In the article Give Up Your Data To Cure Disease, by David B. Agus, discusses his argument about how electronic health care systems are hurting the health system according to doctors, but he says otherwise. Agus says "neither doctors nor patients are happy with it." His main point or argument is that medical discoveries have been made by reviewing people's medical data. He then contends that more people should be willing to share their medical records with doctors to help cure disease.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/opinion/sunday/give-up-your-data-to-cure-disease.html?ref=topics&_r=0
The article Give Up Your Data To Cure Disease? Not So Fast!, by Deborah Peel, is basically a counter argument against the first article. Deborah starts of by saying that yes, patients records may hold information to cure disease, however, that information is personal data and should not be shared. Peel says that when we give our doctors that information we are trusting them to keep it safe and not share it. She claims it is personal information that should not be shared. She says "it destroys a human right, the right to privacy."
http://thehealthcareblog.com/blog/2016/02/09/give-up-your-data-to-cure-disease-not-so-fast/
Monday, February 22, 2016
Thursday, February 18, 2016
Self Assessment: Essay 1 Lawend Barzenji
When I first began this assignment I thought that it would just be another paper to write, a chore, if that is what you want to call it, but as a I did some brainstorming, writing, and research my idea of this paper changed because I found a topic that really caught my interests. My teacher, Mrs. Thomas, told us that we could go on ted.com and find an issue related to our service learning project. So I went on ted.com and spent about two days finding something I really wanted to research. I found a speech about why we should use blood from young humans to cure diseases that come with age. That is a break through in the medical world so I had to stick with his argument. When selecting this speech I just thought about whether or not it related to my service learning project and if the speaker gave a valid argument including evidence and other point of views.
The most difficult issue I came across while writing was mainly how I wanted my topics from my thesis ordered. I didn't want to just mash it all together and go on from one topic to another. I wanted it to flow, I wanted transitions, which I am not the best at. What I did was basically just mash my topics together, I know I just said that I didn't want to do that but I rearranged my paragraphs after I finished my paper.
Along with writing my paper I got a few people to help me revise it. My teacher, Mrs. Thomas commented on our rough drafts on Kizena as well as a student from my class that I was partnered up with to for revising and my brother. I was told that my paper was good but that I should clear up my thesis. Also my brother told me to include more quotes from the speech and a few other things. I took everyone's advice because I am not a good writer so any advice I get I put it into consideration.
I think that my paper had some typical strong and weak points. The strong points would have to be the parts of me discussing how the speaker used rhetoric in his speech. The weak points is probably my conclusion if anything. I have never been well with ending a paper. I always feel like I have given the information that is needed so there is no need to conclude. Sometimes conclusions feel empty to me and pointless so I hate writing them. For my conclusion I just looked at the sample essay my teacher provided to give me an idea of what will be expected. It helped out a lot. I really like that fact that she gives us sample essays.
In the next essay assignment I will probably spend more time with the research and on writing my paper. I want to make sure that my paper is going to be well developed so I will try to do a little of it at a time over a period of days. I will also spend more time on my thesis because I feel that a weak thesis leads to a weak paper.
The most difficult issue I came across while writing was mainly how I wanted my topics from my thesis ordered. I didn't want to just mash it all together and go on from one topic to another. I wanted it to flow, I wanted transitions, which I am not the best at. What I did was basically just mash my topics together, I know I just said that I didn't want to do that but I rearranged my paragraphs after I finished my paper.
Along with writing my paper I got a few people to help me revise it. My teacher, Mrs. Thomas commented on our rough drafts on Kizena as well as a student from my class that I was partnered up with to for revising and my brother. I was told that my paper was good but that I should clear up my thesis. Also my brother told me to include more quotes from the speech and a few other things. I took everyone's advice because I am not a good writer so any advice I get I put it into consideration.
I think that my paper had some typical strong and weak points. The strong points would have to be the parts of me discussing how the speaker used rhetoric in his speech. The weak points is probably my conclusion if anything. I have never been well with ending a paper. I always feel like I have given the information that is needed so there is no need to conclude. Sometimes conclusions feel empty to me and pointless so I hate writing them. For my conclusion I just looked at the sample essay my teacher provided to give me an idea of what will be expected. It helped out a lot. I really like that fact that she gives us sample essays.
In the next essay assignment I will probably spend more time with the research and on writing my paper. I want to make sure that my paper is going to be well developed so I will try to do a little of it at a time over a period of days. I will also spend more time on my thesis because I feel that a weak thesis leads to a weak paper.
Thursday, January 28, 2016
Basic Questions For Rhetorical Analysis by Lawend Barzenji
http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity
The speaker of the speech ,Do Schools Kill Creativity, by Ken Robinson, a University professor contends that schools kill creativity. He brings about his own perspective towards the topic using real life examples he has witnessed and experienced. He speaks to an audience with the intention of convincing them that students loose creativity as they continue through today school system. Robinson proves that schools kill creativity by explaining the school system and using real life examples. He argues that all schools have the same hierarchy of subjects with language and mathematics at the the top and that the education system is based on academic ability, pretty much nothing else. He says that people are kept away from things they enjoy or things they are talented at.
Robinson speaks directly to an audience. The speech is also targeted towards people of the education system such as teachers, principles, university professors, etc. It is also targeted towards all people in general. Robinson is serious as he speaks about this argument however he does joke a little to lighten the audience. He uses a bit of sarcasm which I found pretty funny. He also uses things like metaphors and he has a subtle tone.
Monday, January 25, 2016
TED Talks Speech (Rhetorical analysis) Lawend Barzenji
http://www.ted.com/playlists/171/the_most_popular_talks_of_all
I saw a really interesting TED talk on ted.com by Ken Robinson. The talk was on creativity of kids and students. Robinson explains that creativity is having original ideas that have values. The main argument or question was whether or not schools kill creativity. Ken Robinson contended that they do. He explained that education systems are basically all the same every where in the world. "They teach the same hierarchy for subjects with math and language at the top" (Robinson). It does not leave room for students to explore and learn about their talents.
According to Robinson, creativity is as important as literacy. He went on to talk about how kids are not frightened about being wrong. He said that as we get older and continue or education we are taught to lose that capacity. The thing about not being afraid of being wrong is "if your not prepared to be wrong, you will never come up with anything original." Robinson contends that kids are taken away form things that they are most likely not going to get a job from such as dancing, sports, or music. We are not pressured to learn those things as much as math, language, or history. Towards the end of the speech, Robinson talked of a girl who he knew that could not sit still in class and was getting lower grades. Her mom took her to the doctor to see what was wrong. the doctor wanted to talk to her mom privately and as her mom and doctor were leaving the room, the doctor played the radio. when the doctor and the girls mom came back to the room they saw she was dancing. The doctor concluded "your child is not sick, she is a dancer." Robinson said that her mom put her in a dancing school and she is now a multi-millionaire from dancing. It was her creativity not her education that took her far in life.
I saw a really interesting TED talk on ted.com by Ken Robinson. The talk was on creativity of kids and students. Robinson explains that creativity is having original ideas that have values. The main argument or question was whether or not schools kill creativity. Ken Robinson contended that they do. He explained that education systems are basically all the same every where in the world. "They teach the same hierarchy for subjects with math and language at the top" (Robinson). It does not leave room for students to explore and learn about their talents.
According to Robinson, creativity is as important as literacy. He went on to talk about how kids are not frightened about being wrong. He said that as we get older and continue or education we are taught to lose that capacity. The thing about not being afraid of being wrong is "if your not prepared to be wrong, you will never come up with anything original." Robinson contends that kids are taken away form things that they are most likely not going to get a job from such as dancing, sports, or music. We are not pressured to learn those things as much as math, language, or history. Towards the end of the speech, Robinson talked of a girl who he knew that could not sit still in class and was getting lower grades. Her mom took her to the doctor to see what was wrong. the doctor wanted to talk to her mom privately and as her mom and doctor were leaving the room, the doctor played the radio. when the doctor and the girls mom came back to the room they saw she was dancing. The doctor concluded "your child is not sick, she is a dancer." Robinson said that her mom put her in a dancing school and she is now a multi-millionaire from dancing. It was her creativity not her education that took her far in life.
Monday, January 18, 2016
Changing the World by Lawend Barzenji
If there was one thing I could change about the world and I had unlimited resources I would find a cure to cancer. Cancer is a big deal to me because my mom passed away from it. It has affected my life and a ton of my friends lives. I can not even imagine what it feels like to live with something so horrid. I feel like cancer is becoming more and more common and something should be done about it before it keeps growing. I think if I had unlimited resources I could cure it, not just me but anyone could. I believe the cure is out there, it just needs to be discovered.
First thing that I would do is dedicate my entire time to researching cancer. I would start from the basics. I would study what cancer is and the different forms of cancer. Next I would study it in more detail. For example, how cancer attacks, how it develops in the body, and whether it is genetic. I would then go to school and study to become a doctor and get a job specializing in dealing with patients who have cancer. This way I would be able to not only study cancer from the internet or a book but also look at a real life person with cancer. I would see how the cancer is acting in their body. As a doctor I would have my own lab where I would construct different experiments everyday and test them on animals. Eventually I would discover a cure and test it on humans. Since I have unlimited resources it would be much easier for me. I would not need donations or anything like that.
It would change the world for the better. People would not have to live in fear of cancer anymore. I would make it so that being diagnosed with cancer would be the equivalent to being diagnosed the common cold. I can only begin to imagine all the lives that would be saved. I don't know if it would completely change the world but I could sleep better at night knowing millions of people out there could sleep with one less thing to worry about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)