Alicia’s Blog

allison p, allison m, casey, and tayler

For many centuries mankind has been developing new and improved technology allowing the research of various treatments for diseases to be discovered. With these technological advances, our society has been provided with the most up to date treatment in order to maintain a healthy environment and obtain important information pertaining to certain ailments and diseases or so we think. Although our nation claims to be “ahead of the game” when it comes to medical breakthroughs and modern medical technology, we still restrict the research on some of the most important and promising medical research yet. For example, stem cell research. Stem cell research could possibly hold the most important keys in curing our society’s most deadly diseases. Stem cell research could provide the hope for those afflicted with diseases such as Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, paralysis, and even cancer.

I look at the technology we have today, having the ability to build artificial limbs, recreate an individual’s body with plastic surgery, and even manipulate fertilization of sperm and eggs. Why can’t we provide this research to the citizens of this nation who are not asking to have the “perfect physique” but who simply want to be cured of their disease and be granted the gift of time with their families? Developing life saving technologies should be at the forefront of our priorities as a nation.

In 2001, President Bush stated that there would be a restriction of funding for stem cell research and that federal money would only be used on the very few stem cell lines, including the defective ones that still existed. Restricting federal funding for stem cell research here in the U.S. has allowed other countries who encourage the research to jump ahead in the biomedical knowledge race. Our nation is falling further behind other countries when it comes to scientific research.

When it comes to this kind of life saving research there should be no question if it should or should not be done. The fact is that any research that can save a life regardless of what is deemed to be “ethical” or not should be mandatory, and the government should be the first group to support scientific research. The development and success of this nation depends on it. Who knows, if we do not get back in the “game” of research some of our citizens could move to other countries with the care and treatment that they desperately need.

The stem cell argument is one of the biggest arguments in the United States today, and honestly I do not believe that stem cell research will never be an issue that will be put to rest. With or without the research there will always be individuals against or for stem cell treatment, but I hope that one day we can all agree to disagree and take account of the facts we have at hand. Saving lives should be the most important factor when it comes to debating the issue of stem cell research.

The main argument made when it comes to stem cell research is if it is unethical or not to obtain stem cells from an embryo. The big debate is whether or not life begins at conception although a human embryo has no ability to survive outside the womb. What about the embryos that are aborted? Why is it so unethical to obtain stem cells from them but we can just simply throw them away? Why not use the aborted embryos to research stem cells?

I can only hope that one day our society can look past their conservative views and decide what would be best for our nation. Stem cell research would open the door to so many different possibilities and most importantly, give hope to individuals and their families who have diseases that could be cured by this biomedical research.

I think using the weblog to retrieve different opinions of topics and issues is a great idea, although i do not think that I will use it again after this class. If I were to use this outside of English 110, it would be a great way to spark conversations with other bloggers about personal interests such as hobbies and personal opinions or even use it to benefit another project for a class similar to our op-ed like another writing assignment or for research. Weblogging is a great way to just get your opinion and thoughts out there or gain feedback on projects for school.

At the beginning of the quarter, starting off with the research paper, i had a very good attitude. i had already written a lot of research papers and was very comfortable with the idea of picking my own topic to research. towards the end of the quarter when i had to make my weblog i was somewhat skeptical. i have never really had the chance to put my work out there in the open for everyone else to see, but i think ultimately it has helped me have more confidence in my writing.

For many centuries mankind has been developing new and improved technology allowing the research of various treatments for diseases to be discovered. With these technological advances, our society has been provided with the most up to date treatment in order to maintain a healthy environment and obtain important information pertaining to certain ailments and diseases or so we think. Although our nation claims to be “ahead of the game” when it comes to medical breakthroughs and modern medical technology, we still restrict the research on some of the most important and promising medical research yet. For example, stem cell research. Stem cell research could possibly hold the most important keys in curing our society’s most deadly diseases. Stem cell research could provide the hope for those afflicted with diseases such as Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, paralysis, and even cancer.

I look at the technology we have today, having the ability to build artificial limbs, recreate an individual’s body with plastic surgery, and even manipulate fertilization of sperm and eggs. Why can’t we provide this research to the citizens of this nation who are not asking to have the “perfect physique” but who simply want to be cured of their disease and be granted the gift of time with their families? Developing life saving technologies should be at the forefront of our priorities as a nation.

In 2001, President Bush stated that there would be a restriction of funding for stem cell research and that federal money would only be used on the very few stem cell lines, including the defective ones that still existed. Restricting federal funding for stem cell research here in the U.S. has allowed other countries who encourage the research to jump ahead in the biomedical knowledge race. Our nation is falling further behind other countries when it comes to scientific research.

When it comes to this kind of life saving research there should be no question if it should or should not be done. The fact is that any research that can save a life regardless of what is deemed to be “ethical” or not should be mandatory, and the government should be the first group to support scientific research. The development and success of this nation depends on it. Who knows, if we do not get back in the “game” of research some of our citizens could move to other countries with the care and treatment that they desperately need.

The stem cell argument is one of the biggest arguments in the United States today, and honestly I do not believe that stem cell research will never be an issue that will be put to rest. With or without the research there will always be individuals against or for stem cell treatment, but I hope that one day we can all agree to disagree and take account of the facts we have at hand. Saving lives should be the most important factor when it comes to debating the issue of stem cell research.

The main argument made when it comes to stem cell research is if it is unethical or not to obtain stem cells from an embryo. The big debate is whether or not life begins at conception although a human embryo has no ability to survive outside the womb. What about the embryos that are aborted? Why is it so unethical to obtain stem cells from them but we can just simply throw them away? Why not use the aborted embryos to research stem cells?

I can only hope that one day our society can look past their conservative views and decide what would be best for our nation. Stem cell research would open the door to so many different possibilities and most importantly, give hope to individuals and their families who have diseases that could be cured by this biomedical research.

-What do you take to be the rules and conventions of the op-ed genre? Cite at least one example from a current op-ed.

Op-ed’s do have some rules and known conventions. For example, the op-ed must be short in length and be blunt with what argument the author is attempting to relay across to a particular audience. The op-ed must by timely in a sense that the issue being discussed or argument being made is a present-day event that has occured within the past week or month. An op-ed must be persuasive and include clarity and wit of the argument. It is also written with a tone of authorial confidence that enhances the author’s ability to persuade the audience. The flow and writing techniques used in an op-ed is more informal than in an essay or formal piece. For example, in an op-ed discussing the relation between government and stem cell research there was a statement made saying “Republicans have transformed our party into the political arm of conservative Christians” concerning the opposition of the many controversial topics that are dealt with the government too such as stem cell research, gay marriage, and the opposition to freezing human and embryo stem cells.

-After closely reading a recent op-ed, consider what persuasive or argumentative strategies are found in your op-ed, are the author’s choices effective?

After reading a recent op-ed that I found, the strategies that the author uses to persuade the audience are very effective. In order to appeal to a more academic audience as well as a popular audience, the author uses information from scientific researchers. For example, “Current policy has depressed the field” of research and caused an exodus of scientists from the United States to other countries where such research is flourishing, University of Iowa researcher Nicholas Zavazava says. But “we are a big country; we ought to be able to roll things back.” By using a researcher who knows a great deal on the specific topic, the author is able to hold a more steady argument. Also, the author uses facts in the piece that allows her to provide a more stable argument against the audience with opposing views.

When speaking to different audiences, there are different experiences for academic and popular audiences. With an academic audience, writing must be more formal and professional than a piece directed towards a popular audience. With a popular audience, there is more of a leniency in the piece. You are more free to use sarcasm and wit in the writing.

Here is something i found on USA Today that relates to my research project topic.Interesting.

For many years, stem cell research has been the center of attention whenever government funded research has been  discussed. Although President Bush, has restricted government funding of this very important research, I believe  that this research is needed not only for the knowledge of our society but for the opportunity to save lives. Stem cells have a special characteristic that gives them the ability to renew themselves through a specifc type of cellular division. After division, the cell is capable of differentiating into various types of cells. Here is the debate. Stem cells are found in embryos, which means that in order to obtain embryonic stem cells, the embryo must be aborted or destroyed. It is also possible to obtain stem cells in adult tissues as well. With this research, we will be able to cure diseases such as Parkinson’s, Alzeihmer’s, diabetes, paralysis, and cancer. Without this research, we will continue to deny individuals afflicted with certain diseases the right to proper and effective treatment that could save their lives. With this resaerch, we will have the technology and knowledge to save lives.