The rights of Americans have been the country’s most treasured pursuit. To able to live in such a free nation has put a lot pressure on the government to protect our life styles. Our values as Americans have made us a target for terror to instill disbelief in our liberty. However, as Americans we stand together against those who oppose our rights. When analyzing the events at San Bernardino we understand that those who disagree with our way of life use it to their advantage to pursue a reality that does not already surround them. The FBI has made a request with the department of justice that would alert the world of technology consumers. A request that requires Apple to access information on an iPhone used by a terrorist. This request has brought the question of private security verse public security to the public.

Yaozong Ma in his article “Apple’s Conundrum: The Immutability of Liberty vs. Security,” claims “A cornerstone of the FBI’s argument was the All Writs Act which allowed courts to “issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” Essentially, All Writs Act provides justification and authorization for courts to craft, enact, and implement orders which compel individuals to perform acts provided that reasoning is both necessary and legal. This shows that the FBI believes that they have the legal means to ask for assistance from a third party.

Craig Timberg and Greg Miller in their article “FBI blasts Apple, Google for locking police out of phones,” report the motives of FBI Director James B. Comey wanting Apple to comply with their request. Comey states that, “He could not understand why companies would market something expressly to allow people to place themselves beyond the law.” His reasoning is based on the assumption that apple only caters to the top percent of people who can afford their products. Protecting their private information is what made their company so great to their customers. He defends his stance on protecting the public; moreover it is such a hard stance he forgets that private privacy is just as important to the public. Apple has been known to sell the most exclusive hardware since the beginning of their company. Handling this situation can predict the future of the company.

Felix Wu in his article, “No Easy Answers in the Fight over iPhone decryption.” examples why the FBI’s request is undeserved of a warrant. He states, “Apple’s primary constitutional argument was that compelling its assistance would violate the First Amendment right to freedom of expression. The argument is seductively simple, almost syllogistic. Step one: courts have previously recognized computer code as a form of speech protected by the First Amendment. Step two: the Supreme Court has long held that the government can violate the First Amendment not only by restricting someone’s speech, but also by compelling someone to speak. Ergo, forcing Apple to write code that it did not want to write would be compelling it to speak, in violation of the First Amendment.” No company should be forced to be responsible for the fallout caused by their product. The company itself has no connection to the events that lead to the creation of the warranted evidence.

Rebecca Knight, in her article “National Security or Consumer Privacy, A Question even Siri couldn’t answer.” states several other reasons as to why Apple should not be involved with a FBI Investigation. She claims, “Apple’s argument was that Congress, not the courts, should determine when a third-party must be compelled to assist in investigations conducted by the government. Apple contended that if the technology that the Government wants were to be created, millions of people would be at risk of having their personal data hacked at no fault of their own but rather as a consequence of Farook’s act of terrorism.” Knight believes, “Legally, Apple argues that the Order had no statutory basis and violated the Constitution. First, Apple contended that its connection to the underlying case was too far removed to compel assistance.”  According to Apple, the technical assistance sought would be much more vast and complicated than simply pushing a few buttons, as the Government seemed to believe.  Apple argued that the Government did not demonstrate that Apple’s assistance was necessary to effectuate the warrant. Moreover, the Government made no showing of whether or not it sought or received technical assistance from other federal agencies with expertise in digital forensics, which could negate the need for Apple to create a backdoor into the iPhone. This lack of motivation allows Apple to devalue the FBI’s request for assistance. Next, Apple argued that compliance with the Order would violate the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Specifically, the Government asked the court to compel Apple to write new software that would eliminate safety features built into the iPhone in response to consumer. Knight continued by saying, “Apple contends that the Order amounted to compelled speech and viewpoint discrimination. Under established law, computer code is treated like speech within the meaning of the First Amendment. Thus, whenever the Government seeks to compel speech, the First Amendment is triggered. Compelled speech can only be upheld if it is narrowly tailored to obtain a compelling state interest. In this instance, the Government could not meet this high standard. Finally, Apple argued that investigating terrorism was a legitimate interest; the government only produced speculative evidence that Farook’s iPhone might contain relevant information. Without the right boundaries to connect Apple to investigation, complying with the FBI should to be a business transaction rather than a court order. However, Apple has no plans with allow the FBI to gain access to their encryption code. They wish to stand alone as an American company trying to protect the privacy of the American people.”

Work Cited

Yaozong Ma. “Apple’s Conundrum: The Immutability of Liberty vs. Security.” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Review | IJHSSR. 8 Oct 2016. Web. 8 Nov 2016. <http://www.ijhssrnet.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/2.pdf >.

Craig Timberg and Greg Miller. “FBI blasts Apple, Google for locking police out of phones.” Columbia Public Schools / Home. 25 Sep . Web. 8 Nov 2016. http://www.cpsk12.org/cms/lib8/MO01909752/Centricity/Domain/5012/FBI%20blasts%20Apple%20Google%20for%20locking%20police%20out%20of%20phones.pdf

Felix Wu. “Law and Technology No Easy Answers in the Fight Over iPhone Decryption .” Sep 2016. Web. 10 Nov 2016. http://static1.squarespace.com/static/52095f5de4b0bc18c96d1924/t/57d6075944024343d19e1fc5/1473644381121/Wu+-+2016+-+No+easy+answers+in+the+fight+over+iPhone+decryption%282%29.pdf&gt

Rebecca Knight. “National Security or Consumer Privacy? A Question Even Siri Couldn’t Answer.” University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications | University of Cincinnati College of Law Research. Sep 2016. Web. 10 Nov 2016. <http://scholarship.law.uc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=ipclj&gt;.

 

 

Poor, Poor Scientists

As innovation comes directly from the scientists, Scientists are put under massive amounts of pressure for publishing. This pressure to publish has directly resulted in the ever-growing publication rates that seeminlgy has no end. With this massive influx of studies, there is a large portion of studies that are partial truths due to many different biases that scientists are forced to work through, intentional or not. The reason why there is so much potential for bias is due to the fractured system that scientific studies are based off.

Due to the emphasis of quantity over quality, for both payments and value, scientists are morelenient to not publish the full potential of what studies could have achieved. As scientists are essentiallyforced to focus on the number of intriguing thesis they make instead of quality and accurate studies,more and more faulty studies start to accumulate. To combat this, replication tests are very valuable asthey attempt to retest the study exactly in order to test the study’s validity. These tests are essentially afail-safe, where another scientific group that is independent to the original does everything that thestudy did to see if it produces similar results. Erick Turner from the FDA spoke about the replication testsheld in 2008. The FDA retested 74 studies that proved the effectiveness of numerous FDA-registeredantidepressants. From the replication tests, they found that 23 of them did not even have evidence of publication, which left 51 studies to examine. It was reported that 48 of those 51 studies that were leftoriginally showed positive results, yet when the FDA concluded the replication studies they found thatonly 38 studies out of the original 74 had positive results, thus completely disproving studies that were now found to be selling ineffective antidepressants.

If such a test is so valuable to validate incorrect tests, then there should not be so many tests thatpeople can view where the study essentially publishes false claims. Sadly, these faulty studies are unlikely to be corrected as there is no incentive within the scientific community to replicate the tests. Even though the FDA made replication tests, the company is not a good representation of the entirety of the community as the FDA is a government funded organization whose primary focus is to regulate issues such as the biased studies. This is known as the replication crisis.

As noted before, scientists’ payment are incentivized to push the claims of whatever will help their career. If the scientists are able to sustain themselves using replication test, researchers would have used these replication tests. However, there is no monetary value for replication tests so scientists avoid the very test that helps counteract faulty claims. As scientists are only human and will tend to prioritize their own living for the expense of integrity, they are forced to push plentiful theses for money and do not focus on retesting as there is no monetary value for validating what someone has already stated. This phenomenon essentially eliminates the fail-safe that is made to get rid of the faulty studies, which means that the number of studies that are essentially inaccurate are going to steadily increase with little resistance.

This phenomenon is very detrimental for the future of science. In the article, “Pressure to ‘Publish or

Perish’ May Discourage Innovative Research, UCLA Study Suggests,” author Phil Hampton discusses a study lead by Jacob Foster that measures the risks and innovation studies take and the implications that it makes. Foster found in biomedicine and chemistry that more than sixty percent of the studies that were analyzed showed no new connections. This essentially means that innovation is slowly grinding to a halt due to the flawed system. As scientists are fixated with their publications to make a steady income, they must push whatever will allow the safest income. Even though going with the more innovative idea may result in a breakthrough that will net massive amounts of revenue from publication, there is an even greater chance that the study will not result in a positive study, which would not be beneficial to the scientist. This risk versus reward scenario causes scientists to then make a choice on what they value more. There, the non-innovative route becomes the favored choice as scientist do not have a safety net that can warrant the risk. Thus, innovation is slowly starting to slow down. This is one of the worst outcomes as only innovation causes new leaps and bounds to be made from science. If innovation is starting to slow down, science as a whole slows down as well.

Since all of these issues can be solved by money, funding from organizations seem to be one of the best solutions. Money is being given to the researchers which allows the researchers to remove the restraint of income so better tests are made. However, this harmonious relationship becomes detrimental as both parties benefit too much. A claim from a scientific study is very valuable for a business. The faith people have with how rigid scientific studies are causes people to believe essentially anything a scientific study proves. As a result, companies are willing to invest a lot of money for scientific studies that positively help whatever the company is pushing. This investment would ultimately result in more money for the future. This interest itself causes a cycle that makes this issue worse. A business wants to be able to push their values to gain more money or popularity, so the businesses are more willing to pay money to inevitably reap the benefits. As the business itself pays money for the studies that prove their values, scientists are more enticed to make a study that proves the business’s value for a better living, giving more and more incentive to produce more or alter claims that prove the value.

This cycle results in countless biased articles that unjustifiably prove the claim of the business that affect the public. Companies such as pharmaceuticals and sport drink companies are repeatedly found in the obvious malpractice. For example, in the study “Association of Funding And Conclusions in Randomized Drug Trials,” Bodil ALs-Nielsen randomly selected 370 random drug trials to see if there was an effect on the result of the test being funded by a non-profit organization or a for profit organization. With only 16% of the studies recommending the drugs when it was funded by a non-profit organization and 51% of the studies when funded by a for-profit organization, it is painfully obvious to see the effect that funding sources has.

Works Cited:

Turner, Erick H. “Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent Efficacy — NEJM.” New England Journal of Medicine. N.p., 17 Jan. 2008. Web. 28 Nov. 2016.

Hampton, Phil. “Pressure to ‘publish or Perish’ May Discourage Innovative Research, UCLA Study Suggests.” UCLA Newsroom. N.p., 08 Oct. 2015. Web. 018 Nov. 2016

Nielsen, MD Bodil. “Association of Funding and Conclusions in Randomized Drug Trials.”Association of Funding and Conclusions in Randomized Drug Trials. The JAMA Network, 20 Aug. 2003. Web. 01 Dec. 2016.

Esports in The Public

What really is holding back competitive gaming from becoming part of the mainstream, is the public. Accepting up and coming new trends can be difficult for the people who are accustom to the already established norm of their culture. Media outlets like CBS, HBO and TMZ in the past all have incorrectly defined the sport and have also given it a image that they believe fits their agendas. TMZ goes to the extant of writing “Question — What do pimply-faced geeks who play video games all day have in common with the 6’8″ demigods who roam NBA courts on a nightly basis???” In the description portions of one of their YouTube videos. In this video they interview Rick Fox owner of Echo Fox (eSport Franchise) and also former NBA star for the Boston Celtics and LA Lakers.

Now its fair to assume that TMZ learned their lesson after the backlash they received from the eSport community for writing something like that. Well in less than a month TMZ does another interview with Rick Fox and instead of fixing their mistakes they just repeat the cycle. TMZ goes onto writing “Beware NHL fans … Rick Fox says your sport will be overtaken … by nerds … ’cause the “League of Legends” team owner thinks eSports is primed to take hockey’s place as the fourth major sport in the U.S. in just TWO YEARS!”. This constant cycle of misjudging the eSport community just doesn’t end even with the professional world of news/media.

For a news/media outlet to set specific physical standards for sports players just goes to show how ignorant some can be. Can this trend end? will the image that society gives video game playing ever change? If our media cannot accept this new outlet then the casual viewer will have no desire to follow eSports or learn about it. How did our culture come to know and love the sport of basketball or football? Well soon after the creation of these sports back in the late 1800’s, the creation of leagues rose and opened up the gates to the world of professional sports. with their own rules and regulations. They could turn a fun game to play and pass time, to something that can be considered a career, grant fame, fortune and set a standard of living that is now portrayed as the perfect life to regular society.

Esports just like professional sports started with its creation of leagues. Leagues that go by the name of Electronic Sports League (ESL) and League of Legends Championship Series (LCS). These are some of the larger brand leagues that come along with their own rules and regulations, Which is no different from from the NBA or the NFL What makes basketball and football so popular in North America is its ability to create rivalries between fans and players stemming off of the fact that each team represents a state or city. Which then causes an increase in enthusiasm and support for teams. Esports on the other hand is on the international level of fan bases. Where organisations can represent multiple countries rather than just national states.

Community and fan base is everything when it comes to sports along with professionalism and extreme consistency in the skill of said athletes. But if an entire culture is going to misinterpret the underlying definition of what a sport really is and what it adds to society then without a doubt mindsets will not change and this sport will belong in the niche category of sports.

Works cited

TMZSports. “Rick Fox- ESports Jocks Are Just Like NBA Players…Real Athletes | TMZ Sports.” YouTube. YouTube, 12 Mar. 2016. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.

TMZSports. “Rick Fox- ESports Will Overtake NHL In 2 Years!! | TMZ Sports.” YouTube. YouTube, 21 Mar. 2016. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.

Before New Year’s day in 2009,  a black man name Oscar Grant was killed by a officer name Johannes Mehserle in Oakland, California. Mehserle and several other officers responded to a fight on a crowded Bay Area Rapid Transit. The officers caught Grant and his friends from the train.  While Grant was lying face down, Mehserle and another officer were restraining Grant. Because Mehserle was unable to remove Grant’s arm from under his body in order to handcuff him, Mehserle drew his pistol and shot Grant once in the back.  During this incident, many people recorded what was happening up until Grant, who was unarmed, was shot.  Officer Mehserle resigned from his position and pleaded not guilty during an investigation into the shooting.  Later that year, Mehserle was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter and not guilty of second degree murder and voluntary manslaughter. This case shows that the officer had no reason to kill Grant; he only shot him because he was unable to remove his arm to be handcuffed. 

In the year of 2014 , an African American  boy named Tamir Rice was shot by a police officer.  Two officers on November 22,2014 named Timothy Loehmann and Frank Garmback responded to a call that a young black boy was sitting on a swing and pointing a gun at people.  However, the call also stated that the “gun” might have been fake and believed that Rice might be a juvenile that is doing this. When both officers arrived on the scene, Loehmann claimed that he saw a black gun on the table and the young boy put it in his waistband.  Both officers told Rice to put his hands up, but they both stated that Rice reached into his waistband and pulled out the gun.  Due to this observation by the officers, Loehmann began to shoot.  Later, a video was released and in the video you can see that Rice wasn’t threatening the officers verbally or physically. Loehmann started to shoot as soon as he arrived on the scene.  The gun that they stated Rice had was a Airsoft,which is known to be an air gun which was designed to shoot non-lethal plastic pellets and has a safety tip on it. Loehmann shot Rice in the torso.  Rice had injuries in his major vessels, intestines, and the pelvis.  In this case, both of the officers were placed on leave with pay, but the grand jury decided to dismiss all the charges against each officer. 

In the year 2015, Freddie Gray, Jr. was arrested by the Baltimore Police Department for possessing what the police thought was an illegal switchblade. While Gray was being transported in a police van, he fell into a coma, and later died.  When the doctor described Gray’s death, he stated that there were injuries to his spinal cord.  During this, witnesses to this interaction were recording the whole event. The video showed Gray screaming as the officers were dragging him to the police van.  Those witnessing Gray’s arrest saw one officer bending Gray’s legs backwards, and another holding him down with the officer’s knee pressing into Gray’s neck.  Each of the officers who were involved in this case were not charged with his death. This made the African American community protest until the verdict changed because the evidence showed a video and that the van that held  Gray stopped three times before taking him to the hospital, plus you even had two witnesses stating that they saw what the officer was doing to him and the only consequences they got was suspension with pay. 

Philando Castile was shot by officer Jeronimo Yanez on July 6, 2016.  Castile was driving  in the car with his girlfriend Diamond Reynold and her daughter when being asked to pull over. When officer Yanez asked for Castile license and registration, Castile told the officer that he have licensed to carry a weapon that was in his pocket during the time. Castile was shot  seven time while reaching for his ID after telling officer Yanez he had a gun permit and was armed.  Castile girlfriend Reynold recorded the incident and put it online.  Yanez was being charged with three felonies.  In this case justice was served with the officer being charged for a crime that he did with evidence including a video that surface the air immediately right after it happen.

1.“Centuries of Rage: The Murder of Oscar Grant III.” San Francisco Bay View. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2016Nov. 2016. Web. 30 Nov. 2016.

2.Ellis, Ralph. “Officer Charged with Manslaughter in Philando Castile Killing.” CNN. Cable News Network, n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2016.

3.News, BBC. “Freddie Gray’s Death in Police Custody – What We Know.” BBC News. N.p., 23 May 2016. Web. 06 Dec. 2016.

 

A major cause of concussions is because players are not using safe protective equipment. In this day and age the technology in sports equipment is state of the art. While the training is getting more advanced, players are getting bigger and stronger. Therefore, the equipment technology is getting more advanced as well.  The problem with it is that it is bulky and ugly. Players don’t want to wear big bulky helmets due to the fact that they are not the best looking . Players like to use their older style helmets that they think have good style and that they are used to. This old technology in helmets is outdated and plays a huge role in concussion numbers. Another similar example of this is shoulder pads. Athletes like the smaller lighter style pads so they are more agile. The downfall of this is when they do make contact with a 200 pound opponent it causes serious shoulder trauma. The number two most common injury in contact sports are acromioclavicular (AC) joint separations. This could easily be prevented with the proper use of protective equipment. Athletes are just too stubborn to adapt to the new style. An AC joint separation or AC joint sprain is an injury to the ligament that holds the acromioclavicular joint together at the top of the shoulder. It is usually caused by fall or blow onto an outstretched arm. The Sports Injury Clinic explains to us that AC joint sprains range from very mild to a severe injury. Early treatment and support through taping is important to avoid long term problems or shoulder deformity. Symptoms of this type of injury include pain right at the end of the collar bone on the top of the shoulder. The pain may be widespread throughout the shoulder initially but later on more localized to a bony point on the top of the shoulder. Pain will be worse when trying to move the arm overhead and there is often swelling and depending on the extent of the injury a deformity may be seen in the form of an obvious lump on top of the shoulder joint. Acromioclavicular joint separations are graded one to six with grade one being mild with only minor ligament damage and no separation of the bones while grade 6 is a severe injury with complete ruptures of the ligaments and visible deformity. In most cases this is treated solely by resting the shoulder for six to eight weeks. “Sudden Onset” explains the injury in depth. The problem is that players would rather fight through the pain of the injury and continue to play. This causes big problems later down the road. There should be more strict regulations on the return time of known injured players. It should be left to a higher authority to clear them, allowing the Injured player to return playing full contact. If the injury does not heal correctly, a serious surgery is required to fix the damaged ligaments. Similar to the ACL tear, there is an extreme physical therapy treatment required to rehabilitate the shoulder.

Along with the concussion issue, I can also relate to the AC joint separation dilemma. In my years of ice hockey, I have suffered from two AC joint separations in both of my shoulders. This constant beating on my abused shoulders is what ultimately ended my hockey career. All of my coaches and scouts had big plans for me after collegiate hockey but unfortunately due to the neglect to my injured body parts, my career came to an abrupt ending. All of my dreams went down the tubes. I cannot stress enough how important it is to take care of your injuries in the proper manner and not rush right back into the game. Doctors get paid a high salary to figure out what the necessary precautions are for your injury, you should listen to them before you lose your chance at the game you love.

works cited

No More Helmets In Football!

The battle between are helmets really safe in the National Football League as been going on for years now. This is the first time I have heard that football players shouldn’t wear helmets and players’ should just tackle differently. As a result, with no helmets in football, players will be more cautious of their head when going in for a tackle. I propose the NFL eliminates helmets. Players will soon learn to tackle differently or get hurt.

The brain is the most vital part of everyone’s body because it houses our neurons which allows us to walk, talk, and move. A single hard hit, or a series of smaller hits, can cause players to receive concussions, or a player becoming paralyzed, or worse. Football is a sport that players can get go into a game and after one hard helmet-to-helmet hit can cause them to end their career early. A collection of hard hit versus a one big hard hit can out weigh a hard hit because it can hurt a player later in his life. In the NFL, most of the players are getting hit in the head region every down because they have a big helmet that can get in the way of them trying to block their opponents from getting to their quarterback. In football, players with more than one concussions can be detrimental to their brain because their brain is getting worse, and worse with every hit to the hard.

Back then, players families sued the NFL for their negligence for a football players’ health. Over the years, NFL has taken better care of their players’ ever since the stories about the injuries that can occur with players’ lives after being in the NFL. For example,  Junior Seau a famous linebacker made headlines when the world found out that he had shot himself in the chest at the age of 43. His family was devastated and sued the NFL after they found out about Junior Seau’s brain report. Studies showed that Junior Seau had “a degenerative brain disease linked to repeated head hits and brain trauma.” Junior Seau’s family won the case and ever since that came out the people believe that the NFL has been trying to help make the game safer for the players. Sometimes a player doesn’t notify their coach when they have a concussion because they don’t want to be taken out of the game permanently.

American 7s football league (A7FL for short ) doesn’t allow their players to wear helmets. The number of players on the field is also a factor because of the amount of players getting hit every play. In A7FL, they only allow 7 people on each play, whereas, the NFL allows 11 players on the field. In A7FL. players they have a different way of tackling because they don’t use helmets. A defensive player has to wrap his arms around a other players’ body before make a tackle. Same as Rugby players who have to tackle their opponents to the ground. When football players wear their helmets it can cause them to put their body at more dangerous situations than if they didn’t have any helmets. If they didn’t have helmets on they would want to protect their head as much as possible or if they didn’t protect their head it could lead to a career ending injury and their life will changing dramatically. Helmets can make players’ think they are indestructible because they have all of this protection around their body. Football players misconception is that they are protected from hard hits because of the padding that they have on. A football players is taught to use their shoulders to make a correct tackle, but the tackle can be hard for players to get their arms around their opponent because they have a big helmet on their head.

Steven Laurey is Belgian neurologist who went on Ted talks to speak about the dangers of having hits taken to the head. Throughout his speech he uses Muhammad Ali (The greatest boxer of all time) as an example of what happen to a person that spend years in a sport that has athletes taking punches to the head and face. His main concept is that athletes that get hits taken repeatedly to their head can cause the nerves in their brain to stop working over time because of how many time the brain has hit against the wall of the skull. He shows the audience that after getting hit in the head some many times an athletes can form an abnormal prudent that is toxic to the brain and over time it gets worse and worse causing the athlete to slowly turn into an insane person. He states that there isn’t a cure for the disease. Our brain just continues to get smaller and smaller over time and causes for more diseases to occur.

Helmet to Helmet contact is a very serious situation because a hard hit to the head cause two players to lose consciousness and they can be out for the remainder of the season or even worse ending their career. Some players don’t tell their coaches that they have a concussion, but players should definitely let their coaches know about their concussion because not letting anyone know can cause more harm than good For example, what if the concussion is worse than what the player thought it was be. Their brain may get worse over time and cause the player to be mental rehabilitated. Thomas Drysdale talks about how football players suffer from Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). He shows how doctors say that this disease can be caused by the repeated hits to the head and how this disease can lead to a football players’ death. He gave two examples of linebacker Junior Seau and Chicago Bears’ star safety Dave Duerson both suffered from CTE and need up ending their own lives.

Work Cited:

A7FL. “Safety – A7FL.” A7FL. A7FL, n.d. Web. 06 Nov. 2016

Brain Concussion – Shake It and You Break It | Steven Laureys | TEDxLiège. Dir. Dr. Steven      Laureys. Perf. Steven Laureys. YouTube. YouTube, 2 May 2016. Web. 06 Nov. 2016.

Drysdale, Thomas A. “Journal of Legal Medicine.” Helmet-to-Helmet Contact: Avoiding a Lifetime Penalty. Taylor And Francis Online, 13 Dec. 2013. Web. 06 Nov. 2016.

Do you know what is in that?

Childhood obesity is one of the country’s biggest health problems of the 21st Century and there is truly no cure. In an article produced by the American Society for Nutrition they discuss how obesity is the result of interactions between factors such as genetics, cultures, environments, socioeconomic status and behaviors. These factors are the reasons why people eat what they eat and more specifically is the consumption of sugar.  For most Americans the main source of added sugar consumption comes from their intake of sugary drinks. This unfortunately makes sugary drinks one of the leading causes of childhood obesity.

Sugary drinks are sold everywhere from convenient stores to school vending machines and this exposes children to the constant access and ability to consume. Due to this exposure of drinks like Gatorade and Coke these beverages are being consumed more and more every day. Based on an article written by Roderick McKinley, the average American consumes 1.6 cans of soda a day resulting in the consumption of more than 500 cans of soda in one year. Think about the one 12 ounce can of Coca-Cola, that can of soda contains 39 grams of sugar. According to an article published by Sugar Science, the average amount of added sugar a child should consume in one day is 18.5 grams however this may vary based on age, but should never be more than 25 grams a day. If a child consumes just one can of Coca-Cola a day they have already doubled their sugar intake for the day. The most concerning aspect are the calories being consumed by drinking these beverages. The U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend the total intake of discretional calories, including sugars and fats, should range between 5-15% per day, yet most American children consume about 16% of their intake from added sugars alone, not including fats or any other foods. Many Americans are shocked to learn these statistics. They don’t always understand where these added sugars are coming from and do not seem to realize they come from the drinks they are consuming.

These sugary drinks are often consumed without much thought into the fact that the person consuming the beverage is drinking large amounts of sugar while at the same time they are consuming a large percentage of their daily calories; not to mention doing so quickly. The problem is that many people consume more of this than their body needs. According to an advice column published by the Arch Pediatric Medical Journal, these drinks are consumed before the body has time to realize it is full, in the same way a body would when eating solid food.  The World Health Organization adds to this by stating “these drinks have little nutritional value and do not provide the same feeling of fullness as solid food does, making it so they continue to consume more even though their body has had enough.” As people continue to consume these beverages they begin to exceed the amount of sugar their body needs to produce energy.  Because of the over consumption the body breaks down only what it needs for energy and the rest is stored as fat. After many years of consuming too much sugar and the body continuing to turn the excess into fat, the fat continues to add up ultimately resulting in the person becoming obese. In a study conducted by the American College of Nutrition, they found that “Obese children consume significantly more servings of fats and sugary beverages than non-obese children in a study done between the two groups.” This study, along with many others of a similar nature, have helped to prove the direct correlation between obesity and sugary drinks and how this has affected the nationwide epidemic.

Childhood Obesity may never be cured due to the many different causes. The CDC currently states that childhood obesity affects about 12.7 million children. This statistic could be reduced if sugary drink consumption goes down as well. If parents become more educated and adopt healthy habits themselves, such as cutting back intake of soda, they will begin to influence their children and the children around them to do the same. There is hope that in future generations, obesity rates will decline as a result of parents educating themselves on this issue. As those children become parents, their knowledge on this topic will be extensive and they will be able to provide the healthiest nutritional options for their future children.

Work Cited

“Childhood Obesity Facts.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 17 Nov. 2016. Web. 30 Nov. 2016

Gillis, Linda J., and Oded Bar-Or. “Food away from home, sugar-sweetened drink consumption and juvenile obesity.” Journal of the American College of Nutrition 22.6 (2003): 539-545.

Johnson. “How much is too much?” Research. SugarScience.org, 30 Mar. 2014. Web. 5 Dec. 2016.

Malik, Vasanti S., Matthias B. Schulze, and Frank B. Hu. “Intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review.” The American journal of clinical nutrition 84.2 (2006): 274-288.

McKinlay, Rodrick D. “Obesity Action Coalition » Childhood Obesity: The Link to Drinks.” Childhood Obesity: The Link to Drinks Comments. Obesity Action Coalition, n.d. Web. 04 Dec. 2016.

 “Reducing Consumption of Sugar-sweetened Beverages to Reduce the Risk of Childhood Overweight and Obesity.” Reducing Consumption of Sugar-sweetened Beverages to Reduce the Risk of Childhood Overweight and Obesity. World Health Organization, 24 Aug. 2016. Web. 04 Dec. 2016.

Sugary Drinks and Childhood Obesity. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163(4):400. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2009.16

Many anti stem cell/ abortion groups believe a fertilized egg should have the rights of a human being. This idea to scientists is ludicrous, but these groups believe a fertilized egg will become a human being, period.  This idea is absurd because, after an egg is fertilized, it is not guaranteed to become a human being.

In all processes there are different steps to obtaining whatever goal was trying to be reached. Just because a process begins, does not mean that ultimately it would finish successfully. An example of this is a boy who dreamed of make his high school basketball team. One of the first steps was to get the paperwork done for said team. A physical must be obtained and waivers have to be signed. Once this is done and turned in, he can now try out for the team. The fact that this first step was completed does not indicate he will be on the team when tryouts are finished; he was merely eligible to be tested to see if he could be on the team. The concept should be applied to a fertilized egg. There are many inhibiting factors that may inhibit the fertilized egg from developing into a human.

Another way a fertilized egg can fail to develop into a human being is failing to make it to the womb and becomes trapped inside of the Fallopian tube. This form of pregnancy is called an ectopic pregnancy. Ectopic pregnacies occur 1 in every 80 pregnancies. The newly fertilized egg is unable to escape the Fallopian tube and begins to attempts to develop. As a result, the egg inevitably dies, and the woman carrying this misplaced egg would need medical attention due to internal bleeding.

The process of a fertilized egg to become a zygote is not guaranteed. During the period known as “preimplantation development” about 50 percent of all fertilized eggs fail due to genetic errors. These errors do not result in deformed individuals nor miscarriage, but rather they just die. These blastocyts would never be able to develop past the point they already have, let alone becoming humans. The “preimplantation development” periods refers to when a fertilized egg attempts to embed itself into the uterine wall. After fertilization, newly formed embryos release a hormone known as trypsin. Trypsin signals the womb to prepare its lining for implantation; this allows for preimplantation development to occur, but fertilized eggs with genetic defects have altered signals. This causes for different hormones to be released. As a result, a stress response occurs in the uterine lining , making implantation next to impossible.

Even if a blastocyt overcomes the 50/50 chances of having an error in the DNA and was able to embed itself into the uterine wall, another barrier lies ahead. Miscarriage inhibits 10 to 25 percent of all clinically recognized pregnancies. Miscarriages are caused by many different reasons; they include hormonal problems, immune system responses to the newly formed embryo, infections, preexisting medical conditions in the mother, etc.

A fertilized egg does not mean a human would ultimately be developed over time. The major forces inhibiting the development of these fertilized eggs into human beings are ectopic pregnancies, mistakes in the genetic code, and the possibility of a miscarriage occuring. In all of these cases, the fertilized egg would never become a human being.

 

 

Sources:

1. Caplan, Arthur. “When Does Human Life Begin?” Council for Secular Humanism. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.
2. Rettner, Rachael. “Fate of a Fertilized Egg: Why Some Embryos Don’t Implant.” Live Science. N.p., 06 Feb. 2014. Web. 01 Dec. 2016.
3. Conger, Krista. “Earlier, More Accurate Prediction of Embryo Survival Enabled by Research.” News Center. N.p., 03 Oct. 1970. Web. 01 Dec. 2016.
4. “What Is an Ectopic Pregnancy? – The Ectopic Pregnancy Trust.” The Ectopic Pregnancy Trust. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Dec. 2016.

 

 

Television is making me fat

We see advertising for more unhealthy eating than we do for healthy and it’s beginning to become a problem. In recent years, the obesity rate has nearly doubled since 1980 according to the Obesity Society.  This would lead one to believe that the media can influence people to do .  The media glorifies McDonald’s french fries and will continue to do so until we decide to do something about it. The Obesity Society led by their corresponding author, Youfa Wang states, “On average, the prevalence of overweight and obesity has increased steadily among all US population groups over the past two to three decades.” Obesity does not have a preference on gender or race. This may lead one to wonder “Will all Americans one day become overweight or obese?”  We can put an end or regress the spiraling upward trend of obesity in Americans but it is going to take a revolution to do so.

It’s known that children can be more easily swayed compared to adults.  Everyone else in the household to go with it.  Going out with children can be stressful because children have a hard time deciding what they actually want.   Parent’s raise their children hoping that their children will begin to understand the difference between want and need.  Parents need to be held responsible for their children and their health. The World Health Organization and other leading institutions both international and domestic have provided or atlas [atleast] attempted to create a body mass index or BMI. The purpose of a BMI is to determine what weight is a healthy weight depending on height and age. According to the LA County Department of Public Health, “42% of children are obese or overweight.” That is almost half of the entire county and should alarm anyone who has kids or plans on having kids.

We see children that would rather play online instead of outside with their friends. Parents who allow their child to become obese should be subject to punishment for a list of reasons starting off with they have total control in what their child puts in their stomach.  The media is good at tempting viewers. The media makes it seem like it’s okay to give into temptation.  Sometimes we don’t have the time to make something real quick or just are too lazy to do the dishes afterwards. They provide celebrities and other icons that draw attention and better relate to what they are watching.  Most of the time the media draws attention by showing something totally irrelevant to what they are trying to market.  The commercial could start off with two people playing basketball who when finished drink a Sprite to quench their thirst. Once we censor the media [censor the audit?] and become educated on the media we can begin to see real change when it comes to many of the problems we face.

Children who have bad eating habits will end up turning into overweight teenagers and end up becoming obese adults with health problems.  There is a trend of poor health and it all start with what families feed their children at home. Another big impact on what children eat is at school. Eating healthy isn’t fun, but a big reason is because the media made it seem that way and parents have said anything that goes against it. Americans have glorified going out to eat; a luxury not everyone can afford it. Where a person goes to eat is very important. What child does not love getting to go to McDonalds for lunch?  The media targets children with toys, happy meals, and even play houses. We should begin to glorify cooking together what we see on television except with real food, healthier food that benefit not only our children but our pockets. Eating healthy should not be looked at as a punishment, but being obese should be looked at as a crime. The fact that obesity in children is rising is a major problem that should not be taken lightly.  It’s time we create punishments for parents who fail to recognize their children’s health as a big deal and if they are failing to realize that then they are failing as a parent.

Works Cited

Wang Y, Beydoun MA. The obesity epidemic in the United States—gender, age, socioeconomic, racial/ethnic, and geographic characteristics: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Epidemiol Rev  2007; 29: 6–28.

Klein, S., Allison, D. B., Heymsfield, S. B., Kelley, D. E., Leibel, R. L., Nonas, C. and Kahn, R. (2007), Waist Circumference and Cardiometabolic Risk: A Consensus Statement from Shaping America’s Health: Association for Weight Management and Obesity Prevention; NAASO, The Obesity Society; the American Society for Nutrition; and the American Diabetes

Reilly John J, Armstrong Julie, Dorosty Ahmad R, Emmett Pauline M, Ness A, Rogers I et al. Early life risk factors for obesity in childhood: cohort studyBMJ  2005;  330 :1357

The Dark Truth About Driving

When it comes to police officers pulling over minorities for discriminatory reasons, the causal chain that follows has proven to be extremely controversial and sometimes even fatal. These looming problems could be non existent if officers used their authority properly on a consistent basis. The specific issue at hand exists in the first place because police officers in today’s society do not always use their discretion to pull drivers over simply for issues relating to the law, but rather because of their discriminatory mentality. Christopher Ingraham claims that “approximately a two percent higher amount of blacks than whites are actually not even given a reason for why they have been pulled over when they get stopped,” in his article, “You Really Can Get Pulled Over For Driving While Black, Federal Statistics Show.” Two percent may not sound extremely high, but when the percentage of whites not given a reason is only at 2.6, then it is almost double the amount of blacks that go through the same thing.

The causal chain that tends to occur in this situation is that discriminating police officers pulling over a higher number of minorities than any other group, then leads to these minorities resenting police officers because they abuse their authority. In addition to that, whether the driver or officer are being particularly way too difficult at the time, things have taken an abrupt, violent turn for the worst.

The Constitution begins by stating that “all men are equal”, yet the society we live in has proven that although it is in The Constitution, it is still far from true. In relation to discrimination by officers potentially turning violent, it is important to understand that the discrimination does not just stop when the car is pulled over. Much like how The Constitution states that all men are equal but still are not treated equally, the 14th Amendment provides equal protection and not allowing discrimination while driving, but that is also not applied consistently. As a nation, we cannot be oblivious and neglect the fact that regardless of what The Constitution may say, law enforcement does not faithfully abide to it. Minorities are referred to as such because there are less of them in our country than whites. Nevertheless, more blacks are pulled over than whites. Minorities making up the majority of people pulled over is a staggering statistic that should not be overlooked.
Just a few months ago, an African-American man named Philando Castile was shot and killed by a police officer in his car in Minnesota. The car was pulled over for a broken taillight, which is understandable. Nevertheless, the man had a 5 year old girl in the back seat when the officer shot him. There was a woman in the passenger seat that started recording the situation on her phone after shots were fired, and her statement explaining the killing was that, ”he let the officer know that he had a firearm and he was reaching for his wallet and the officer just shot him in his arm,” Elliot McLaughlin reports in his article, “Woman Streams Aftermath of Fatal Officer-Involved Shooting.” He had a permit for the gun and went out of his way to make the officer aware he had it. It may not be known how this would have unfolded had the driver been white, but taking into consideration that the society we live in today is full of discrimination and hate, most people would believe that this officer was slightly more on-edge and trigger-happy due to the color of the man on the opposite end of the barrel.

The issue does not just begin and end with a simple traffic stop, either. “The racial disparity isn’t just limited to stops. Other police-driver contact — searches, tickets, arrests and license suspensions — show similar racial skews,” according to Kim Soften in “The Big Question About Why Police Pull Over So Many Black Drivers.” This is what leads to the majority of these minorities resenting and not respecting the authority. Many of them may have to deal with ensuing legal issues after getting pulled over, that would not have happened had this epidemic been a thing of the past.

As far as the anticipated rebuttals to this argument go, it is clear that not everybody shares a similar viewpoint on this topic. If everybody had the same mindset about it, it probably would not be a problem. Some rebuttals are indisputably true as well, such as the fact that African American police officers pull over black people as well, so it is unlikely a man would discriminate against someone the same color as him. Nevertheless, with that being said, that does not account for every single traffic stop. It is an exception to the discriminatory pattern of white against black, but yet it cannot be ignored that the percentage of those occurrences is minuscule in relation to the typical white cop, black driver scenario.

In conclusion, as much as our nation would probably like to say that discrimination was a thing of the past, it is not. These are real issues and racism is still alive. Just because it does not come in the visual form of segregation in the early 1900s, does not mean it is gone and over with. It is clearly unknown what it will take to change the discriminatory mindset of the people in our society today, but at this rate it looks like we are on pace to set our country back 100 years and something must be done about it. Yes, we have had a black president, but it is as if we took one step forward and two steps back by now electing a man who openly makes racist and discriminatory remarks in many of his debates and press conferences. There were actually riots when Obama was elected. This shows that a good amount of this country was not ready for a black president. If racial profiling still happened under a black president, they certainly will not improve or just go away under the government of a man who sustains a discriminatory mentality.

Works Cited

Soften, Kim. “The Big Question About Why Police Pull Over So Many Black Drivers” The Washington Post. 08 July 2016. Web. 30 Oct. 2016<

Ingraham, Christopher. “You Really Can Get Pulled Over For Driving While Black, Federal Statistics Show” The Washington Post. 09 Sept. 2014. Web. 30 Oct. 2016

McLaughlin, Elliot. “Woman Streams Aftermath of Fatal Officer-Involved Shooting” CNN. 08 July, 2016. Web. 06 Nov. 2016