Autoethnography Plan: Unit 3 Mid-Unit Post

My autoethnography is going to focus on the benefits of musical theater and primarily how it is an extremely fun experience for anybody involved.

Instead of focusing on musical theater as a whole I’m going to break it down into its basic components: music and theater. With this in mind I’m going to be focusing on the benefits of the two individually and then I’m going to talk about my own experiences.

What I mean by the benefits is that music helps to build social aspects of a student’s life. It puts them in situations with like minded people, thus allowing to build strong bonds and relationships that test the span of time. Music also increases a student’s educational capacity and instills in them thinking strategies that help them later on in life. Now, theater also has benefits in a student’s life. Being a part of a theater group helps build a student’s self-esteem and also teaches a student the value of teamwork and working together to accomplish a goal.

Autoethnography Plan

Joe Giordano

My autoethnography podcast will explore the effects that big business has on rural economies in North Carolina.

Many northern companies export work to southern communities to avoid unions and to make higher profits. When these companies come to a new place, the often bring factories and business buildings; urbanizing the communities. Some North Carolinians are hesitant of big businesses and urbanization coming to rural communities feeling that these businesses would somehow damage their community; but they should not worry. Big Companies and Factories that come south, improve North Carolinian economies by providing jobs, stimulating spending, and reduces poverty in that community.  These companies are foundation of economic growth and more rural North Carolinians should be more open to the idea.

Most of my research comes from North Carolinian economists. They explain how these businesses do really good job of putting more money in everyone's pocket. These economists also agree that economic growth funds social revolution and education reforms and often does not damage the communities they reside in.

Autoethnography Mid-Unit Post

Picture by Oscar Rethwill

My autoethnography is going to cover the stereotypes of female student athletes and how they compare to male student athletes. Female athletes are expected to act and look a certain way and are normally broadcasted for their sexuality, unlike men who are shown for their talent. People assume that female student athletes choose to participate in sports because it is an extracurricular activity and that athletes are in general not as smart as normal students. My autoethnography is going to explain how all of these stereotypes are wrong and unfair.

There are tons of stereotypes that could relate to a female student athlete including being aggressive, muscular, busy, vicious, and intimidating. Not only are there many stereotypes of how female athletes look and act but there are also great expectations about how these athletes should look compared to what sport they are involved in. Athletes that play softball or hockey are expected to look masculine, while volleyball and track athletes are typically thin and feminine. (Swenson)

Female athletics have never been equal to male's. Female sports are less broadcasted on television and other media sources and have been considered less professional than male sports. Female athletes are hardly recognized in high school and even though college's advertise female games, a football game is completely different than a softball game. Women athletes are still being depicted as traditional figures like wives and mothers, while men are seen as heroic, masculine features that have honor, courage, strength, and endurance. (Hanson)

Picture by Anna Gutermuth

Studies show that athletes experience more stress than normal students, especially during their freshman year.(Wilson) This is one of many negative aspects that people predict about athletes. Others include that athletes are "dumb jocks" and all they care about is lifting weights and excelling in their particular sport. In college, these athletes are expected to care even less about academics and more about their ability to perform well because of all the pressure. These negative traits are persuading students to not participate in collegiate sports, but other studies prove that student athletes actually perform better academically than students who do not participate. A particular study showed that the average grade point of average of a student athlete is 3.56, while a normal students was a 3.40. (Derryberry) Another study proved that students who participated in high school sports, did much better in their science courses, than nonathletic students. (Hanson)

I am going to prove to you that not all female athletes are masculine, dumb, and malicious through my autoethnography. Also, I plan on proving that male and female athletes are equal and there should not be a difference between the two just because of gender.

Rap and Hip-Hop Culture Autoethnography Mid Unit Post

Picture by raremusicvideo1

My autoethnography is going to examine the belief that the listeners of rap and hip-hop music are all criminals and that the music itself inspires others to commit criminal like behavior. My research is on both ends of the spectrum covering people who believe it does do things of this nature and arguments that directly refute it. My explanations almost exclusively come from scholarly articles and studies done by sociologists on these topics specifically and I will be using a combination of these to really dive into the topic itself.

The research studies I found all focus on self reported studies of individual criminal behavior in youths. I plan on analyzing these results and methods used in conjunction with a couple of source in particular. The first being a study that went into the correlation of an individuals struggles and the role rap music plays in their life. Another is an article that in summary, states that it is not rap music that affects the environment but rather the other way around. With these sources I plan on trying to defeat the gross stereotype that all members of the rap community are thugs and hoodlums and that the violence they speak about it is not the origin of violence in these areas. Rather the violence they speak about is from inequality and discrimination as a whole and that in order to erase the violence in and caused by rap music one must eliminate the original violence that inspires it.

Why do teenagers dislike classical music?

Jorge Franganillo

My autoethnography is going to explore the common belief of teenagers that all who love classical music are snobs. This belief is to be explored through the eyes of these teenagers who are literally repelled by classical music. There are many who enjoy classical music that are completely normal and just enjoy the purity of sound that accompanies classical music, while enjoying other music styles that others would call unintelligent or cartoonish (Hood).

So why exactly are so many who like classical music considered snobby and pretentious? Well, because they are. This is not to say every person who likes classical music looks down on other genres and sips their tea with “pinkies out.” Through research I have discovered that the loudest voices in classical music are the ones that ruin the reputation of the classical music genre. Critics, purists, and the ones with lots of money who attend concerts and orchestras in expensive, black tie attire are the reason that teenagers today are repulsed by classical music (Joachim). It has been branded an elitist art form which turns off the youth of today (Joachim).

Professional businesses and gas stations alike have begun to play classical music in and around their buildings as a way to prevent crime and loitering. It is “uncool” for kids to be hanging around where this snooty music is being played and when asked about classical music being played in underground subways for this same purpose, Norman Lebrecht, a British music columnist, said it was, “culturally reckless” and “profoundly demeaning to one of the greater glories of civilization” (Hirsch).

It is this kind of attitude that reinforces the idea that classical music is not for the average Joe, that it is exclusive, only for snobs that ride around in limos.

The HeART of Education

For centuries, music and the arts have been a major staple in education, but as time went on less and less focus have been put on music and the arts, especially in these modern times. Plato once said “I would teach children music, physics, and philosophy; but most importantly music, for the patterns in music and all the arts are the keys to learning.” This statement still holds true as music has been the basis for scientific discoveries throughout time. The astronomer Johannes Kepler was able to arrive at his third law of planetary motion -- the relationship between a planet’s distance from the Sun and the time it takes to orbit -- by expressing the planetary motions in musical notation. (Strike) This and many other instances are great examples that given the academic and social benefits of arts education in a student’s life, there needs to be more focus and funding put into the arts in schools.

Academics and educational achievement, for many students all across the world, are a major source of stress and confusion because of a lack of preparedness. Music education, however, has been proven to help children even from a young age. Music education, when provided to young children, has been linked to language development and increased spatial-temporal skills. When it comes to language development and the effects of music education, researchers will typically look at children in between ages two and nine. Monitoring of this age group is beneficial because within that age range it’s natural for the brain to work in order to recognize sounds and words. Music education only helps enhance those natural abilities. What’s meant when saying that the brain itself is working, is that musical training is physically developing the left side of the brain, which is involved in processing language. (Brown) This work of the brain then allows for an increase in spatial-temporal skills, meaning that the brain has a larger thinking capacity. This spatial intelligence allows children to make connections that would allow them to solve multi-step problems like they would when solving a math problem. (Brown) Academic benefits isn’t even the end of what music education can do for students. There is also evidence of social benefits.

“Will they like me?” “Will I make any friends?” These are questions many young people ask themselves when playing the social game known as life. These same students, when exposed to music and arts education, are then able to find their answers. Being involved in arts education allows students to completely disregard these questions and let relationships build naturally while also boosting their self-esteem. What’s meant when saying they build relationships naturally is that when in a music group, like a band or orchestra, or a performance arts group like a cast for a musical, the student is surrounded by individuals that have the same interests. Being surrounded by this group of like minded peers then allows for friendships to just happen naturally with not much work having to be put into them. (Hallam) Now, before these friendships can be formed, the student needs to have self-esteem in order to have the courage to instigate the beginnings of a friendship. This self-esteem comes from learning how to play an instrument. When a student learns to play an instrument they gain pride and confidence in themselves and once they start learning how to play difficult music they gain a sense of accomplishment with their own achievements. (20 Important)

Sadly, even with so much proof about their benefits, the arts are in danger in our school systems as a result of competition from other extracurricular programs and downsizing because of budget cuts. This competition usually comes from sports. It’s no secret that most people would rather go to a football game rather than an orchestra concert or school musical. T.J Nelson, an editor from World Music Center, tells a story from 2005 that really captures this fact. She says that just in the Durham school system, 112 teaching positions were done away with and a majority of those were music and arts positions. (Nelson) Although competition from other extracurriculars is a detriment to the arts that’s not it’s biggest problem. The biggest problem for the arts comes from lack of funding. There was an interview conducted in 2009 whose sole purpose was to address this issue. This interview was done by KPBS’s Maureen Cavanaugh and she was talking to Russ Sperling, director of Visual and Performing Arts for Sweetwater Union High School District and Dr. Diana Hollinger teaches music education at San Jose State University. In this interview both Sperling and Dr. Hollinger agreed that the most important part of a music program is the teacher, but because of budget cuts many schools are letting their music teachers go. Sperling even told a story saying “ I had a principal tell me this morning, I’m not sure next year if I’m going to be able to keep my music teacher onboard.” (Carone)

For many years, arts education has been close to my heart and I have had experiences with all three of these situations. When I was younger, meaning the first few years of elementary school, I didn’t care about school at all. I was the loud kid that would just cut up and want to have fun. I never got in trouble because I was still a good kid, but I just didn’t want to do anything school related. I thought it was boring. But then in fifth grade I started playing the cello and that was really my first experience with arts education. Once I started playing the cello, I noticed a difference in how I performed in school. I was put into the advanced classes, my test scores improved, I cared about the work I was doing, I actually enjoyed school and was having with it. Just my experience, while not definitive proof, is a fantastic example of a student’s academic prowess improving as a result of having an arts background. So with academic achievement came my other point in this whole argument: social benefits. After starting cello I would go on to play through middle and high school, getting pretty good if I’d say so myself, and making several great friends that I still have to this day. Cello, however, doesn’t provide me with the best example of arts helping my social life. That honor belongs to the school musical. In high school, I would end up doing the school musical my sophomore to senior year and to be honest that was the most fun experience of my entire highschool life. In this order we did Fiddler on the Roof, The Sound of Music, and Oklahoma and as time went on during these musicals I made some of the best friends I could ever ask for. You might be asking yourself, “Well, how did the arts directly benefit your social life?” and the answer is confidence. Having something that I was good at and that I loved boosted my confidence so much and made me so much more willing to put myself out there. Also just from being around people that had the same interests in the arts as me made becoming friends a lot easier and much more natural feeling. Now, the aspect of arts education that has always saddened and angered me is the lack of focus or funding from the school. Being a part of arts education programs for so long I have seen many highs and lows and this has always been a low. When I was living in Fayetteville, there was almost no focus put into the arts program. It was all about sports so people didn’t really care about us. If you went to a football game the crowd would be massive, but if you went to the orchestra concert it was pitiful in comparison. I noticed a difference, however, when I moved to Boone. The arts still may not have been on the same level as sports, but there was a noticeable difference in how much this town cared about its arts programs as compared to Fayetteville. A lot of the time with an arts

program, however, it’s not the lack of focus that’s the downfall, but the lack of funding. I really only noticed this to be a problem once I got to high school, it was then that I realized how big of a problem it was. In my high school orchestra, funding was a big problem. We had to do so many fundraisers just to be able to go on trips that we were doing. After those trips, there was barely any money left. This was really upsetting because in order for an orchestra to thrive, the musicians need to have good equipment. Several people couldn’t afford their own instrument and had to borrow from the school. This wasn’t a great scenario because the school’s instruments weren’t in the best shape and we had no money to replace them. There was no money to replace instruments, no money to replace bows, there wasn’t even any money for our director to buy new music. We were still a great orchestra, but I always wonder how much better we could’ve been if we had the same funding the football team does.






Bibliography

"Strike a Chord." Nature.com. N.p., 18 Mar. 2015. Web.




Brown, Laura Lewis. "The Benefits of Music

Education."Http://www.pbs.org/parents/education/music-arts/the-benefits-of-music-educati

on/. N.p., n.d. Web.




Hallam, S. "The Power of Music: Its Impact on the Intellectual, Social and Personal Development of

Children and Young People." International Journal of Music Education 28.3 (2010): 269-89.

Web.




"20 Important Benefits of Music in Our

Schools."Http://www.nafme.org/20-important-benefits-of-music-in-our-schools/. N.p., n.d.

Web.




Nelson, T.J. "Dumbing Down, the Dwindling Funding of the Arts." Dumbing Down, the Dwindling

Funding of the Arts. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2015.




Carone, Angela, and Maureen Cavanaugh. "The State Of Music Education In Schools." KPBS

Public Media. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Oct. 2015.

Unit 2 Project: The Cure to HIV

HIV awareness ribbon by Trygve Utstumo

The human immunodeficiency virus, one that has baffled both researchers and doctors alike since the discovery of its existence. Unlike other viruses, your immune system cannot fight off HIV, it affects cells in your body known as CD4 cells (also referred to as T Cells). These are the primary fighters of your immune system and overtime they are destroyed by the HIV virus leaving the body susceptible to any number of other infections and diseases. Modern medicine has led to treatment known as antiretroviral therapy (ART). This is a combination of HIV medicines often referred to as a “drug cocktail” (“What is HIV/AIDS?”). With these medicines a person can live virtually as long as those without the disease, however it does require daily medication. However, I feel that researchers and scientists have lost site of the true endgame, to eradicate this virus from the face of the earth. The scientific community is divided on what steps to take to get closer to the cure. The cure to HIV has been sought after for a long time now and I am confident it is coming to a close, offering relief to family and friends as well as a newfound sense of safety for the public, however, in order for this to happen we need to ease off of antiretroviral therapy, a new therapy method without NRTIs needs to be discovered, and research on current more experimental methods of treatments needs to continue. (“What is HIV/AIDS?”)

Now one might wonder why I think the way to find the cure is to ease off of the one treatment that has been prolonging life in patients. Just to be clear, by ease off I do not mean we need to cut it cold turkey and leave people to suffer, continuing antiretroviral therapy is currently our only consistently effective way of combatting HIV. What I mean is that we need to begin focusing our efforts on other forms of treatment, while ART is a great preventative measure it is not a cure. However, in the nature editorial “The HIV epidemic can be stopped”, the author is under the impression that ART will be what cures the world of HIV. I have a few problems with the way in which they look at this problem though. First off, the author states that “Treating people with antiretroviral drugs as soon as possible after their diagnosis, it seems, not only prevents death and disability due to the disease but also prevents virus transmission.” (“The HIV epidemic can be stopped”) According to this author, these are the reasons ART is the cure for HIV. My gripe with this is that this is not a cure for HIV, it is a band aid. What it comes down to is that this author proposes we find a way to suppress all HIV cases to the point in which it can no longer be spread and then for all intents and purposes just let everyone with the virus eventually die out resulting in eradication of the disease. To me, that is not a cure and it is wrong, allowing people to suffer with a horrible virus should not be the answer. However, the answer it seems may be right underneath our noses. (“The HIV epidemic can be stopped”)

Nucleoside Receptor Transcriptase Inhibitors (NRTIs), these are contained within the the ART medicines administered to patients and they may be the problem with the treatments. ART extends and adds comfort to the patient’s life with the downside being lifelong treatment. Patients who are removed from the treatment and subsequently receive no alternative forms of treatment experience a swift rebound of the virus that eventually leads to death. The problem with this are these NRTIs, it has been hypothesized they are the reason this lifelong treatment is required. If Florian Hladik of F1000 Research is correct, then what is occurring is that the NRTIs are “promoting the survival of cells with integrated provirus” (Hladik). A provirus is the genetic material of a virus that is incorporated in a host cell and replicates as the host cell replicates. So in layman’s terms these inhibitors are allowing cells that are making more copies of the virus survive. When the source is being preserved, no matter how many of the surrounding infected cells are eliminated, the process is proven to be. Hladiks proposal is that the cure for HIV is much simpler (in relative terms) than we think. All that needs to be done is creating a cocktail that provides all of the same benefits and affects as the current treatment without the addition of NRTIs. This will prove to be quite a task because a majority of the major drugs used to combat the virus contain these inhibitors (Hladik).

Unfortunately, this is all currently hypothetical and more research needs to be done. While that is being done it is imperative that as a whole the research community needs to look onward to other forms of treatment being currently tested. There has been one case of a patient being cured, he has earned the moniker “The Berlin Patient” (Fauci). This patient was given a very risky procedure with a high mortality rate known as hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). HSCT is a transplantation of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs), which are the blood cells that create all other blood cells, which in this case was allogeneic which means they are from a donor. HSCs are found in bone marrow and umbilical cord blood (“Hematopoietic Stem Cells”). Interestingly enough the patient was also diagnosed with leukemia thus requiring pre-transplant therapy, which includes rounds of chemotherapy to destroy cancerous cells and also prepare the bone marrow for new stem cells (Mayo Clinic Staff). The curing of HIV in this case was incidental in some ways because it was primarily leukemia not HIV that as the authors stated “tipped the risk-benefit evaluation in favor of HSCT to cure the malignancy” (Fauci). Also the transplant donor cells were resistant to HIV with a mutation in the CCR5 gene which effects the co-receptor that is most commonly used by HIV strains when entering the human body. What this all boils down to is after transplantation the leftover HIV had no targets to make a rebound with, and the patient is still clear of all detectable signs of HIV and currently receiving no ART (Fauci).

Picture by Juhan Sonin

Looking in on a similar case with a very different outcome is the “Mississippi baby”. This was a case of a baby who was born HIV positive to a mother who received no treatment during pregnancy. Treatment for the child began when she was 30 hours old, stopping ART at 18 months. The child then remained off of the drugs for the next 27 months. This was thought to be a gigantic breakthrough in the fight against HIV and a federally funded clinical trial to see if these results could be repeated was to begin, however it seems that her HIV infection has now rebounded. The clinical trials are now being reevaluated, Anthony Fauci who is the director of US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases says the “study is still in play” (Ledford). Doctors are still unsure of what has caused this rebound in the young girl, she was tested every 6 to 8 weeks for HIV and all seemed normal until her CD4 immune cells began to drop. If the hypothesis of the authors previously mentioned is true than it means the cells that contained the provirus were silently hiding away until able to begin replication again thanks to the NRTIs in her system from treatments (Ledford).

This why we need more effort and funding to be funneled towards discovering a cocktail that includes no NRTIs as well as alternative methods of treatment like the HSCT. If safer methods of experimental treatments can be created, working out all of the kinks then we may just find the cure for HIV within our lifetime, possibly even by the year 2030. If we begin to target our efforts toward these more experimental methods, we may come out with something that has a 100% success rate to cure with a mortality rate that is little not nonexistent. Research just needs to be constantly looked at, then looked at again and then reevaluated and analyzed in a different light so that these scientists see their methods from all perspectives, leaving no stone unturned. One article that reinforced this argument was published in JAMA and talked explicitly on the feasibility, discovery, and implementation of different methods and proposed cures of HIV. This article spoke explicitly on the way researchers need to go about designing these methods to cure individuals. It outlines that first as a researcher you must look at your proposal and ask if it is indeed feasible. That is, is what you are trying to do possible and can it be accomplished within reasonable borders. Meaning no unnecessary harm will be done to any patient and will not bring rise to another problem. Next is the discovery, testing any and all possibilities. Looking into all of these different methods, constantly tweaking them and trying new combinations of these drugs until one of them show some possible signs of success. Then run with it, complete multiple trials, show it to other researchers and gain their opinion on it. When complete confidence is gained, it is time for the implementation. Put the wheels in motion, begin distribution reach any and all cases possible.

In conclusion, the nature article “The HIV epidemic can be stopped” grossly underestimates the problem and makes claims that cannot be substantiated by any cases out there. What is proven currently is that ART in itself is not a cure nor does it look like it will be, however it appears the fault within it has been found and with enough effort and ingenuity the possibility to finally cure HIV is within our grasp, all it will take is the right combination of drugs that can perform the same effect as current medicines, without NRTIs which appear to be shielding the host viruses. While this purported cocktail is looked into, alternative treatments such as the HSCT that with some tweaks and extra measures taken can be cures for complicated cases such as “The Berlin Patient”. All in all, the cure to HIV will come from a new drug mixture, something never used before and the consistent funding of the current treatment will not bring us any closer to what the real end game should be, eradicating HIV.

References

"What Is HIV/AIDS?" AIDS.gov, 8 Aug. 27. Web. 07 Oct. 2015.

Fauci, Anthony S. "Feasibility and Discovery of an HIV Cure." JAMA Network. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 23 July 2014. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

"Hematopoietic Stem Cells." National Institues of Health, n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2015.

Hladik, Florian. "A New Hypothesis on HIV Cure." F1000Research. F1000Research, 24 Mar. 2015. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

Ledford, Heidi. "HIV Rebound Dashes Hope of 'Mississippi Baby' Cure." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group, 10 July 2014. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

Mayo Clinic Staff. "Stem Cell Transplant." How You Prepare. Mayo Clinic, 5 May 2015. Web. 07 Oct. 2015.

"The HIV Epidemic Can Be Stopped." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group, 7 July 2015. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

Death by Popular Vote: Why America should Abolish the Death Penalty

Add caption

In 2011, German pharmaceutical companies single handedly prevented the execution of Allen Nicklasson. Nicklasson was on death row for a murder he committed in 1994 and in 2011 was set to die by lethal injection. In his proposed case they would use a cocktail of drugs to kill him, including Propofol. Propofol is used up to 50 million times a year in American hospitals and is used to sedate patients. However when the German Company put their feet down, saying if Propofol was stay in American markets, it was not to be used to kill anyone. This left American executioners scrambling to find alternatives. (Woolson, Web.) The withdrawal of medications involved in lethal injections,( like midazolam or sodium thiopental,) American executioners are left with this ultimatum: come up with more creative ways to put prisoners to death or put the death penalty to rest; This debate highlights flaws with the practice including the unresolved ethical, cost, and effectiveness problems. 

Lethal injections are the number one choice in the executions of today. It is used because it supposed to be more effective in providing an easier and quicker death to the inmate that is to be executed. While Lethal injection does it job most cases there are cases where executions go very wrong: 7.1% of lethal injection cases are botched. (Siegelbaum, Web.)

In an execution there can be between 1-3 lethal drug cocktails, drugs of choice include sodium thiopental and Midazolam. However the rates of botched executions have gone up since 2011 when sodium /thiopental was pulled off the market because the drug makers did not feel it was ethical to profit from executions. (Hospira Statement Regarding Pentothal, Web. ) There is no regulation on which or how many drugs are used in executions. This means the Americans in charge of executions cannot kill inmates effectively. 

The United States Constitution's Eighth Amendment states that, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted." (Eighth Amendment, Web) While the supreme court ruled the effective death penalties to not necessarily be in violation of the eighth amendment, what about the ones that go very wrong? According to the Associated Press, the average time of an execution by lethal injection is 10 minutes. (Midazolam is common thread, Web.) However in the case of Clayton D. Lockett it took him almost an hour to die:

“ Lockett was administered an untested mixture of drugs that had not previously been used for executions in the United States. He writhed, groaned, convulsed, and spoke during the process and attempted to rise from the execution table fourteen minutes into the procedure, despite having been declared unconscious. And after 15 minutes witnesses’ were no longer allowed to witness his execution. The Execution was eventually stopped, and Lockett died from a heart attack 43 minutes after being sedated.” (Fretland, Web.)

To say that Lockett’s death was horrific is a gross understatement and could very well be considered as torture. Clayton D. Lockett’s constitutional rights were violated because he died from torture at the government’s hand.

While some death penalty supporters would argue that Lockett deserved his death because he guilty of his crime, (“deserved what was coming to him,”) what about the death row inmates who are innocent of their crimes? Many death penalty supporters claim that there are no innocent people on death row because forensics today is a “Perfect Science.” According to an article in Nature, a study done from 2002-2004, retested forensic evidence from random samples of death row cases and found that out of every 300 cases, up to 20-30 cases are found innocent or exonerate. This means up to 10% of prisoners on death row could be put to death for crimes that they did not commit. 

This unacceptable rate of innocent death row inmates, can come from cross contamination of evidence or even crime laboratory corruption or incompetence. In 2002 the Houston Police Department’s crime laboratory was closed because of consistent mis-procedures, lack of funding, inept management, contamination and misinterpretation of evidence. Nearly 95% of United States Police crime laboratories are accredited, (held up to high standards, reviewed, and consistently managed,) but the 5% of laboratories could be enough leeway to put another innocent US citizen on death row. ( DNA tests put death penalty under fire, Web.)

Many argue that keeping a prisoner in jail for the rest of their life costs more than killing them. This is not true. In Texas, a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years. (Executions cost Texas Millions, web.). This is because when the death penalty is sought they have to be proven guilty, so many times and they have to be given lots of appeal, these appeals take lots of time and time inherently costs money. If the court cases were swift it would cost a lot less, however this is not the case. Enforcing the death penalty costs Florida $51 million a year above what it would cost to punish all first-degree murderers with life in prison without parole. Based on the 44 executions Florida had carried out since 1976, that amounts to a cost of $24 million for each execution. (High price of Killing, Web.). These costs only skyrocket if the execution was botched.

Why do we have the death penalty? The US embassy states that execution is reserved is for the most heinous case of aggravated murder. (David Garland, Web.) Capital Punishment in the United States is used as a preventative for murder in order to scare the people from killing others. While this logic seems intact, a report by the National Research Council, titled Deterrence and the Death Penalty, stated that studies claiming that the death penalty has a deterrent effect on murder rates are “fundamentally flawed” and should not be used when making policy decisions (2012) and 2013 FBI Uniform Crime Report showed that the South had the highest murder rate. The South accounts for over 80% of executions. The Northeast, which has less than 1% of all Murder Rates per 100,000 (2013) executions, had the lowest murder rate (Deathpenaltyinfo.org, Web.) This statistic nullifies the theory that executions lowers homicide rate since the places with the highest execution rates had the highest murder rate and the states that did not enforce the death penalty had a significantly lower murder rate.

Amnesty International says “The death penalty is the ultimate, irreversible denial of human rights. Abolition of the death penalty would solve previously unresolved ethical, cost, and effectiveness problems. The only reason that Americans should get keep the death penalty would be to avenge murder victims. However the practice of “murdering for murdering” seems too barbaric for a society that prides itself on humanity, rights of an individual, and mercy. Instead of perfecting the death penalty, the penitentiary systems should focus more on therapy, education, and the curtailing of the system altogether. One can only hope that America, can soon lay the practice of the death penalty to rest.

Banner, Stuart. Death Penalty : An American History. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press, 2002. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 10 July 2015.

David W. Garland “You Asked: Why Does the U.S. Have Capital Punishment?” U.S. Embassy,  May 28, 2011. U.S. Department of State. Web. July 13, 2015. http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/pamphlet/2012/03/201203303047.html#ixzz3fsSQMFoe

Deathpenaltyinfo.org. 2015 death penalty information center. Web. July 13 2015.http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/node/5623/4

“End Capital Punishment” Amnestyusa.org. 2015 Amnesty International USA. Web. July 13 2015. http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/campaigns/abolish-the-death-penalty

“Executions cost Texas Millions” The Dallas Morning News. Dallas Morning News 

Marris, Emma. "DNA Tests Put Death Penalty Under Fire." Nature 439.7073 (2006): 126-7. ProQuest. Web. 24 Sep. 2015.

Woolston, C. (2013). Death row incurs drug penalty. Nature, 502(7472), 417-8.

Who should California give water to during the drought? Farmers or Fishermen?

Photo by Bert Kaufmann

Currently in North Carolina, we are battling flooding from an excessive amount of rainfall from Hurricane Joaquin, while states in the west are suffering from very small amounts of rainfall. There actually has been a drought in California for the last 10 years that has caused a huge impact on the state government, local residents, and companies. The drought has also affected Americans, through unemployment and high produce prices, and officials are debating the long-term plans to solve it through putting water in the deltas or providing water to farmers. They are arguing each plan through the effects of providing water to both sources, extinction of smelt, and farming supply cuts. These officials must make the choice to either put water in the deltas to prevent the delta smelt from going extinct or to give water to the farmers who need it to grow and produce their crops. The outcome of this debate affects all Americans, because the prices of produce and seafood are increasing greatly due to the decreased supply of these resources. Therefore, I disagree with official’s opinions that they should have to choose which source they provide water to, and think that they should find a system that provides water to both the deltas and farmers because of essential needs for water from both sources and the major effects that could happen if they do not get the needed water.

The drought has been affecting many Americans and even has caused a very important species, the hypomesus transpacificus, to become endangered and could eventually make it extinct. Within the many Americans being affected in this drought are farmers, fishermen, and other local citizens. The water managers of California have decided on two different plans to fix the drought in the state which include providing water to the deltas or giving the water to the farmers. The government has asked everyone to limit their use of water and local residents have had to reduce their own personal uses of water because of the drought to conserve water for nutritional purposes. Farmers have likewise been asked to use less water and are having to compensate for this shortage by using a system called irrigation. Although scientists are hoping for El Niña, which is a rainy winter, to fix all of their problems, it is not guaranteed and these scientists are going to have to come up with a long-term plan that will preserve the water that the state has and keep the state debt low. (Parched California)

Delta Smelt by Pacific Southwest Region

The first plan they created is to add water to the local deltas. By providing this water to the deltas, the delta smelt, or hypomesus transpacificus, will increase in number and not become extinct. (Parched California) If you’re like me, you’re asking “Who cares if the delta smelt becomes extinct?” Unfortunately, the smelt plays a huge role in the ecosystem it lives in. Delta smelts are an extremely important species in California, because they are listed as an indicator species, which is a species that indicates how the health of the environment is doing, as a whole. By looking at the health and population of this species, scientists can determine how the health of every species, plants and animals, are doing. Michael Bean, head of wildlife programs at Environmental Defense stated, “If the only species at risk was the Delta smelt, then the question of ‘so what’ would have more impact, but the Delta smelt is just the tip of the iceberg…the reality is these species are sentinels for the ecosystem.” (Taugher) Since this water resource drains 40 percent of the state of California, the health of this watershed is in fact very important. Not only will adding water to the deltas benefit the smelt but it will also help the economic state of the citizens and decrease the unemployment rates of fishermen. Since the delta smelt will have a better chance of staying alive, fishermen will have to get their jobs back and the unemployment rate in California will decline. (Johnson) With a whole industry down, the unemployment is very high and there are more people hunting for jobs. Since these people have significantly less money now, they are spending less on everyday things. Therefore, the state is getting less money every year and they are becoming further and further in debt.

After just a couple of years of California being in a drought, they were already in a $24 billion budget deficit and this number has only increased since the drought has continued. Not only is the state government in debt but also the fishermen and farmers. Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Association said that “Salmon fishermen have been out of work for two years now because of the total closure of the fishery.” (Johnson) Grader stated this in 2009 and since then has appointed David J. Hayes with $160 million to go toward Recovery Funds for these fishermen.

Photo by Gabriel Millos

On the other side of the debate, Farmers have been given significantly less water since the drought to grow their crops and they are still being forced by the government to use the least amount possible of the water they are given. These farmers have started using an old method called irrigation, which uses much less water and is still efficient. (Parched California) These supply cuts have caused some farmers to permanently end their crop season or have made them buy water from other sources. If the farmers choose to buy more water from other supply sources they are being charge 10 times the amount that the government was charging the farmers. This has been one of the leading causes of the many farmers in debt. (Wade) Rick Gilmore, a general manager of a California district, complains about the water cutoff by saying, “This is happening right in the middle of growing season...so it couldn’t come at a worse time.” (Carlton) Over 17,000 farmers have had no choice but to stop farming because of the amount of money that it’s costing them and now they are out of a jobs as well. The drought has caused many farmers to go into debt, as well as the whole state. (Johnson) A study done in May of 2015 by the University of California, Davis, calculated that an average of 18,600 agriculture-related jobs and $2.7 billion would be loss just this year from the drought. (Carlton) Even though they are fighting over the water supply, farmers are struggling just as much as the fishermen are and they are both desperate for a solution.

The water supply in California has been argued and debated over to who is more likely and needy of the water that the California government has reserved. Farmers, fishermen, and local residents have realized that “...the water supplies aren’t as permanent as they thought,” (Carlton) Although, officials and managers are debating to give water to farmers or fishermen, I think that both resources need to be given water. If water is not given to farmers, they will have to stop their produce and the nation will have a huge shortage and the prices of crops will go up drastically. If water is not provided in the deltas, the delta smelt will become extinct, which could harm the entire ecosystem, and fishermen will be unemployed. Without fishermen, there will be a significantly less amount of seafood in the food industry, also causing an increase of prices. Therefore, it is obvious that there needs to be a system that combines giving water to both the farmers and fishermen, which provides a different aspect than in the Nature Article Parched California. If managers and officials could come up with a way to efficiently and effectively provide water to both the farming industries as well as put water into the deltas, Americans would be saving tons of money. Also, when California finally gets out of the drought, scientists will know how to overcome these problems next time they occur.

We, as Americans should take interest in this debate on how to conserve the water in California, because it plays a big role in our everyday lives. Many crops that are sold across the nation are grown in California. So, if these farmers are not able to produce these specific crops, then we will have a shortage of food and the food that is available will be at a much higher price. Also California is a main contributor to nationwide seafood sales. Therefore, the same goes with seafood, if the fishermen are not able to catch the fish, the price of seafood will increase because of the shortage of the amount of the item. The largest connection to this problem is that the prices of taxes will go up because of this drought. The reason for this is the government is having to spend a lot of money to overcome the drought and they are paying for the solutions with tax payer’s money. When the money runs out, the government will need more and they will charge Americans all over the world. Regardless that this drought is occurring on the other side of the country, it is still affecting us here in North Carolina, as well as other parts of the United States. We are having to pay more money for products, like fish and crops, since there is a decreased amount available. We are also having to pay taxes to the government and a portion of these taxes are going to California to pay for the debt that has occurred.

Even though we are currently having huge flooding on the east coast, the west coast is suffering from a pro-longed drought. Scientists are having to decide whether they give water supplies to the deltas or to farmers for an effective long-term plan. Wherever this water goes, it is affecting American’s everywhere through increased product prices, unemployment, and even the population of the delta smelt species. If scientist could create a plan that would provide water to both the farmers and the deltas, they would be able to decrease the unemployment rates, decrease the amount of produce prices, and even save the delta smelt from becoming extinct. The Nature article “Parched California” states the debate between the farmers and fishermen/delta smelt, but it is evident that water is essential for both places for America to survive.




Resources:
"Parched California." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group, 2 Sept. 2015. Web. 25 Sept. 2015. <http://www.nature.com/news/parched-california-1.18270>.

Carlton, Jim, and Ian Brat. "California Drought Leaves Few Farmers Unscathed." WSJ. N.p., 13 July 2015. Web. 07 Oct. 2015. <http://www.wsj.com/articles/california-drought-leaves-few-farmers-unscathed-1436809802>.

Johnson, Christina S. "California Farmers and Salmon Fishermen Fight for Water." National Fisherman 90.5 (2009): 13.ProQuest. Web. 28 Sep. 2015.<http://search.proquest.com/docview/211489113?pq-origsite=summon>.

Taugher, Mike. "Why Not Let Inconvenient Delta Smelt Just Go Extinct?"InsideBayArea.com. N.p., 04 June 2007. Web. 07 Oct. 2015.

Wade, Mike. "California Farmers Already Under Drought Emergency." Western Farm Press (2015)ProQuest. Web. 28 Sep. 2015.<seach.proquest.com/docview/1664905332?p1-origsite=summon>.

Should the New CRISPR Technique be Approved for Use?

Picture by: Duncan Hull

Recently geneticists have come up with a new piece of bioengineering technology known as CRISPR. CRISPR is an acronym for clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats and has the ability to edit genes in a quick and efficient way that has yet to be seen so far in the genetic engineering field. There has been a lot of hype built up by the new CRISPR method. James Wilson, a medical geneticist at UPenn says, “It’s just really spectacular” (Ledford). This technology has already been used to engineer genomes of over twelve species (Oye). It is still in its newer stages of development and has the potential to alter the DNA of species beyond the usual mice and fruit flies that are chosen for experimentation (Ledford). Though CRISPR has such great potential, it is still in its developmental stages, which means it also has the potential to be very dangerous. The use of the CRISPR-Cas9 method should be indefinitely halted until the time comes where the scientific community can trust that it is not dangerous for human beings or ecosystems.

CRISPR uses a Cas9 enzyme and a protein to cut DNA at the specific base code it is programmed for. By description, CRISPR is the messiah of the genetic engineering field. It far surpasses the previous methods of genome editing in cost, efficiency, and precision. It costs roughly $30 to buy the RNA fragment that makes this technique successful which is notably less than all other of the other genetic engineering methods that have been used so far (Ledford). An article written for the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences states that CRISPR, “offers simplicity, flexibility, and precision in gene targeting,” that requires little training (Webber). The CRISPR technology is certainly exciting and it is understandable that the genetic engineering field is being turned upside down by it.

Malaria bacteria
Picture by: NIAID

This technology has the potential to do great things. Two of these include eradicating malaria bacteria from mosquito-vectors and removing invasive species that are currently damaging ecosystems. Malaria kills 650,000 people per year and this count does not include the many other diseases transmitted through insect vectors (Esvelt). If the gene drive is successful, CRISPR could be a part of removing diseases that have inflicted immense suffering on human beings (Esvelt). Invasive species have become a huge ecological and economic problem for many nations around the world. In the United States, invasive species account for $42 billion in damages (Esvelt).

Yes, there is a great, currently untapped, potential with this new technology, but it is also flawed. Many scientists are of the opinion that CRISPR still has a long way to go before it can be ready for effective, safe use. James Haber, a microbiologist at Brandeis University says, “These enzymes will cut in places, other than the places you have designed them to cut, and that has a lot of implications” (Ledford). Accidentally damaging a nontarget gene has the potential to damage the entire species. This altering of genes is very powerful and should be handled prudently.

One of the big dangers of cutting the wrong gene is creating cancerous cells. Keith Young from the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston describes mutation frequencies when these accidental, off-target cuts are made in DNA strands. They range from 0.1 to 60 percent mutation frequency. Even lower mutation frequencies can create catastrophic outcomes for individuals and later populations through gene drives, the movement of altered genetic material throughout generations. CRISPR is said to be very precise, but precise is not enough when the possibility of cancer is on the table. (Ledford)

If this CRISPR method has the ability to remove disease and alter entire genomes, even possibly create malignant, cancerous cells, it may also have the ability to be used as a weapon. Human beings have dreamed up new forms of biological warfare since 600 BC and have continued to use it throughout all of history(Riedel). If mosquitos can be made to no longer carry the dreaded malaria bacteria, other insects can be altered to carry more fearsome diseases as well.

In the recent past, policymakers have considered moving toward regulating the CRISPR method, but at the time it was not something that was believed to be urgent. Less than one year later the CRISPR technology has spread throughout the genetics community and policymakers are a step behind. (“Driving Test”)

In the past, unregulated scientific solutions have spelled disaster. The birth of the modern FDA stems from the past catastrophe of thalidomide babies (“Thalidomide”). Though thalidomide is a drug and CRISPR alters genes, the CRISPR technology would be considered a toxin or a veterinary medicine in terms of how it is regulated (Oye). Thalidomide is a drug that was administered to pregnant women to help them sleep, but the aftermath of using this drug was child deformity. Children were being born with shrunken or absent appendages (“Thalidomide”). If this drug had been thoroughly tested and officially regulated it would not have been able to damage the lives of so many people worldwide.

Children with deformities caused Thalidomide taken by their mothers during pregnancy
Picture by: Luciana Christante

Unfortunately, the FDA-that was so changed by the thalidomide babies of the 1950s and 1960s-has not been doing a good job fulfilling its duties. Recently the FDA has been working either too fast or too slow (“FDA vulnerability revealed”). Certain cases are being pushed forward because of political agenda while other, more important ones sit on the backburner. The FDA was recently pressured into approving a drug that helps increase a woman’s libido. This drug had very little effect at all in trials and had quite the list of risks accompanying it, nonetheless the women supporters coerced the FDA into approving a drug that has, “a poorly understood reaction with alcohol.” (“FDA vulnerability revealed”) If a national organization responds this way to the arm-twisting of a group of protestors, they are not to be trusted with the regulation of something as important as changing the DNA of entire species. If proper regulation is not a method that can be trusted to keep CRISPR in check, it should not be pursued any further.

The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published their opinion that, “without a regulatory framework that provides a mechanism to work with these issues with clarity and transparency for the CRISPR-Cas9 gene drive, this putative silver bullet technology could become a global conservation threat” (Webber). Author Kenneth Oye and his peers write,

“For emerging technologies that affect the global commons, concepts and applications
should be published in advance of construction, testing, and release. This lead time
enables public discussion of environmental and security concerns, research into areas of
uncertainty, and development and testing of safety features. It allows adaptation of
regulations and conventions in light of emerging information on benefits, risks, and
policy gaps. Most important, lead time will allow for broadly inclusive and well-informed
public discussion to determine if, when, and how gene drives should be used” (Oye). The scientific community believes that it is important to fully understand this new CRISPR technique before it should be allowed for use. Uncertain technology should not be unchecked by regulation.

Picture by: Gian Luigi Perrella

Heidi Ledford, author of “CRISPR-the disruptor,” argues that while it may not be fully understood at this point, CRISPR is an amazing, new technology that will break barriers in the genetic field. Ledford cites ideas from multiple authors to illustrate her thoughts on CRISPR (Ledford). She quotes Micky Eubanks who says, “...when you give it more thought and weigh it against the environmental changes that we have already made and continue to make, it would be a drop in the ocean” (Ledford). Something that allows human beings to bring about the eradication of species is not something to be considered ‘a drop in the ocean’ as Eubanks calls it. One of these environmental changes she alludes to is climate change, which is not a positive environmental alteration that should be used as a reason to continue messing up the planet. Drops in the ocean have ripple effects and until it can be determined that the outcome of this technology will be a positive one, it is unsafe to move forward with it. Ledford herself says, “This issue is not black and white” (Ledford). While what she says is true, there is a clear cut solution to it and that is to halt the application of the CRISPR technology.

The CRISPR-Cas9 technology does have some potentially amazing benefits and it is an incredible scientific feat. That being said it is too early to say that it will be able to rid insect vectors of disease and safely alter genes the way that many scientists believe it will. It is an impressive technology but it is not proven to be safe and at this point in its development CRISPR is certainly not ready to be used outside of anything but a contained laboratory. If it is never proven to be safe, it should never be used in nature or in human beings.


References

“Driving Test: ‘Gene drive’ techniques have the potential to alter whole populations. Regulators
must catch up.” Nature 524.7563. 4 Aug. 2015. Print.

Esvelt, Kevin M., Andrea L. Smidler, Flaminia Catteruccia, and George M. Church. “Concerning
RNA-guided gene drives for the alteration of wild populations.” eLife. 17 Jul. 2014. Print.

"FDA vulnerability revealed." Nature 524.7566. Nature Publishing Group, 26 Aug. 2015. Web.
03 Oct. 2015.

Ledford, Heidi. “CRISPR, the disruptor.” Nature 522.7554. 3 Jul. 2015. Print.

Oye, Kenneth A., et al. “Regulating Gene Drives.” Science 345.6197 (8 Aug. 2014): 626-628.
Print.

Riedel, Stefan. “Biological warfare and bioterrorism: a historical review.” NCBI 17(4). Oct.
2004. Print.

"Thalidomide." Science Museum. Brought to Life: Exploring the History of Medicine. N.p., n.d.
Web. 03 Oct. 2015.

Webber, Bruce L, Raghu, S., and Edwards, Owain R. “Opinion: Is CRISPR-based gene drive a
biocontrol silver bullet or global conservation threat?” PNAS 112.34. N.d. Print.