Response to Nick Janus’ Ethics in Medicine

http://njanuslsc100f10.blogspot.com/

                Nick does a great job explaining the multiple stances of animal testing.  I see both side’s points of view and lye somewhere in the middle.  Although animal testing has led us to making great advances in medicine that has saved many lives, I would never want to see so many animals harmed.  To add to Nick’s comment that doctors cannot even compare the results of animal testing to humans due to anatomical differences; scientists have studied animal body functions and many have systems that work the same way as ours.  This is not to say that the affect of drugs on an animal’s body will be the same as on a human’s but it definitely has some merit.

                It’s quite compelling to me to hear which animals some people think should be tested on and which shouldn’t.  Nick says some are for primate testing because they are our closest ancestors, and some are against it for that same reason.  My stance on this is animals which show culture and which humans have made a connection with should not be tested on.  In experiments, such as giving one primate food and not the other have shown that primates have culture and experience some of the same emotional feelings as humans do.  Their bodies respond the same way chemically as humans to situations that would induce certain emotions.  Also humans feel a connection with certain animals.  These usually include domesticated animals. 

The line between what should and should not be tested on is hazy and differs from person to person.  Nick did a great job representing the many opinion.

Ethics and Medicine: Assisted Suicide

http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1995050506&type=hitlist

                 Today’s medical law does not permit doctor assisted suicides.  I learned from a documentary, the issue of whether a doctor aiding a patient in committing suicide is ethical or not grew from the famous Dr. Kevorkian.  Dr. Kevorkian successfully assisted about 130 terminal patients in committing suicide.  He was then charged with second degree murder and served eight years of his 10-25 year prison sentence.

                The story of Dr. Kevorkian led many to question whether a patient should have the right to commit suicide with the aid of their doctor if they are terminally ill.  The purpose of a doctor assisted suicide is to end the patient’s suffering.  Many believe that it is the patient’s right to decide if their life is worth continuing in the pain of death’s hands.  Although, assisted suicide is illegal in the majority of the states.  Family members of the terminally ill might be against assisted suicide because they want more time with their loved one and don’t want to see them die.  Some religions say suicide is committed out of unknowing or confusion and will block the transcendence to the afterlife.  I don’t think that either side is misrepresented because both have valid concerns for either wanting a loved one to live, or wanting to die if subjected to suffering for the rest of their life.  In the case of Dr. Kevorkian, though, many see him as a criminal lacking morals or what’s right and wrong.

                Arguments for euthanasia are quite compelling.  The most interesting one I found said that the goal of medicine is to relieve suffering for people.  That is essential what assisted suicide is; relieving the patient of their suffering.  Those against euthanasia say that patients would be selfish or cowardly for wanting an assisted suicide.

Response: Max Jentsch's Demonstration Evaluation

http://mjentschlsc100f10.blogspot.com/

               I agree with Max that the video on how to build a paper airplane is done very well.  The bird’s eye view of the plane is ideal but to follow along I think it would have been better if the camera was placed as how the demonstrator was viewing the paper.  The viewers saw the steps upside down from how the demonstrator did, unless the demonstrator himself was doing the steps upside down, which I would be thoroughly impressed with.  Personally, I do not like that a voice is not there to guide me.  Although it can be relaxing not to have someone directing you what to do, as Max stated, I found it harder to follow along with.  A voice to reinforce the steps would be beneficial to the viewer and help them follow along while watching their own paper airplane without watching the screen.  Max said that he preferred there to be no sound but he understood that some learned differently and would like sound.  I think including sound would be beneficial and if someone didn’t like it, they could always turn the sound off due to it being a video demonstration and not a live one.

                Max had a great point that repeating the steps would have aided to viewer, and that because it was a youtube video you could rewind, it didn’t really matter.  But maybe introducing the steps in the beginning and summing them up at the end would help the viewer grasp what was being done overall.  This would help them prepare for the steps to come and insure them they have done it right if so.  Also some guidelines, similar to the paper plane demonstration speech done by a classmate, such as remembering to crease all folds, would have helped.  An introduction or conclusion of relevance to the viewer would help grab their attention, especially because the absence of sound makes the video a little boring.

Rubix Cube Demonstration Evaluation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsQIoPyfQzM

This is a two part demonstration video that explains how to solve a Rubix Cube.  It is done by shooting the demonstrators hands going through the steps.  It starts off with an interesting brief history of the Rubix cube that grabbed my attention.  Before getting to the real solution, the demonstrator first tells the viewer how to “cheat” and remove the cube to be replaced in their correct spots.  This allows viewers who are not interested in learning the extensive solution to stay interested.

  To inforce the steps to the viewers, a simplified series of moves for each step is displayed on the screen.  This ensures that the viewer is able to follow along correctly and can go back at each display and repeat the steps if needed.  The simplified way of explaining the moves successfully makes a complicated task one that everyone can do.  To further simplify the task, simple, common language is used throughout.

The only drawback is that the demonstrator quickly “resets” the cube to show the multiple starting points at each step.  This can be confusing at times and would be clearer to the viewer if multiple cubes were prepared at each step so transition from one to the other was smoother.  This is similar to a cooking style demonstration where the final product is prepared ahead of time so the viewers don’t have to wait in between steps.  Other than this, the video was done extraordinarily well and simplified a complex task so it can be done by the average viewer.