trash that kills. Retrieved March 31, 2019, fromhttps://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/9691

Background: This source focuses on  explaining how Marine litter is a vicious killer of marine mammals, seabirds and many other life forms in the marine and coastal environment. The source also explains how ocean pollution entails substantial economic costs and losses to, e.g., fisherman, boat owners in general, coastal communications, farmers, power stations and individuals.

How I used it: I used this website for the statistic that said 100.000 sea animals die a year from plastic in the ocean to make a claim in my research paper about how polluting the ocean affects the economy because it decreases the sea food and fishing market.

Fox, B. (n.d.). Sustainable Seafood. Retrieved April 4, 2019, fromhttps://www.worldwildlife.org/industries/sustainable-seafood

Background: World Wildlife is a website that advocates for the safety and cleanliness of the fishing industry based on the numerous amount of the population that relies on the sea food market. It goes into detail about farms and how they ensure nothing such as pesticides or diseases make it into the fish people eat every day.

How I used it: I used this source for the statistic that states that “Approximately three billion people in the world rely on both wild-caught and farmed seafood as their primary source of protein.” I used this stat because it helped me prove the point that sea life such as fish is a very important source of income for the world so ocean pollution would cost the economy to take a hit.

N. (2017, May 9). U.S. fishing generated more than $200B in sales in 2015, two stocks rebuilt in 2016. Retrieved April 4, 2019, from https://www.noaa.gov/media-release/us-fishing-generated-more-than-200b-in-sales-in-2015-two-stocks-rebuilt-in-2016

Background: I used the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for a lot of my sources because their organization advocates for ocean safety and exemplifies the importance of it. This source in particular talks about the fishing industry and how essential it is to not only the U.S economy, but other countries such as Mexico. The main focus of this source is numbers. It talks about how much the fishing industry has brought in financially over the years and how that number is steadily growing as the fishing market expands.

How I used it: I used this source for the statistic, “U.S. commercial and recreational fishing generated $208 billion in sales, contributed $97 billion to the gross domestic product and supported 1.6 million full- and part-time jobs in 2015”. This was important to me because it shows how reliant America is on the fishing industry not just with supplying food but money to the economy as well. My point of how ocean pollution will eventually tear a hole in this system stands because of these statistics.

US Department of Commerce, & National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2008, October 08). How important is the ocean to our economy? Retrieved April 4, 2019, fromhttps://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oceaneconomy.html

Background:  This source by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is very short and just states some stats that further emphasis how important the ocean is to the economy.

How I used it: I used this source for the stat, “Tourism and recreation account for 72 percent of the ocean economy’s total employment and 31 percent of its GDP. Offshore mineral extraction accounts for another 43 percent of the ocean economy’s GDP.” I used this because I was making the point that ocean pollution will have negative effects on the economy based on recreation activities such as enjoying a day on the beach.

Parker, L. (2018, October 10). Beach clean-up study shows global scope of plastic pollution. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2018/10/greenpeace-beach-cleanup-report-highlights-ocean-plastic-problem/

Background: This source by the national geographic states how beach cleanups are beginning to not make a difference because of the massive amount that accumulates every day. The author emphasises how new trash inevitably appears in minutes as people try to clean it up.

How I used it: I used this source for the quote by Nicholas Mallos who is directs the Ocean Conservancy’s Trash Free Seas program. He states,”I have been on beaches in Hong Kong, Saint Helena in the South Atlantic, and Indonesia where you can watch plastics and debris in the barrel of each wave crash onto the beach. Literally, the trash starts getting replaced as soon as you pick it up”. I thought this quote from Mallos was important because it helped me make the point that the attraction for beaches would go down because of all the trash on the sand. This will ultimately affect the economy because of how much recreational activities such as the beach makes for the world.

Blog. (2014, March 24). Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://www.planetaid.org/blog/how-ocean-pollution-affects-humans

Background: This source by Planet Aid is focusing on how ocean pollution directly impacts humans. The information used basically describes how humans are causing their own destruction. They state how the toxic chemicals and oils that are in the ocean definitely affect the fish because they’re swimming around in it. But now those fish are plucked from the ocean and put on our plates. This shows how ocean pollution affects more than jst sea life, but the economy, and the human race itself.

How I used it: I used this source for the stat that states, “the ocean “provides over 70 percent of the oxygen we breathe and over 97 percent of the world’s water supply”. This stat was important to me because it showed how we are so reliant on the ocean’s resources to us, yet we voluntarily pollute, knowing the results will go back to us in the end.

US Department of Commerce, & National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2008, October 08). What is the biggest source of pollution in the ocean? Retrieved March 31, 2019, from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/pollution.html

Background: The National Ocean Service explains in this source how ocean pollution starts way before it reaches the ocean. It states how cars and other vehicles drop oils and chemicals onto the beach through roads and parking lots that eventually find their way into the sea.

How I used it: I used this source because it stated, ““Eighty percent of pollution to the marine environment comes from the land”. This stat was important because I said in my paper that humans are the cause of their own destruction and that’s because we put the most trash in the ocean and we benefit from the ocean the second most after the sea animals that live in it.

Ell, K. (2018, July 10). Paper straws cost ‘may be 10 times’ more than plastic straws, says paper straw distributor. Retrieved March 31, 2019, from https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/09/paper-straws-are-better-for-the-environment-but-they-will-cost-you.html

Background: The CNBC news network reports on the damages of plastic straws versus paper straws. They state how harmful the plastic straws are to the environment because of how it affects the ocean, but how it’s cheaper so that’s why companies mass produce them instead of paper straws that are a little more costly but safer for the environment.

How I used it: I used this source because of their information that said, “it only cost half a cent to produce each straw, but it cost 2½ cents to make paper straws which are safer for the environment.” This proves to me how we’re moving backwards as a society with the things we care about and choose to spend money on. Producing paper straws would be safer but it something that would help the world is viewed as too expensive but to expand tech companies which produces more pollution is always getting more money poured into them.

Langone, A. (2018, July 23). No One Knew How Many Plastic Straws Americans Use Every Day. Then a 9-Year-Old Kid Did the Math. Retrieved March 31, 2019, fromhttp://money.com/money/5343736/how-many-plastic-straws-used-every-day/

Background: This source was from Money Magazine and it was based on a project done by a nine year old boy who found out the number of straws used in America a day. The answer he estimated was around 5oo million. The rest of the article is spreading awareness to stop this from expanding into larger numbers.

How I used it: I used this source to show how 500 million straws are being used  day and we have to stop mass producing them because most likely they all end up in the ocean or on land fills. But the response to the 500 million straws a day was very negative. Some people said it wa too low of a number to even worry about the problem. I asked  in my paper what number has to be high enough for people to take action to help the environment,

Klein, A., & ENVIRONMENT. (2018, August 10). New Zealand becomes the latest country to ban plastic bags. Retrieved March 31, 2019, fromhttps://www.newscientist.com/article/2176417-new-zealand-becomes-the-latest-country-to-ban-plastic-bags/

Background: The New Scientist news source focused on the plastic ban that many countries are putting into place as a response to ocean pollution. It goes into detail about New Zealand that began this ban recently in 2007. They pushed to replace all plastic single use bags into reusable polyester bags that are safer for the environment.

How I used it: I used this source because it speaks on how some countries have seen the need for a change after realizing what the effects of their actions are ricocheting back to them. My point was that if some people see the damages, why isn’t there more countries that are implementing this ban on plastic bags as well.  

Posted in Bibliography, daphneblake, Portfolio DaphneBlake | Leave a comment

Reflective- yourfavoriteanon

Posted on April 28, 2019 by yourfavoriteanon

Self-reflective Statement

Core Value 1. My work demonstrates that I used a variety of social and interactive practices that involve recursive stages of exploration, discovery, conceptualization, and development.

When writing about video games’ causes and effects made me think deep into the roots of what they consist of. I play video games often but for the sake of my paper, I played to study the effects I received from them and the interactions I made in the game to develop. Being able to receive feedback for each assignment boosted my confidences on how they could turn out and what I needed to focus on. Knowing other people’s opinions help see the other side of writing and engages the author to grow as a writer. After having my friend read my causal argument and show me tips, I was able to adjust it and then was able to get my professor’s feedback to further better my paper.

Core Value 2. My work demonstrates that I read critically, and that I placed texts into conversation with one another to create meaning by synthesizing ideas from various discourse communities. 

Having another voice to help an argument or conflict is always a big deal. Being able to have a source that understands the argument and reinforces it is super important in writing. Showing results of an experiment in my definition argument helped me reinforce my understanding of core value 2. The two sources used are important in reinforcing my argument by adding other community’s educated findings and results. Transitioning into another sources quote shows the importance of critical reading. Being able to explain a quote and what it means to my writing helped me through getting my point across in my writing to help the reader understand what I say. Weaving my ideas with another wasn’t easy but once synthesized, the execution was satisfying to show the effect of my research. 

Core Value 3. My work demonstrates that I rhetorically analyzed the purpose, audience, and contexts of my own writing and other texts and visual arguments.

Addressing the opposing sides is another important aspect in research. The opposing side shows important points that the writer needs to be able to rebut on. In my rebuttal argument, I was able to effectively address a strong opponent in my research by providing evidence against it. I also addressed my audience and what they might feel about video games as a whole. Writing the rebuttal was difficult because I had to analyze all the variables that would be able to counter my argument but reviewing rhetoric and my own evidence helped me think about what my true purpose was for this research. Core value 3 was a little tough understanding until I was able to find it in my own writing and then I could make connections.

Core Value 4: My work demonstrates that I have met the expectations of academic writing by locating, evaluating, and incorporating illustrations and evidence to support my own ideas and interpretations.

Core value 4 is all about using sources effectively making sure there is enough included to support an argument. I thought the causal argument was the most important because it explained the effects of the argument and how it all works. For the causal argument, I wanted to make sure my sources effectively supported my ideas in a way that was easy to understand. Video games seems like a simple concept to talk about but there are various factors to account for when explaining how they help. Having to explain and back up that the positive results aren’t immediate proved difficult, but I can connect it with core value 4. Anybody can input random scholar writing but not everyone can transition it with their own writing for a clear argument. I used other author’s writing to back up my ideas but also reinforced theirs.

Core Value 5. My work demonstrates that I respect my ethical responsibility to represent complex ideas fairly and to the sources of my information with appropriate citation. 

Credit for writing is important because it shows that not just anyone scribbled up some piece of writing. Having an appropriate citation isn’t just required for plagiarism but it shows that I am able to incorporate other people’s ideas and I can give the right credit to them for it. It can be seen as a “thank you” to the author for their contribution to your argument. In another way, depending on how the info is used, it could also be seen as an addition to the author’s original writing as a sequel of some sort. It is also important to address ideas in a respectful manner to keep it scholarly. Rebutting the opposition in my rebuttal argument was in respect of me understanding their side of the argument but disproving it through evidence. This evidence was correctly cited also in respect to the original author for appropriate use.

Posted in Portfolio YourFavoriteAnon, Reflective, yourfavoriteanon | Leave a comment

Annotated Bibliography- NYAJ32

Posted on April 28, 2019 by nyaj32

1) Burg, R. V. (n.d.). Yearning for a Past that Never Was: Baseball, Steroids, and the Anxiety of the American Dream. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15295030903176641

Background: Mark McGwire is the perfect example as someone who cheated their way to success. He is also a perfect example of someone who saved baseball. If it were not for Mark McGwire nd other players in his generation, baseball may not be what it is today. Baseball wasd taking a downfall and players taking Steroids Like Mark McGwire are the reason people started watching the games again. They brought a tremendous amount of excitement to the ballpark every day,

How I used it: I used this information to prove to people that Steroids at the time were not bad for baseball. If anything, steroids saved the game of baseball from going bankrupt and losing all of its fans. The sport would have most likely rolled under.

2) Mather, Victor. “Joe Morgan: Keep Steroid Users Out of Baseball Hall of Fame.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 21 Nov. 2017, http://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/21/sports/baseball/joe-morgan-hall-of-fame-steroids.html.

Background: In this article, Joe Morgan is being interviewed on his opinions of possibly allowing known steroid users into the baseball hall of fame. He expresses how it would be very unfair to let them into the hall because other people who did not cheat their way to success are more deserving. He feels it would be a disgrace to the game to allow known steroid users into the hall of fame.

How I used it: It turned this article around and used it to my advantage. What Joe Morgan does not say in his interview is that there are already many known cheaters in the bsaseball hall of fame. Even Hank Aaron used a form of PED’s while he was playing and Hank Aaron says that everyone was using them during his time as well. Joe Morgan did not say any of that.

3) Nightengale, B. (2018, January 22). Nightengale: It’s past time for Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens to earn Hall of Fame induction. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/columnist/bob-nightengale/2018/01/22/barry-bonds-roger-clemens-hall-fame-steroids/1053787001/

Background: In this article the author, Bob Nightengale, describes why he believes players like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens should already be in the baseball hall of fame. He gives points like “Other players who are not clean are already in the hall of fame.” He feels that if it is already not clean then what exactly is the point in keeping out other guys who have done the same thing and made the same mistakes.

How I used it: I essentially used this source to back up my own opinions and facts stated previously. I already say earlier in the paper that the hall of fame is not currently clean so there is no point in keeping out other players who are not clean either. I used this article to reiterate exactly what I was saying just as another way to prove my point.

4) (n.d.). Retrieved from https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2005-05-03-steroids-house_x.htm

Background: Hank Aaron is considered one of the greatest baseball players of all time. He is in the hall of fame because of everything he has accomplished throughout his career and for the amazing job he did on the baseball field. THere is one thing many people do not know about Hank Aaron. He used a form of PED’s called greenies. He came out and said he used them and said that all hitters and catchers were using them and trying to find better ones than each other. Everyone was trying to get an advantage over one another by using this form of performance enhancing drugs.

How I used it: This article, although not one of the more scholarly sources that I have, is a huge part of my argument. I have a lot of article that say that steroid users should not be in the hall of fame and I immediately contradict them with this article. People that think steroid users should not be in most likely think that because those players are considered cheaters foer using PED’s. Well Greenies are also a form of PED’s and there was a time period where almost every single player in the league used them at the same time, according to Hank Aaron. Even he used them; one of the most respected baseball players ever.

5) Kelly, C. (2017, November 21). How should the Baseball Hall of Fame be dealing with PED users? Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/baseball/how-should-baseballs-hall-of-fame-be-dealing-with-ped-users/article37043700/

Background: This article circles back around to Joe Morgan. Morgan was describing what he feels should and should not be allowed. That is the specific part of this article that I used in my paper. He gave a specific criteria for what should not be allowed. That criteria is, “Players who failed drug tests, admitted using steroids, or were identified as users in the Major League Baseball’s investigation into steroid abuse, known as the Mitchell Report, should not get in [to the Hall of Fame],” Morgan writes. “Those are the three criteria that many players and I think are right.”

How I used it: I was able to take this information and ask my audience new questions that follow up what Joe Morgan had said. I asked, “If that is the exact criteria then what about players who used PED’s and never got caught. What if those players who never got caught suddenly do get caught and everyone finds out that a huge portion of the hall of fame are a bunch of cheaters? You can not just kick them out of the hall of fame. You could allow other known users instead.

6) Young, W. A., Holland, W. S., & Weckman, G. R. (2013, April 02). Determining Hall of Fame Status for Major League Baseball Using an Artificial Neural Network. Retrieved from https://www.degruyter.com/dg/viewarticle/j$002fjqas.2008.4.4$002fjqas.2008.4.4.1131$002fjqas.2008.4.4.1131.xml

Background: The main gist of this article goes with the saying, “if you’re good enough, then you’re good enough. The article explains how there has always been a lack of research of what kind of statistics certain players need to be able to make their way into the national baseball hall of fame. Based on career statistics you can be awarded by being elected into the hall that everyone desires to be apart of.

How I used it: using this article was a great way for me to establish a base point of what should and should be in the hall of fame and what is considered hall of fame worthy. Then I took that information and made the argument of the accomplishments. If a player accomplished feats that not many people do, they should be recognized for it by being in the baseball hall of fame regardless of if they used PED’s. Otherwise it’s almost as if it was never done if it was never recognized by the public.

7) Smith, C. (2012). Why It’s time to Legalize Steroids in Professional Sports. 1-2. Retrieved April 28, 2019.

Background: To begin, this article is not only focused on baseball. It is focusing on many sports and the usage of steroids in all of them. The article describes why steroids are not all that bad for sports and why they can actually be beneficial. For starters, steroids did basically save baseball in the 70’s. If it were not for steroids, baseball could have crumbled a long time ago. It also makes the game much more exciting because players can put up really big numbers and get the fans interested.

How I used it: I used this article to wrap up my point in my paper. This article sums up a lot of what I covered in my paper and it really backs up a lot of what I had to say throughout and as a whole.

8) Hart, A. (n.d.). Barry Bonds and the National Baseball Hall of Fame. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/swulr40&id=178&men_tab=srchresults

Background: The article shown above in an excellent representation of why guys like Barry Bonds will most likely enter the baseball hall of fame soon. Towards the end of the article, the author describes how the commissioner of baseball has not placed Barry Bonds on the eligible list and it does not look like he will anytime soon. This means that he may be okay with allowing known PED users like him into the hall of fame.

How I used it: I took this information and used it to benefit my case. The fact that the commissioner of baseball knows that he can place Bonds on the ineligible list and still has not really means something. This article was written in 2012 and it is now 2019. Bonds has still not been placed on the ineligible list.

9) Grossman, M., Kimsey, T., Moreen, J., & Owings, M. (n.d.). Steroids and Major League Baseball. Steroids and Major League Baseball,1-21. Retrieved April 28, 2019.

Background: This last source is an overview of steroids in major league baseball. This article has everything you need to know about steroids in baseball today. It begins with how the league tests their players for performance enhancing drugs. Then it goes on to talk about all the differebt rules and punishments if you were to break any of those rules. Punishments may be getting worse in the future, though.

How I used it: I mainly used this source to provide basic facts about steroids and how even though they are not allowed in baseball that there are currently players in the hall of fame that utilized them and there is no punishment for them so why should there be punishment for other people.

Posted in Bibliography, NYAJ32, Portfolio NYAJ | Leave a comment

Research–Daphneblake

Posted on April 28, 2019 by daphneblake25

Pollution Should Never be the Price of Prosperity

The Webster definition of ocean pollution is, “the presence in or introduction into the ocean of a substance or thing that has harmful or poisonous effects”, but the damage it does to the economy, and sea life and how it trickles down from one person to the ocean expands way past the page. The detrimental effects of ocean pollution and the various ways it impacts the world can be interpreted by the image of a tree. We only see the beautiful, tall 70-foot tree, but that result takes an average of ten to thirty years to manifest itself in front of us. The same goes for ocean pollution. The floating island of trash along the northern region of the pacific ocean that’s now 600,000 square miles didn’t get that way over night. The effects of ocean pollution are created through a series of events that start really small. An individual single-use straw that gets discarded on the beach gets drawn into the ocean from the tides and stuck in a little sea turtle’s nose, or gets broken down into microplastics that are consumed by larger fish, damaging sea life which in turn hurts the sea food market and a source of food to humans. This is a representation of what ocean pollution really is how prominent the issue is in our societies and communities.

A scientific study from “Earthwise” proved that sea animals eat plastic because it looks like food. To a hungry sea turtle, a floating plastic bag resembles a jellyfish. And while it is easier to pick out the larger plastics on a beach cleanup, the ones you can see aren’t the most harmful. The ocean pollution that does the most damage are the ones too small for us to see. OceanService.noaa.gov” states; “Plastic debris can come in all shapes and sizes, but those that are less than five millimeters in length (or about the size of a sesame seed) are called “microplastics.” These are the most harmful because it lures sea animals in without them knowing. According to the “National Geographic”,  animals eat ocean plastic because it smells like food. This is because as plastic breaks down into the ocean, Algae, (a primary food source for many sea birds) begin to accumulate on it. Then the animals are led into a horrifying trap because they’re consuming the plastic along with the Algae and it’s ultimately killing them. This is a large contribution to the reduction of sea life and shows that ocean pollution is more harmful than the eye can even detect.

The factors that cause microplastics vary, but each one contributes to the issue significantly in different ways. The most common one is the human contribution. This aspect includes the plastic and other recyclable material found on beaches, riverbanks, or anywhere near large bodies of water. The human contribution to ocean pollution is the hardest to end because it’s the hardest to control. Research found by “Keep America Beautiful” reported that people litter on the beach every 12 paces. Based on an observation that they did, their findings proved that out of 1069 people, 43% said they littered for lack of trash cans. A possible solution would be to put a trash can every 12 paces, but then it spreads to large corporations dumping toxic chemicals into oceans. This is something that’s done regularly without any oversight or checks. Ocean pollution should be reported about on a higher level because so many people contribute to it without even realizing it. For instance, not recycling plastics, papers, and metals contributes to ocean pollution because regular things in the trash either gets dumped in junkyards on land or floating islands of trash in the ocean. By using material that gets broken down into microplastics is making an impact because we all know where it’s going to end up, but this may not be a problem solved at the general public level since it’s a flawed system embedded in our way of living. My solution to this incident would be to use edible straws to shave a portion of plastic from the ocean. I believe that the production and mandatory use of edible straws would decrease the plastic waste from single use plastic straws that gets broken down into microplastics in the ocean which would reduce ocean pollution. “Conserve Energy Future” lists all the causes of ocean pollution. They include: sewage, which enters the ocean directly, toxic chemicals from Industries, Land Runoff, Large Scale Oil Spills, Ocean Mining, and Littering. Making the effort to replace the plastic to something we know would be disposed of without harming the ocean is a help to the issue because all of the listed factors contain human interference, but the human participation for the advocacy of the depolluting of oceans is very minimal.

Many people believe that it’s not their fault regarding ocean pollution, or any because they’re not intentionally throwing trash and plastic on the floor with the intent to harm the environment or sea life. But as aforementioned, even using plastic is contributing because it’s a material that never breaks down completely and most of its remains end up in the ocean or in junk yards. Also, not advocating against ocean pollution is a form of contributing to it as well because if there aren’t people trying to make a difference and show actual concern for the environment, no changes are going to be accomplished. Another reason for not recycling is always the cost. The cost and time refurbishing used material is too expensive and there is little to no profit in it for clear plastic material. But the cost for a building a new planet is definitely more expensive and time consuming than recycling. So ocean pollution is a combination of a variety of factors. It initiates at the individual level, but other factors such as oil spills and toxic chemical dumps from large companies makes a lot of damage in a little bit of time. Ocean pollution can be defined as anything placed in the ocean environment that is considered harmful, but unpacked, it means so much and is encompassed with many aspects and levels that aren’t always taken into consideration when evaluating ocean pollution.

To expand on the issue, the negative effects even span out to the economy. The first image that enters the mind at the thought of the phrase “ocean pollution” probably isn’t a destroyed economy, but that’s exactly what the result will be. Everyday, millions of people litter the ground with plastic, paper, and metals that get transferred into the ocean or into massive areas of land. This process is what ultimately will lead to a destroyed economy. As previously stated, microplastics are a huge cause of the reduction of sea life because it’s harder to detect by sea animals and its interrupting the cycle of the way animals eat. The “United Nations Environment Programme” reported that “Over 1 million seabirds and 100,000 sea mammals are killed by pollution every year. This decreased population of sea life will ultimately cause the economy to take a hard hit. Due to the fact that the material of plastic doesn’t ever fully break down back into the earth, microplastics become difficult to see, especially for hungry fish searching for something to eat. These fish that intake the pollution in the ocean get eaten by bigger fish and when these sea animals wash up on land, they have things like bottle caps and straws inside them that never fully got digested into their systems.

Seafood is a huge part of the global food economy whose future is threatened by the devastation caused by plastic pollution. According to Worldwildlife, “Approximately three billion people in the world rely on both wild-caught and farmed seafood as their primary source of protein. As the largest traded food commodity in the world, seafood provides sustenance to billions of people worldwide.” There aren’t going to be anymore people consuming seafood if all the sea animals are either dead from ocean pollution or have hundreds of bits of plastic inside them. Ocean pollution serves as a direct hit to the seafood market which in turn hurts the economy due to the fact that all those people who were once redistributing their money into society will decrease because the seafood market will not exist anymore. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration states the extreme benefits that the fishing industry give to the economy. Not only did it generate over two-hundred billion dollars in sales, but it also creates 1.6 billion jobs. Without the fishing industry, not only will this be detrimental in economic matters, but the total unemployment line will increase. Both money and jobs will be lost. And these factors are at stake from the steady rise in ocean pollution.

The seafood market is an example of a direct correlation to how detrimental ocean pollution can be on the economy, but there are other examples that aren’t as blatant. The beach market is also a huge contributor to the economy. The beach is one of the most desired locations for vacations. The endless stretch of sand, the beautiful vast and relaxing waves, and the feeling of excitement and satisfaction as the two come together before one’s very own eyes. These year long dreams will be slowly diminished if ocean pollution stays at a steady increase. The National Geographic reports that “Every year, tens of thousands of people worldwide volunteer for the Sisyphean chore of picking up trash from beaches. The largest effort is conducted every September by the Ocean Conservancy, which in 30 years of cleanups has collected 300 million pounds and more than 350 types of items.” They go on to quote Nicholas Mallos, the leader of these cleanups who says, “I have been on beaches in Hong Kong, Saint Helena in the South Atlantic, and Indonesia where you can watch plastics and debris in the barrel of each wave crash onto the beach. Literally, the trash starts getting replaced as soon as you pick it up.” The attraction for beaches is to escape reality and relax, but who can relax when the reality of the world’s ecological problem of ocean pollution is waiting for you at every beach? According to the U.S Census Bureau’s Statistical Abstract of the United States 2012, Table 1240, 58.67 million people went to the beach in 2010. These numbers are going to drastically drop after the beaches become so filled with plastic that no one wants to visit them anymore. Again, the question may arise of how this affects the economy, well, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration points out how Tourism and recreation account for 72 percent of the ocean economy’s total employment and 31 percent of its GDP. These numbers prove how ocean pollution causes various harsh results for our world economically.

The beach and the seafood market both contribute greatly to the economy, but what about the costs of ocean pollution that the world may not have to pay right now, but in the future. Based on the current state of our planet, the future of mankind is at state, all due to ocean pollution. Planetaid.org presents the information that the ocean “provides over 70 percent of the oxygen we breathe and over 97 percent of the world’s water supply.” But everyday the ocean is the unfortunate recipient of manmade pollution. The world is essentially destroying itself. Because of the road us humans are going down now, there are going to be a plethora of environmental costs the world is going to try to fix when it becomes close to too late. There are a lot of things humans hold as significant to life. People say tangible objects such as technology and clothes are essential to living, but when we don’t have a planet to live on, we’re really going to be in deep water. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimates how much it will cost to clean the oceans. They state that “At a cost of $5,000-20,000 per day, it would cost between $122 million and $489 million for the year. That’s a lot of money—and that’s only for boat time. It doesn’t include equipment or labor costs.” But that’s just the cost of it today, who knows the estimated costs in the future if people continue to pollute the ocean. Ocean pollution is a direct causal problem to a destroyed economy, from seafood to beaches to future repairs. This is a serious detriment to the world’s finances, recreation, and most importantly, to our lives.

The constant barrier that remains in the way between ocean pollution and its solution is the cost factor. The fact that the world is so consistently worried about how much it will cost to keep oceans clean is the main reason why it’s not a work in progress at the moment. It’s similar to when one puts off an essay because of how much time it will take as the deadline approaches. The problem never goes away. In fact, it becomes more prominent and continues to manifest as the time spent procrastinating it is extended. The problem with ocean pollution is never going to disperse on its own; human intervention is needed and costly drastic measures need to be taken to ensure the problem doesn’t reach a point where even money can’t solve it. My hypothesis of creating edible straws is a step in the right direction of reducing the amount of plastic that enters into the ocean. The drawbacks include the cost and time it would take to make them, but the fact that there needs to be a breakthrough in solving ocean pollution denounces those claims.

The relationship between the world in the environment is one of negligence and ignorance. We as a community disregard the necessity of a healthy and well nurtured area for us to inhabit. The American philosopher and ecologist Aldo Leopold once said, “We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it for love and respect.” The initial steps in living up to Leopold’s words is giving up the ideology that fixing the problem is too much money. That isn’t a solution and it only works in setting the earth deeper and deeper into a polluted black hole. To begin, taking small steps is a way to try to help the situation. Littering has a huge impact on ocean pollution. According to the National Ocean Service, “Eighty percent of pollution to the marine environment comes from the land.” This trash on land travels to the ocean in rainstorms which ultimately creates ocean pollution. Not littering, especially at beaches, will be a massive help and it literally costs nothing but maybe a longer walk to throw something away or recycle. So, the idea that cleaning the oceans is a massively expensive task is not true at all, taking small steps is one way to make an impact, however small, to removing pollution from the oceans.

Small individual tasks such as not littering, picking up trash, and recycling are ways to pave the way for a solution, other methods the world can take to ensure safer and cleaner oceans is by governments around the world using other material besides plastic to create necessary items. Items such as straws and water bottles are made with plastic because it’s cheaper to make and producers know people are only going to use these things once. Making objects like bags and silverware only in metal and creating a culture of reusing things is a step the government can take to prevent the huge amounts of plastic that flood the oceans each year. Based on research reported by CNBC news, it only cost half a cent to produce each straw, but it cost 2½ cents to make paper straws which are safer for the environment. Why hasn’t the world switched over yet? Because “it’s too expensive.” A young nine-year-old boy engaged in an environmental project where he calculated how many plastic straws Americans use a day. His estimates were around 500 million a day. Some people have even declared that number is “too low”, (Money magazine, 2018). What number has to be “too high for the world to open their eyes and acknowledge the problem we face today with the large amounts of plastic in the ocean?

Bangladesh already stepped on the path of reducing ocean pollution in 2007 by banning plastic bags. New Zealand has followed suite and banned them as well. The “New Scientist” newsletter reports that the Prime Minister of New Zealand states, “New Zealand currently uses over 750 million single-use plastic bags per year, which is equivalent to about 150 per person. “A mountain of bags, many of which end up polluting our precious coastal and marine environments and cause serious harm to all kinds of marine life.” While this switch from plastic to more recyclable material is costly, counties such as New Zealand and Bangladesh recognize the immediate need to reduce the amount of plastic in the ocean. Small individual steps and bigger governmental intervention can help out the situation in numerous ways regardless of the cost. The cost of not having a sustainable planet to live on is even higher than any efforts to solve the problem can ever be.

There are various production companies that are against reducing ocean pollution and the steps that have to be taken to reach that point. This is because they benefit from making cheap single-use plastic items. But the world can’t ignore the problem much longer. Not only is ocean pollution wrong, it literally effects the whole world. The economic downfalls for one are clearly evident. The decrease in sea life will cause the fish and seafood market to plummet. But the future costs from ocean pollution are the most appalling. Right now, the United Nations Environment Programme estimate that the “price tag on the environmental damage done by the millions of tons of plastic floating around the world’s oceans: $13 billion a year.” If the environmental cost is thirteen billion dollars right now, the future costs will be nothing but higher. If we keep complaining about the issue and not acting on the current problems at hand, we’ll just be bystanders to the self-destruction of our earth. The change starts within, we can start small and work our way up. Efforts as small as not littering, beach cleanups, and governmental interventions similar to Bangladesh and New Zealand are all ways the world can get involved, the cost shouldn’t be the determining factor for our decision to save our earth.

References

Liittschwager, D., & Liittschwager, D. (2019, January 18). Jellyfish are the ‘snack food’ of the sea-and that’s a good thing. Retrieved March 11, 2019, from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/2019/01/many-ocean-creatures-surprisingly-eat-jellyfish/

US Department of Commerce, & National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2016, April 13). What are microplastics? Retrieved from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/microplastics.html

Causes and Effects of Ocean Pollution That Are Destroying Our Planet. (2019, April 09). Retrieved from https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/causes-and-effects-of-ocean-pollution.php

Shows, N. P. (2016, November 21). Home. Retrieved April 28, 2019, from https://earthwiseradio.org/2016/11/why-do-animals-eat-ocean-plastic/

Animals Eat Ocean Plastic Because it Smells Like Food. (2016, November 09). Retrieved April 28, 2019, from https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/11/animals-eat-ocean-plastic-because-of-smell-dms-algae-seabirds-fish/

Schultz, P., & Reid, S. R. (2009). Executive summary: Litter in america 2009 national litter research findings and recommendations. Retrieved April 28, 2019, from https://www.kab.org/sites/default/files/News&Info_Research_LitterinAmerica_ExecutiveSummary_Final.pdf.

United Nations Environment Programme. (1970, January 01). Marine litter: Trash that kills. Retrieved March 31, 2019, from https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/9691

Fox, B. (n.d.). Sustainable Seafood. Retrieved April 4, 2019, from https://www.worldwildlife.org/industries/sustainable-seafood

N. (2017, May 9). U.S. fishing generated more than $200B in sales in 2015, two stocks rebuilt in 2016. Retrieved April 4, 2019, from https://www.noaa.gov/media-release/us-fishing-generated-more-than-200b-in-sales-in-2015-two-stocks-rebuilt-in-2016

US Department of Commerce, & National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2008, October 08). How important is the ocean to our economy? Retrieved April 4, 2019, fromhttps://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oceaneconomy.html

Parker, L. (2018, October 10). Beach clean-up study shows global scope of plastic pollution. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2018/10/greenpeace-beach-cleanup-report-highlights-ocean-plastic-problem/

Blog. (2014, March 24). Retrieved March 25, 2019, from https://www.planetaid.org/blog/how-ocean-pollution-affects-humans

US Department of Commerce, & National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2008, October 08). What is the biggest source of pollution in the ocean? Retrieved March 31, 2019, from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/pollution.html

Ell, K. (2018, July 10). Paper straws cost ‘maybe 10 times’ more than plastic straws, says paper straw distributor. Retrieved March 31, 2019, from https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/09/paper-straws-are-better-for-the-environment-but-they-will-cost-you.html

Langone, A. (2018, July 23). No One Knew How Many Plastic Straws Americans Use Every Day. Then a 9-Year-Old Kid Did the Math. Retrieved March 31, 2019, from http://money.com/money/5343736/how-many-plastic-straws-used-every-day/

Klein, A., & ENVIRONMENT. (2018, August 10). New Zealand becomes the latest country to ban plastic bags. Retrieved March 31, 2019, from https://www.newscientist.com/article/2176417-new-zealand-becomes-the-latest-country-to-ban-plastic-bags/

United Nations Environment Programme. (1970, January 01). Marine litter: Trash that kills. Retrieved March 31, 2019, from https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/9691


Posted in daphneblake, Portfolio DaphneBlake, x Research Position Paper | Leave a comment