Saturday, February 23, 2019
The No Blog Blog
THis weekend, you need to hit your research hard. Notes need to be constructed, but more importantly, you need to get your thoughts together. Post here your thesis statement, and tell us a little bit about your argument. What do you know so far? DO NOT FALL BEHIND ON THIS ASSIGNMENT. I WILL NOT ALLOW ANY LATE PAPERS!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My thesis statement for my bioethics paper is: The use of stem cells warrants controversy because of their derivation from early embryonic stem cells, however stem cell research is deemed ethical if conducted properly using cells which can now be harvested from live donors.
ReplyDeleteI am arguing that stem cell research has developed from its true beginning with the use of embryos and can be ethical if the stem cells are taken from adult stem cells in cadavers, bone marrow, and even fat. The main issue is that most aborted babies are highly accessible and available for a cheap price, in order to be used for stem cell research. Utilizing these aborted fetuses allows for the industry to gain profit and essentially perpetuate more abortions. There are numerous alternatives from which the source of stem cells can be taken from and used properly. Compared with embryonic stem cells, adult stem cells have a more limited ability to give rise to various cells of the body. While these controversial cells have been promoted as more promising for the treatment of disease, this research involves the destruction of embryos, and thus makes it unethical
I really like that you aren't just bashing stem cells and, rather, providing another option and mentioning their ethical benefits. I also think that the discussion between the embryonic stem cells being more promising but less ethical brings up a weird balance between being ethical and being practical.
DeleteI don't know if this is relevant, but have you researched if they have ever tried to harvest stem cells from miscarriages Dominique? I don't know if it has ever been done before because I haven't researched it myself, but I think this would be also another ethical route to go because you're deriving good from an awful evil that happens to so many women who want to have a child and are stricken by this. I like your topic, and I hope I can read it by the end of this because I really like stem cell research and how far it has come and I hope my question brings positive results.
DeleteI find this interesting and am excited to see the final project! Keep up the good work.
DeleteLogan, I will look into the harvesting of stem cells from miscarriages. I had not thought of that. I appreciate your suggestion!
DeleteDom, I cannot wait to read and see how your paper turns out. I think you have a great start on your research & I think Logan’s suggestion could make it even better. I know you will produce a great paper!!
DeleteMy thesis statement for my bioethics paper is: The process of therapeutic cloning for organ donation is unethical and is a threat to human dignity. The form of therapeutic cloning for organ donation has many ethical dilemmas found within it. The concepts of abortion, euthanasia, stem cell research, CRISPR, and in-vitro fertilization are found within. Even though it has not been put into use today, it has been making long and fast strides to make therapeutic cloning for organ donations a reality. They have been experimenting on animals already, however, many ethics programs like the President’s Council of Bioethics, created in the United States in 2002, feel that using the process of therapeutic cloning for organ donation can cause much more harm than good. Other countries like China, South Korea, and Singapore have already stated that this process would be beneficial within their countries. The process of therapeutic cloning for organ donation was designed to help create organs for people who are in need for them. There has been a major demand for organs and tissues like kidneys, lungs, corneas, hearts, and skin but there as been a lack of donors. The process of therapeutic cloning for organ donation has been created to start with an animal egg, like a cow or pig, and then take cells from the person who needs the organ transplant to fertilize the egg. The fertilized egg is then implanted into the animal. What they have proposed currently is that they would essentially terminate the pregnancy and then harvest the organs that are needed to successfully transplant. However, this leads to problems like how will the organs be fully developed to be able to do certain transplants because many organs need to be adult to be able to transplant. This leads to the possibility of placing them in farms, camps, to grow them to a adult age and then slaughtering them when the time comes. The combination of animal and human genes is called a chimaera.
ReplyDeleteThis topic has many strings attached to it. I also interviewed Miss John Paul Bauer to ask about her experience with her cornea transplants and how she would feel about having her cornea come from a chimera. She stated that she was incredibly grateful for her second opportunity at life and being able to see again. She believes that it is so much more humbling to receive her cornea from a person who died so that herself and many others could live again. She felt that receiving her cornea from a chimera is “Not in God’s original plan.” I too feel that receiving my future kidney from a chimera would be wrong. Even if an organism has an ounce of human in them, they should still be considered human. The opportunity of abusing this is far too great to take the risk.
Gracie I have a few problems/questions with your topic. First of all, what are you proposing to do about the organ donation shortage instead of this "cloning"? Second, when you state "This leads to the possibility of placing them in farms, camps, to grow them to a adult age and then slaughtering them when the time comes," is this not what farms already do to produce meats and other goods for the world? I honestly see no difference between the two because you're achieving a good from both methods, one just has edited genes and an organ inside of it. Third, have you considered looking into how they used to use pig valves in heart operations (I think that would be interesting)? My issue is, Miss John Paul Bauer's eye wasn't chimaera, on the contrary as you stated it was from "a person who died" so no animal genes were involved in the creation. Overall, your paper will be really good, I just think you need an alternative proposal to get more organ donors ethically instead of writing it off as a whole, I hope my questions help with your paper.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteFollowing what Logan said about having more organ donors, would it be possible to come to an agreement where people can choose if they want to receive an organ from a chimera, so that those who don't oppose it still could, and those that do have the choice? I reckon this could be an answer for both sides. Also, I would ask how someone would feel if they absolutely needed an organ transplant to live that they would be so caring as to where it comes from. Other than that, I really like how you interviewed Miss Bauer, I think that provides a really good source and opinion on the topic.
DeleteI think it was a great idea to interview John Paul Bauer! Good luck on your paper, it will be a good one!
DeleteThis must not have been clear enough. My paper is on the different propositions for therapeutic human cloning. One method, the one you are asking about, involves the implantation of what are, for all intents and purposes, genetically human zygotes into an animal womb. These creations/chimaeras are expected to be the potential donors of organs to make up for the shortage. I don’t have any issues with animals as organ donors. My own great-grandfather was given a pig’s valve in heart surgery, but this isn’t what this paper is debating. This is about a far more perverse and dire method that is expected to be explored in the coming years regardless of the morality of it or the humanity of its victims. There are many alternatives that I am going to explore within my paper.
DeleteMy thesis statement is: Genetically Modified Organisms are good and should be pursued because they produce stronger crops, maximize minimal farm space, and provide more nutrient full foods. The ethical concern is basically that it has unknown factors and risks, it favors big business, and that GMO aren't natural. It is also considered that the benefits are great and that each instance is different and this is why an ethical argument can still remain, because ethics have a tendency to change between people and can be controversial, however, the basis of GMO's are to help people and that is being accomplished. The benefits, as mentioned in the thesis, basically maximize the factors used in farming to be more efficient and effective, and that is a big goal in general life. Another positive I found is that GMO's are used to create medicines and vaccines to help people treat and/or prevent diseases, these medicines and vaccines come from a better source and have fewer risks than the prior methods. Overall, there are great benefits but also potential risks, and it needs to be tested and implemented more to be able to decide any definitive views, but they could also be the solution to the demand and needs for sustainable food world-wide.
ReplyDeleteChris, a few months ago I stumbled across a video that was about genetically modified cows. Apparently, in a foreign country the cows adapted to the environment to become very very skinny to deal with the heat, and as a result they became less fatty and had less meat. Now, they're trying to introduce our cows down there, but sadly, our cows can't take the heat, so now they're using gene editing to splice in the portion of the DNA that control heat from the cows in their country into the cows we're moving down there and so far there is one successful instance (sadly their sibling died in the womb or else there would have been two). I hope this helps towards your research. Also, make sure to mention that a GMO can result from selective breeding and not just gene editing because that's how we've derived plenty of food from their ancestors.
DeleteThe selective breeding is a really good point, and I didn't mention this, but typically GMOs are considered GMOs when their DNA manipulation is done in a non natural way or one that does not occur naturally by mating or by natural recombination. Basically, I think that selective breeding doesn't count here, or at least I'm not treating it as such. But thank you for the suggestion, also, thank you for bring up that video, I'll have to check it out.
DeleteChris, I read a good article a few weeks ago about how people who know less about GMOs tend to feel more strongly about them (whether for or against). Would be good to look it up to add to your paper. This looks great so far.
DeleteGMOs are very interesting because there is much controversy on them. The controversy is growing in today’s society as well, great topic I’m interested in where you take it.
DeleteMy thesis statement is: Insurance companies should be required to cover dementia treatments because the elderly have the right to live the best life possible. This should include but is not limited to medication, treatment and respite care. I decided to research and learn more about dementia due to the fact that my grandma does not even know my name, yet is still so happy and incredible. It is interesting to me that my family pays a large amount of money for the nursing home and medications that are not proven to work. I researched all the medications and found out there are many forms of dementia. In my paper I will be focusing on the dignity of people with dementia. Many say that due to the fact that these medicines do not work, people with dementia should not even take these medications and that they should just stop selling them. However, I will include the right of a person and explain that they are able to try for the small possibility of less dementia symptoms. I will overall argue why Insurance companies should have to cover all of these expenses, and trust me after researcher it’s a lot of money.
ReplyDeleteEmily, I am really looking forward to reading your paper & seeing how you are going to be able to include your own family and experience. I think that is a great thing to include!
DeleteThis topic is very interesting and it certainly helps that you are involved and aware with dementia on a first-hand basis. This argument is very different from most bioethics arguments, but I cannot wait to see what you come up with in your paper. You could also include that insurance companies should be required to cover the expenses, due to the fact that those who suffer from dementia cannot do anything to prevent it from happening in the first place.
DeleteEmily, I think you picked a great topic and one that is certainly very interesting. I think that since this is an issue close to you, it will make the paper even better. Good luck!
DeleteEmily, you definitely have a very good start and strong background regarding this topic. You have some very good ideas and I think it is a topic that should be discussed. Good luck!
DeleteThesis: The widespread acceptance of the transgender ideology has produced numerous societal and social issues within the United States to the extent where the consequences of this ideology outweighs the positives, thus justifying the ideology as unethical and detrimental to not just the United States, but all throughout the world.
ReplyDeleteFrom the moment of consummation the average person is given two sex chromosomes that identifies us as either male of female, but the transgender ideology disagrees. This ideology argues that sex and gender are not simply biological, but rather, an inner sense of feeling, although evidence shows that there is a differentiation biologically between being males and females within the sex chromosomes, hormones produced, and even the grey matter within the brain. This has led to an increasing amount of people being diagnosed with gender dysphoria, and thus being treated with hormonal and sexual reassignment therapy, even though neither of which change the gender of the individual, but rather let the mentally ill person live in their own fantasy world where they have complete and utter control over their body. The reality of the situation is that DSM-5, the standards psychologists and psychiatrists must follow, did not look into the evidence that hormonal and sexual reassignment is just about the most detrimental way to "cure" gender dysphoria because it leads to a forty-one percent suicidality rate -ten times that of which for the average American citizen. Instead, as DSM-4 states, they must be given mental care to remove these delusions of being the opposite gender. But yet, society lacks either the common sense or the logic to identify this as a mental disorder, instead allowing them to "do whatever they want with their body," but yet when a person wishes to commit suicide they are instantly thrown into a mental care facility that BENEFITS their mental health. Society is now attempting to further promote these delusions by forcing children onto hormone blockers and allowing a person to use any public facility as they wish. Overall, this ideology has gotten out of hand and rather mistakes "gender identity" for "gender role" psychologically, and as a result, makes a person believe they are "born in the wrong body."
This argument is extremely relevant to today’s society. I haven’t done any extensive research on the transgender ideology, but most people are familiar with the recent change involving “Caitlyn Jenner”, or the former Bruce Jenner, and have no other experience with such forms of transgender ideologies. This will be an interesting read and I cannot wait to see what you come up with.
DeleteThesis: Vaccinations have historically kept communities safe and that must continue, however, quality, quantity and national health necessity must all be regulated lawfully as well as personally in order to adhere to Catholic teaching.
ReplyDeleteMy essay focuses mainly on three topics: the issue of vaccines containing fetal cell lines, the controversy associated with the HPV vaccine, and the quantity of administered vaccines. Vaccines with fetal cell lines are given to almost every single child. Fetal cell lines are so widely used in vaccines because these cells are cheap to obtain and the diploid cell lines of fetuses are the best for fighting diseases. Some routine vaccines do have alternatives to the fetal cell vaccines, but many do not. This is a huge dilemma especially for Catholic mothers vaccinating their newborn babies. However, according to the Catholic Church, refusing to vaccinate is more unethical because it puts the whole population at risk for diseases we have eradicated.
The HPV vaccine is another area of concern. The HPV vaccine is mainly given to young girls to help prevent human papillomavirus, which is an STD that causes cervical cancer among other genital issues. The vaccine is administered three times between ages 11-14 and it costs about $360, making it one of the most expensive vaccines. States such as Texas and Virginia are making the HPV vaccine necessary for girls entering sixth grade, which is unethical because HPV is not an airborne virus and will not affect student population unless it is transferred through sexual contact.
Finally, vaccines have also causes many concerns with the dosage they are administered in. This dosage is often way to high, aiding the formation of “super viruses.” These super viruses are especially difficult to treat because they have built up an immunity to the vaccine. This is creating a frantic demand for new vaccines or cures for diseases that once were extremely rare in the Untied States. In other words, health care officials are actually sometimes reversing the effects intended by the vaccine. There is such a thing as too much.
Never heard of the dosage problems. If you are referring to the “delayed schedule” of giving vaccines, the doctor that created it has said that it is only to “make parents feel better” and there is not scientific basis on it. Sophie, I’m concerned about where you are getting your information. There is plenty of crack science around vaccines and I’m worried you could fall down that rabbit hole. I would suggest speaking to Mrs. A to try and find some good, medically sound sources.
DeleteThesis Statement: Humans, along with animals, have a right to life, but by using animals to test new medicines, some believe animals are not given this right, however the benefit of testing new medications in animals have made tremendous, positive impacts on the lives of humans and animals.
ReplyDeleteThe use of animals in the process of testing new medicines is an extremely sensitive topic. One of the most interesting facts I have found about this topic is that the Catholic Church supports the idea of animal testing. The church’s stances is that if animal testing is done in a humane way and done for the advancement of humankind, the church is fine with it. The US law is also based off this same idea, humane and advancement of man. The head of the church, Pope Francis, who choose his name after St. Francis of Assisi, the lover of animals and patron saint of ecologist, agrees with the teachings of the church. He states in his 2015 encyclical, Laudato Si, that the scientists performing the experiments must not put the animal in any unneeded pain. He also says that God has given these scientists the knowledge and ability to perform these experiments, and man kind can not take their God given talents away from them. PETA( People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is the .org inaction fighting back against animal testing. In 2015, the same year Pope Francis’ Laudato Si came out, PETA acknowledge Pope Francis as “PETA’S person of the year.” Why would PETA acknowledge someone who supports the idea that they argue against.(Pope Francis being PETA’s 2015 person of the year is not going to swing people to the side of animal testing, but his opinion about animal testing might. I found this fact very interesting and ironic.)
Jacob, you picked a great topic, and I’m sure it’s going to be a very enjoyable read, but I have a few things that I THINK may help you to lengthen your paper. First of all, in the Book of Genesis, it mentions how God created man on the 6th day above all other creatures. I feel like you could incorporate this into your paper with a few different arguments; and second, I feel like unless you have a volunteer who is willing to take a new medicine, you can’t really test it on another being that has a soul. We can’t have advancements in medicine if there is no one or nothing to test said medicine. Just a few suggestions but I’m sure it’ll be a great paper!
DeleteJacob, you told me that you were struggling to find information on this topic. However, it seems like you were able to do it because your argument is starting to sound great!
DeleteThesis statement: While organ donations are notoriously known for being able to save the lives of many people, organ trafficking, the equity of the topic as a whole, brain death and the harvesting process all create issues among those who are considering to donate their organs or become a recipient of donated organs.
ReplyDeleteIn my essay, I am looking to mainly focus my paper on four different aspects of organ donation; organ trafficking, the equity of who and where the organ goes to, brain death and the surgery and harvesting process. After doing much research, I have found the Catholic Church allows and is okay with receiving organs to those considered brain dead by neurological criteria, which many people have many controversies with because they believe they should have died by natural death or cardio pulmonary death. Organ trafficking has also become a major issue, because people are coming over seas or even personally contacting a possible donor, and paying them insane amounts for their organs. This issue has even gone as far as people creating makeshift operating rooms in their homes to do these surgeries under the table. The equity in this issue is also a main complaint for many, as there are some areas throughout the country that do not get offers for many transplants and those people typically wait longer for a transplant. And, as a result of this, many more people end up dying. The process of harvesting and donation as a whole has become much more intricate over the past few years as more regulations have come into play. The matching of the donor to the recipient has also become much more complex and a large computer system has been implemented to ease the matching process slightly. Organ donation has become such a large part of health care over the past few decades, but the controversy has also become something many people consider, which may or may not be a good thing.
Ellie, I think you picked what could be a very interesting topic. So I am personally still confused about organ trafficking. Is it like stealing people’s body matter? Like organ theft? If so, you could talk to Mr. Winklbauer about his experience with it. His hip replacement was stolen in transit before he received it for surgery. Or is this about something else? I’m just a little unclear on what the topic really is. I myself will need an organ transplants in the near future, so learning about organ donations is fascinating to me. I really think this has a lot of potential.
DeleteGrace, as I have been doing my research, I have been finding organ trafficking to be what many people consider to be the third form of human trafficking. It is basically when a person contacts and person, whether it be anonymous or not, and makes them a large monetary offer for their organs. Many times, these surgeries are then carried out in a makeshift operating room, or they are completed in a hospital, and the surgical team is told that the donor is someone that is donating their organs out of love & kindness, when really they are doing it for the money.
DeleteThank you for saying that. That is so fascinating. I can’t wait to see how this works out for you!
DeleteMy thesis statement is, the issue of the opioid epidemic is a big controversy as to how many, why, and when they are given to patients. However, opioids can be deemed medically necessary if they are given under certain diagnoses. I am arguing for a stringent regulation be placed on all opioids as to how many should be given and only under certain medical conditions. So far, what I do know, is relating to my own personal experiences when I have had my shoulder surgery and wisdom teeth removed I was given 60 Percocet pills each time. Although each one of these surgery’s was painful, I believe that acetaminophen would have done the trick. It is my belief due to my personal experience that doctors over prescribe these drugs leading people to become addicted. The responsibility not only falls on the doctors over prescribing but the pharmaceutical companies instructing the doctors that they are non addictive, then the doctors give large prescriptions based off it thus creating the opioid epidemic.
ReplyDeleteThis is Dan
DeleteDan, I think you are doing your bioethics paper on an important topic that is of growing importance in Elk County. It is not bad to build off of personal experience (I am also planning to incorporate this into my paper); however, it is important to find sufficient information to backup your claim. Some operations require you to take opioids. For me, I would pass out from the intense amount of pain if I did not take pills after my spinal surgery. However, I do believe that doctors need to stick to what they learned and not prescribe people more opioids unless they do further testing. It has potential with more research to back it up.
DeleteYes your absolutely right in your case. As my thesis states I believe opioids are okay as long as they are medically necessary. I have more information to back up my thesis.
DeleteDan, it will make your paper very interesting being able to speak from experience. I think this topic is very relevant and interesting to talk about.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe donation of the human body to science can be a difficult and complex issue, but one that if considered fully, has the potential to educate further important scientific discoveries while adhering to ethically sound principles as well. Basically I’m arguing that if the right body donation program is chosen, it can be a wonderful benefit to society and mich can be learned from them. However, some programs involve unethical uses of the human body, such as allowing it to be eaten by animals, or displaying them in plastic, or not allowing a funeral to take place. If, you want to donate your body to science, great! But, research needs to be done on the program you chose needs to align with your values. Even though the soul is gone from the body, the corpse is still a human one, and deserves respect. By having an open and frank conversation about what you want done with your body after your death, you avoid having your body donating to such a program. We must always be thinking about our death, not only in a spiritual way, but a practical way.
ReplyDeleteI don’t really know what side I stand on with your argument. I can see the positive aspect of new discoveries, but on the other hand, I feel as if using real human bodies when the are alternative soulutions could be considered unethical, in my eyes anyway. However, this is just my opinion and I will keep this topic in mind. I am excited to learn more about it and maybe my views will change! Good luck with this!
DeleteI agree with Maddie on I’m not sure where I stand but it is very interesting and I am interested to see where you stand on this matter. Good luck,
DeleteThesis: Humane and skillful care for the dying is a social obligation as well as a personal offering from those directly involved, but should remain the patients decision to a certain extent.
ReplyDeleteEnd-of-life decision making is the process in which the patient, and the patients family goes through to determine which treatments will and will not be used to treat a life-threatening illness. New drugs, devices, and tools are developed every day for use in ICUs (Intensive Care Unit) that increase the ability to counteract or modify the effects of diseases that, in the past, were surely fatal. These new drugs and sources of technology in the intensive care unit may be very helpful in some cases, but also very harmful in others. More often than not, caregivers in the Western parts of the world, he caregiver or physician is the one who decides what medications the patient will be placed upon and which they will not, but this isn’t always the case. The patient and the patients family should be able to decide how the individual will end their life, but remain within the context of the Catholic Church. Some patients aren’t able to decide for themselves (for example; those in persistent vegetative states) and in this case, the family should decide what is best for the patient, again, keeping in the boundaries of Catholic Church teaching.
This topic seems very interesting! I really like your viewpoint about the decision of the patient in persistent vegetative states. I look forward to hearing more about this paper.
DeleteSteve you have my intrigued in your topic as you say it's a social obligation. Do you mean it's a social obligation because it's the right moral thing to do or it's what should be socially accepted?
DeleteThe thesis of my paper is, “Death should never be a consequence, even for the most hardened, convicted criminals in countries with the ability to keep society safe with imprisonment, like the Untied States. I decided to make the the United States the focal point because the death penalty is such a broad topic and in order to include other countries I would have to dig deep into their government processes, funding, perceptions, cultures, etc., whereas, I have more familiarity with these topics regarding the U.S.. Furthermore, in the paper I plan to elaborate upon Pope Francis’s revision of the Catechism of the Catholic Church in early August concerning the death penalty. The National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC) also has articles explaining the double effect, when something is morally wrong but morally good at the same time, and I believe that many people can agree that the death penalty falls into this category. In Dignitas Personae, defending the dignity of a human person also comes into play. It notes that a person has dignity from the time that they are conceived until their natural death, meaning that the human person has no right to take that dignity away by any means. Finally, I am researching the accounts of victims on death row in order to provide a glance into their thoughts, actions, and cases. One of which that was extremely interesting was the struggle of Kenneth Foster, a man who was sentenced to death under the Law of Parties. Foster was not involved with any murder, but was actually put on death row before the actual murder, Mauriceo Brown. Nearly 6 hours before Kenneth’s execution, his case was commuted and a sentence of life in prison was redistributed. Not only does this go to show the brutal consequence that the death penalty can have on a person, a family, and a nation, but that there are in fact alternative solutions to this torturous sentence.
ReplyDeleteI agree Maddie. It is not our choice to decide who lives and who dies. There are many other approaches that do not require death. Also, I believe that spending life in prison is a harsher punishment compared to the death penalty.
DeleteThis is a relevant topic to write about because it still continues in the United States. It answers the question, “Why should a person be killed for killing?” I think it will be interesting to read the thoughts, actions, and cases of the individuals.
DeleteAll humans were created in the image and likeness of God in which we were given one gender. As humans, Americans, and Catholics, we are given a remarkable amount of free choices, but the choice of gender is not one of them.
ReplyDeleteMy argument will be centered around the belief that humans are not given the choice of gender. Given the fact that this could primarily be a faith-based question, I will touch on that throughout most of paper. However, I believe it is also important to also use other approaches to the topic. Such as a scientific approach proving that humans are given one gender at birth, and the fact that the gender cannot truly be changed. I will also refute the common argument that gender is simply changed through surgery. I have plenty of information proving that that statement is not true. Lastly, it is important to touch on these topics without saying what is “right” and what is “wrong”, because it is also not anyone’s purpose to decide how someone else lives their own life.
I totally agree with your side of the argument. However my question is when There is a kid born with both male and female genitalia which can happen, how does the parent chose which is correct?
DeleteBryce I really like the topic you pick and really want to read this as I'm really interested in what you have to say about this. I also like how you are not using religion as a crutch but will also you science to prove your thesis.
DeleteYou have a very frank and justifiable thesis, well done.
DeleteI think you have chosen a very interesting topic and I hope I get to read it. I think using religion will really boost your argument! Good luck!
DeleteTo be honest Dan, I am not sure. I will have to research that a bit more.
DeletePerformance enhancing drugs are not only harmful physically, but are the cause of societal concerns and ethical issues, therefore, use should be banned for athletes both ametuer and professional. I know in today’s world everyone is looking for more and more. I choose this topic because it interests me when athletes look for unnatural resources to excel at their sport. I believe that the use of steroids is unethical and is the cause for much controversy in sports. Many people are caught but many times people also get away with it. This is where the problem comes in. The steroid control act of 1990 forces the distribution of steroids to be given through a physician. In my paper I will write about the scandals like Lance Armstrong, Derek Jeter, and many others. I will also bring up the consequences like Olympic athletes who were stripped of their medals because the illegal use of steroids. I will also talk about the effects of steroids, long lasting and short term. We need to put a stop to this because many people who use steroids we admire and pay money to watch them accomplish great athletic heights but this further encourages them. When people manipulate their bodies for our entertainment, what are we? Many times we don’t know but it is still an ethical issue.
ReplyDeleteBen, I think you’ve picked a really interesting topic here. I also think it would be interesting to touch a little bit on the side effects of these drugs and what makes them so wrong from a medical perspective. Good luck!
DeleteThis will be an interesting topic to write about because it is an international problem. You could write about the astonishing number of Russian athletes who were banned from competing in the Olympics a few years ago for using performance enhancing drugs. Adding the physical and psychological problems associated with this drugs would also be interesting.
DeleteThis is a topic I have always been interesting and I can’t wait to read it. I think you have chosen a great topic. Good luck!
DeleteVaccines, though sometimes harmful, are essential to keeping today's children and adults healthy, however, proper guidelines must be followed and regulations enforced to make sure they are properly formed and distribution
ReplyDeleteMy argument is focused on two things, the creation of vaccines and the ethics of putting these things in your body and how some are helpful while other can be less effective. I am using Donum vitae as my Catholic encyclical for this idea. I really want to focus on the creation of vaccines, where they come from, how they are processed etc. I have learned that not only are vaccines made from fetuses, but also animals such as pigs, which is disturbing considering your putting that in your blood. I will also focus on the flu vaccine and why it can be ineffective because of the virus is always changing from year to year, along with other diseases that it is effective with. Research is going well and I'm happy with the amount of information I have as of now.
Anthony, I think you have a very interesting topic. I look forward to reading your paper. I honestly never thought about what was making up the vaccines I was getting, I just got them.
DeleteI am looking forward to reading the section of your paper that refers to the Donum Vitae. I hope it will be as interesting as I anticipate.
DeleteBecause vaccinations are important in establishing and sustaining a healthy community, they should not only be received, but they should also be accepted for the miracles they work. However, regulations should be established in regards to minimal exposure and the ethical design of vaccinations that are absolutely necessary.
ReplyDeleteIn 1796, the first vaccine was produced by Edward Jenner with the purpose of protecting individuals from smallpox. Since then, vaccinations have been used to greatly reduce and eradicate a variety of serious, life-threatening diseases. These vaccines are extremely safe as long as they are received in small doses, and they can reduce someone’s percentage of contracting a disease between 90% and 99%. Although they are deemed safe, there are ethical issues that arise. Many vaccines are produced using aborted fetal tissue and stem cells. The immoral process behind the production of these vaccines is not justified by diseases they prevent. Vaccines are an important part of a healthy life, but the moral standard behind their production needs to be considered.
I think you have a very strong thesis statement. This is an interesting topic.
DeleteCurrent society is one of convenience which is creating ethical struggles for those who are left to care for loved ones with unexpected social and emotional disabilities however, regardless of the sacrifice, the dignity of the human person must be upheld.
ReplyDeleteOur society now of days seems to do everything by taking the easiest route. Yet, when it comes to the elderly, terminally ill people, or the disabled, the support that is needed is sometimes not easy, causing an issue for the so called ‘normal’ people. As a loved one, we must go above and beyond to care for them. Everyone, no matter what their lifestyle is like, has dignity. This means everyone is worthy and deserves respect. In my paper, I will be describing illnesses that some encounter that need much care. I will also be talking about what we as a loved one of the patient or elderly person are expected to do and how we should make decisions. Taking care of those who tend to be hard to take care of is what we are called to do, even though it can be frustrating. We live in a culture where when people get too hard to take care of, we want to get rid of them, but that is wrong. Change must happen.
I think your topic is something that must be talked about. There are so many people that are being neglected or even forgotten about such as people in nursing homes.
DeleteThesis statement: Due to the psychological and physical components and the complexity of addiction, those addicted to alcohol must be classified as having a mental illness and be treated accordingly.
ReplyDeleteAddicts, especially alcohol addicts, have an impaired free will because of a psychological craving for alcohol. Although the addict willingly drank alcohol before he or she became addicted, after months or years of alcohol abuse, the addict’s freedom was flawed. Alcoholics cannot just quit drinking alcohol because they believe that their body needs the substance in order to function. Alcoholism leaves addicts with no choice but to continue drinking because their brain has been damaged into thinking that the alcohol provides them with nutrients.
Alcoholism and its symptoms can be compared to any other mental illness. For example, a patient suffering from dementia shows similar personality traits to an alcoholic. Neither person chose to have their mental illness; it just slowly developed over time. A dementia patient can be very aggressive at times, but an alcohol addict can also show signs of hostility or aggression while under the influence or when he or she is craving the substance.
Alcoholics can no longer think for themselves because of their corrupt psychological state. Their body has been tricked into believing that the alcohol is necessary for survival and as a result the addict can not simply walk away from their condition. Their free will has been corrupted and thus alcoholism can be classified as a mental illness.
You’re thesis is very interesting Gabe, I like how you’re taking the stand that addiction should be classified as an illness rather than a crime.
DeleteThesis: The new CRISPR gene should not be used in humans due to patient rights, ethical concerns and possible physical implications.
ReplyDeleteThe main points I will be addressing in my bioethics essay are the use of CRISPR for research on embryos, and the much unknown about this field of study. For example, it is a fact that many of the embryos used in gene editing research are discarded after their use. Also, these embryos are constructed using an immoral way of creating life called IVF.
My thesis is as follows: Abortion is a very controversial topic and as such, we need to make sure medical professionals are at the forefront of this discussion, not self declared professionals.
ReplyDeleteI've been doing a lot of research on the definition of life and what not and I find it interesting that state and federal law can differ wildly (ie. NY vs. federal). I am very interested to see how this works out, considering much of it will be political and common speak.
My thesis statement for my bioethics paper is: Embryonic stem cell research should be abolished due to the fact that there is a safer and ethical for scientists to obtain the research that they need.
ReplyDeleteAfter conducting thorough research, it can be concluded that embryonic stem cell research is a medically unnecessary means of research. Some stem cell research can be highly beneficial that can be conducted without the unethical methods of embryonic research. Embryonic stem cells are extracted from the inner cell mass of human embryos. The human embryo must be completely destroyed in order to obtain the cells. Adult stem cell research is a much safer alternative to embryonic stem cell research because it can produce the same results, without the harmful effects of murdering a human embryo. Extracting adult stem cells does not produce the same harmful physical effects that the embryonic stem cells do. Stem cells can be used to treat certain medical conditions that are caused by a loss of cells. Embryonic stem cell research is completely unnecessary because there is a completely logical and far more safe method of extraction.
I really enjoy your topic here. I think it’s really important to talk about the fact that stem cells do not have to be obtained through murdering human embryos, but the fact that there is another alternative option that is way less tragic.
DeleteThesis Statement: World wide, the agenda of the abortion culture is being advanced through fallacious claims such as "maternal-fetal complications" which mollifies the ugliness of the unethical practice of the killing of thousands of innocent babies per day.
ReplyDeleteAbortion is defined as “the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy.” In my paper, I will be focusing on the aspect of having an abortion when either the mother, baby, or both are in danger, and what the morality behind that choice is. It’s a scientific fact that from the moment of fertilization, a human being meets all the scientific criteria for a living organism. Therefore, this human being is completely distinct from the mother’s body. Also, it is important to note that abortion does not cure any diseases, as pregnancy is not a disease to be cured. The purposeful murder of an unborn child through means of abortion is not healthcare.
I can tell how much emotion you are putting into this paper just by this post. I find it interesting because our topics are similar but at the same time very different. You made some amazing points and I can tell this is going to be a good paper.
DeleteThesis: The Supreme Court should encourage and be encouraged to overturn Roe vs. Wade
ReplyDeleteMy paper primarily focuses on the subject of Roe vs. Wade. Roe v Wade was issued in 1973 and makes abortion legal. There are many arguments as to why we need this law. These include, “it’s a woman’s choice,” “it’s none of your business” and “my body, my rights.” When looking at this topic the reasons why we need it bury the many reasons we would be better off without it. Though it requires a lot of digging, these reasons can be found and include, “it’s unconstitutional,” “it’s hypocritical,” and even “it’s a step backwards in equality.” The major point throughout this whole argument it whether or not the fetus is a person. A simple answer is yes but there are many ways to go about proving it. What defines a person? Is it the ability to think and reason? Is it the ability to be seen? Is it the contributions we make to society? There are many ways to go about proving what makes up a person and ultimately that a fetus is a person. There isn’t an excuse for abortion; it is a purely selfish act. Though we are making strides on this topic, we have to stop and ask ourselves if they are in the right direction and if so are they enough?
Thesis Statement: While some places may treat the mother as a priority, the individuality of her and the child is undeniable. Therefore, mother-fetal conflicts are not a justification to ignore human rights and murder a child.
ReplyDeleteI will be writing my paper on the different complications a mother could have during a pregnancy. Therefore, stating reasons of solutions and thorough reasons as to why it is wrong. I will also be discussing the point of view of Catholic doctors who view it as wrong and doctors who do not believe it is. The main point of my research paper is too state that abortions do far more harm than good and it should not be an option or alternative for pregnant women. Society is manipulated in many cases to believe that abortions are the best route to go and that they are harmless. Every single life is valuable and through any stage of pregnancy an abortion it is the killing of a living baby.