After September 11, 2001, America increased security including harder immigration restrictions. The restrictions affected those seeking citizenship and also scientists hoping to do research and teach. By 2004, the United State was warned that these policies would delay scientific exchange. According to a recent Nature editorial, these restrictions have improved. The government has managed to abandon a plan to force foreign scientists to obtain licenses to work in a laboratory. The editor feels complacent with the improvements made by the United States government. I feel that the United States has not done enough with the restriction policy for immigrants.
Right now America is faced with a big debate over the immigration between Mexico and America, its neighboring country. The reason why a lot of scientists want to come to America is because this country has a lot of new hi-tech equipment as well as a lot of funding that goes into scientific research. For scientists there is a great need to keep doors open between the science communities so that they can communicate ideas efficiently. According to another article by Nature in 2003, The Risk of Exclusion, an Australian citizen was sent to Montreal for a one-day visa interview. When he tired to return to the United States he was delayed for nine weeks because he was born in Malaysia and that was one of the 26 countries being investigated after 9/11(Nature, pg 1). This incident happened just two years before the editor in the 2006 article from Nature claimed that so much has been improved. I understand that the government finds a greater need to protect its citizens, but for the pursuit of higher knowledge in the field of science the government should try to find a more efficient means of allowing people to travel into the United States.
With these immigration restrictions not only are scientists feeling the affects but so are public-health programs. As mention in Nature’s 2003 article, “Chris Beyrer, who directs the AIDS International Training and Research Program at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, says that visa delays have occurred…in Uganda and Thailand”(Nature, 2). For scientists that live in Africa coming to America it is very important to learn how to implement “Antiviral therapy for AIDS” (Nature, 2). Without this knowledge there is no hope in ending the AIDS crisis in Africa. However, new guidelines for obtaining a visa have pushed back much needed information other countries need to fight illnesses. As mention in 2003 Nature magazine, now many scientists have to wait three to five months for their visa to be processed (Nature, 1). The second stage of obtaining an entry stamp is harder to predict because consular officials can be faced with criminal charges for admitting someone who commits a terrorist act (Nature, 1). These delays not only affect other countries but the United States as well.
As mention in a meeting amongst the House Science Committee many expressed satisfaction from the exclusion of foreign scientist (Nature, 2). It is unlikely for a large number of committee members to change their mind in three years, especially, as the United States continues to receive biological threats that can be easily transferred on an airplane. However, there is still a great risk from not involving foreign scientists. As mention in Peuples and Monde, the United States can deny funding for scientific research of HIV (Peuples and Monde, 1). The Bush Administration appears to be in denial that there should only be “abstinence-only” programs regardless of the thousands of people who already have HIV (Peuples and Monde, 1). By having scientist from other countries coming to America, our scientists can be introduced to new ways to neutralize or eliminate the HIV virus. These other countries can use the funding provided by their government to discover new treatment. Although, if the scientists from these countries can not come into the Unites States then American citizens will be behind in beneficial treatment. HIV is a rapidly growing problem that needs to be contained now before it becomes out of hand across the world.
I am not saying that America needs to forget about 9/11 and allow any scientist to come to America. At the same time be excluding every scientist America falls behind in new ways from improving public health. As a college student with the lack of international students I can not fully expand my potential because I am not exposed to other ideas. With my goals of becoming a Pharmacist other ideas are key factors to creating cures for some of the most deadly and harmful diseases. Outside influences can point out things that I or other colleagues may have over looked. If other countries continued to be prevented from entering the United States these countries could create weapons that could harm us without our knowledge. As the saying goes “Keep your friends close, keep you enemies closer.”
Sources
Brumfiel, Geoff. “Researchers rage at tightened restrictions on US immigration.” Nature. 422 (2003): 457-458. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v422/n6931/full/422457a.html;jsessionid=89B39DFE562FCBA9117E7C9507675363
“Five years on.” Nature. 433 (2006): 2. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v443/n7107/full/443002a.html
“In the United States, today Science, as science, is under attack as never before.” Peuples & Monde. (2006): 2. http://www.peuplesmonde.com/article.php3?id_article=574
“The risk of exclusion.” Nature. 6.2 (2003): 203. http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v6/n3/pdf/nn0303-203.pdf
Thursday, February 15, 2007
How Much is Too Much?
As a whole, many American people are unhappy with the way the Bush administration has continued to increase the
As of October 26, 2006 the
In order to be successful at keeping other nuclear countries at bay, the American government must continue to excel in creating new ideas, specifically nuclear weapons and improved weapons facilities. The country who is ahead in the weapons race is always at a great advantage; holding the upper hand when it comes to running the show. Therefore it is imperative that the
Overall, the idea of nuclear warfare between opposing countries is always going to raise some type of controversy and debate. As for the actions of the
Works Cited
“Rich in Plutonium.” Nature. 443 (2006): 883-884.
Nuclear Weapons Testing. John Pike. Oct. 10, 2006. Global Security. 10 Feb. 2007 http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/nuke-test.htm
Lists of States with Nuclear Weapons. 14 Feb. 2007 Wikipedia. 14 Feb. 2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons
Impending Doom
A virus’ impending doom can quickly spread to cause international concern. However, to sit and worry about attacks has never been productive. So, the real problem lies in what to do in preparation for the future.
A Nature article focuses on the lack of bird flu data, and pinpoints the root of the problem to not having an adequate flow of information between countries. While getting along with these other countries is important, should we not be more concerned about trying to produce a vaccine?
The public has the right to know about this deadly disease, one that has the means to kill more people than many of the previous flu pandemics, including the epidemic of 1918. Scientists and government officials need to be ready for this type of outbreak, because once the flu mutates to become contagious between people, if immediate treatment is not given within the first 48 hours then death is even more rapid.
Instead, some people such as the author of the Nature article are more concerned about creating an international database containing information about the Avian flu. As of today, there are no laws requiring the government report any sicknesses other than yellow fever, cholera, and the plague leading officials to worry that there have been unreported cases of the bird flu.
But should we be putting all of our efforts towards trying to reform the World Health Organization, or should we be putting them towards bringing together the best internationally acclaimed scientists as a team?
Officials, both scientists and those in the government, are somewhat convinced that one of the first outbreaks of the Avian flu is going to occur after a plane ride. One person who has obtained the flu in another country may sit beside someone who has not yet contracted the flu. However, once the infected person sneezes or commits some other seemingly harmless act, the flu is transmitted and can quickly spread throughout the plane. Once these people get off this first flight, and either go home or transfer to another flight, the flu can quickly be spread.
How much help is an international flu database going to be, when these people have to be found, quarantined, diagnosed, and their lives saved within the first 48 hours of being on that plane?
No sure place has yet been reached that would make scientists feel confident enough to say they have a sure-fire vaccine in case of an epidemic. This obviously needs to be solved as soon as possible, for once the Avian flu mutates to become easily passable between humans, there is not much time to stop it before it spreads into a pandemic.
Scientists have stated that level of lethality in the virus depends on the changes it undergoes, but more importantly this means that the virus can take many different paths all to result in death. These different paths make it much more difficult to produce a viable vaccine, and simultaneously make it imperative for top scientists to consult among each other.
Scientists, as well as the world, need to be ready for the devastation this virus could induce. The only way we can be ready for this however, would be to completely focus on what to do once the outbreak hits, not overly worrying about what countries are getting along with whom.
The United States government has attempted to develop an adequate course of action to take in the event of a rapid flu spread, in order to prevent a pandemic. However, this falls in line with what the author of Nature is suggesting and nothing concrete has been set or even provided for monetarily. While the U.S. government has the ability to control things such as domestic travel and other regulations within our own country, the government would have trouble providing significant authority over international regulations, or even air flights. This may be where the Nature author feels it would be appropriate to have an international "treaty" of sorts, but once again, it would be impossible to terminate all flights and, in a sense, quarantine several countries at a time.
Instead of looking towards what is going to happen after the pandemic hits full force, it would be a much better investment of time to look tactics that would prevent a pandemic altogether.
Sources
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/11/world/11flu.html?ex=1171688400&en=66a4041d8b503b0f&ei=5070
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7082/full/440255b.html (Subscription required)
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/facts.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/04/health/04flu.html?ex=1171688400&en=94ede87c8ed1ad2c&ei=5070
A Nature article focuses on the lack of bird flu data, and pinpoints the root of the problem to not having an adequate flow of information between countries. While getting along with these other countries is important, should we not be more concerned about trying to produce a vaccine?
The public has the right to know about this deadly disease, one that has the means to kill more people than many of the previous flu pandemics, including the epidemic of 1918. Scientists and government officials need to be ready for this type of outbreak, because once the flu mutates to become contagious between people, if immediate treatment is not given within the first 48 hours then death is even more rapid.
Instead, some people such as the author of the Nature article are more concerned about creating an international database containing information about the Avian flu. As of today, there are no laws requiring the government report any sicknesses other than yellow fever, cholera, and the plague leading officials to worry that there have been unreported cases of the bird flu.
But should we be putting all of our efforts towards trying to reform the World Health Organization, or should we be putting them towards bringing together the best internationally acclaimed scientists as a team?
Officials, both scientists and those in the government, are somewhat convinced that one of the first outbreaks of the Avian flu is going to occur after a plane ride. One person who has obtained the flu in another country may sit beside someone who has not yet contracted the flu. However, once the infected person sneezes or commits some other seemingly harmless act, the flu is transmitted and can quickly spread throughout the plane. Once these people get off this first flight, and either go home or transfer to another flight, the flu can quickly be spread.
How much help is an international flu database going to be, when these people have to be found, quarantined, diagnosed, and their lives saved within the first 48 hours of being on that plane?
No sure place has yet been reached that would make scientists feel confident enough to say they have a sure-fire vaccine in case of an epidemic. This obviously needs to be solved as soon as possible, for once the Avian flu mutates to become easily passable between humans, there is not much time to stop it before it spreads into a pandemic.
Scientists have stated that level of lethality in the virus depends on the changes it undergoes, but more importantly this means that the virus can take many different paths all to result in death. These different paths make it much more difficult to produce a viable vaccine, and simultaneously make it imperative for top scientists to consult among each other.
Scientists, as well as the world, need to be ready for the devastation this virus could induce. The only way we can be ready for this however, would be to completely focus on what to do once the outbreak hits, not overly worrying about what countries are getting along with whom.
The United States government has attempted to develop an adequate course of action to take in the event of a rapid flu spread, in order to prevent a pandemic. However, this falls in line with what the author of Nature is suggesting and nothing concrete has been set or even provided for monetarily. While the U.S. government has the ability to control things such as domestic travel and other regulations within our own country, the government would have trouble providing significant authority over international regulations, or even air flights. This may be where the Nature author feels it would be appropriate to have an international "treaty" of sorts, but once again, it would be impossible to terminate all flights and, in a sense, quarantine several countries at a time.
Instead of looking towards what is going to happen after the pandemic hits full force, it would be a much better investment of time to look tactics that would prevent a pandemic altogether.
Sources
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/11/world/11flu.html?ex=1171688400&en=66a4041d8b503b0f&ei=5070
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7082/full/440255b.html (Subscription required)
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/facts.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/04/health/04flu.html?ex=1171688400&en=94ede87c8ed1ad2c&ei=5070
Thursday, February 8, 2007
What Will You Do About the Avian Flu?
Scholarly Journals in the natural science area are easily found and contain a wide variety of information. In the previous assignment, we looked at Nature, a scientific magazine. We were particularly focused on editorials and opinions and were instructed to write on something we found particularly interesting. As I looked into bioterrorism in the previous post, I decided to view scholarly articles on the Avian Flu Epidemic that recently hit mainstream media and had a large number of people worried. I found that the distinct difference between scholarly journals and regular articles is the type of information each provides and I gained a great deal of useful information on the avian flu from the journal. We could all benefit from knowing so much about something that our government is worried enough to spend $3.8 billion dollars on, right?
It is not difficult to see that scholarly journals take on a completely different level of thought and organization. These writings are much longer and obviously take a much larger amount of time, effort, and research; whereas, most editorials give the basic outline of the situation and then discuss the author’s opinion on the subject. In the Avian Flu Threat, the report starts with an Abstract and Overview, which summarize the article and gives an overview of the situation and how it started. In this particular article, they talk about what is being done to combat the flu, the first human-to-human case, and the amount of money and lives this new threat has taken (Glazer, 1). They go on to explain the World Health Organization’s (WHO) involvement and include maps of bird migratory patterns for the spread of the virus. The scientist’s hypothesis is clearly stated throughout the paper, what is the United States going to do when another flu epidemic comes and it takes too long to create a vaccine?
The background gives information to better inform the reader of the data presented. In this case, information is presented on the flu outbreak of 1918, where an estimated 40 to 100 million citizens died worldwide (Glazer, 2). The SARS outbreak is also highlighted, along with facts about the expected mutation of the virus and the chances of it becoming spread vastly from human to human. “Today, the virus is “like a key that doesn't quite fit the lock” of human-to-human contagion, explains Michael T. Osterholm, a professor at the University of Minnesota's School of Public Health. “But if you jiggle the key enough times, occasionally it will open the door. The virus is moving closer to the key that would really open the door. That's when you get sustained human-to-human transmission.” The only available treatment are Tamiflu and Relenza, which are simply medicines for basic influenza.
Probably the most informative and interesting sections are the overview and current situation. It encompasses all the previously assessed information and relates it to citizens. There is a chart of avian flu cases and deaths since 2003 presented by the WHO and other informative visuals, such as, How to Avoid Risk. One can particularly find the set-up of these sections useful. The author presents the audience with a quesiton (e.g. “Is the United States Preparded for a Pandemic?”) (Glazer, 4), and then proceeds to provide the answer. Domestic efforts, liability, and quarantines are all presented in sections as solutions to the problem. Unfortunately what worries scientists the most is the fifty-percent death rate of this disease (Glazer, 4). An interesting topic also presented is the economic effects. Countries will shut down their borders and cut off trade, which will cause a severe medicine shortage in the United States, because we import eighty percent of our raw materials (Glazer). Scholarly journals not only present the entire subject, but also provide solutions and other information pertinent to the topic.
To sum up the information, scholarly journals usually contain an outlook section towards the end. We are left with a question, in this case, economic disaster? (Glazer) While many disagree on the severity of this epidemic, most agree that there will be another flu epidemic and that we should caution ourselves because chances are vaccines will be in short supply if it sneaks up on us (Glazer). This article contains useful information on how the government and other organizations are researching and providing answers to this threat. It presents the problems, how many vaccines will be needed, when vaccines will be available and how many can be produced? It really stresses the need to start now, because of scientists beliefs that there will be another flu epidemic and the medicine needed is not going to meet the number of people acquiring the disease. They also tell the stories of several people who died of the avian flu in Asia while the flu was believed to be a severe threat.
Just by providing an overview of the contents of a scholarly journal, one can see that it encompasses a much higher amount of information. Editorials are intended to get the reader interested and provide an opinion, but one should always view scholarly journals when researching or learning everything they can about a subject. There is such a large amount of good information that it is hard not to learn more from them and this scholarly journal is a good start to inform oneself about this biological threat.
Works Cited:
Glazer, S. (2006, January 13). Avian flu threat. CQ Researcher, 16, 25-48. Retrieved January 30, 2007, from CQ Researcher Online, http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2006011300.
It is not difficult to see that scholarly journals take on a completely different level of thought and organization. These writings are much longer and obviously take a much larger amount of time, effort, and research; whereas, most editorials give the basic outline of the situation and then discuss the author’s opinion on the subject. In the Avian Flu Threat, the report starts with an Abstract and Overview, which summarize the article and gives an overview of the situation and how it started. In this particular article, they talk about what is being done to combat the flu, the first human-to-human case, and the amount of money and lives this new threat has taken (Glazer, 1). They go on to explain the World Health Organization’s (WHO) involvement and include maps of bird migratory patterns for the spread of the virus. The scientist’s hypothesis is clearly stated throughout the paper, what is the United States going to do when another flu epidemic comes and it takes too long to create a vaccine?
The background gives information to better inform the reader of the data presented. In this case, information is presented on the flu outbreak of 1918, where an estimated 40 to 100 million citizens died worldwide (Glazer, 2). The SARS outbreak is also highlighted, along with facts about the expected mutation of the virus and the chances of it becoming spread vastly from human to human. “Today, the virus is “like a key that doesn't quite fit the lock” of human-to-human contagion, explains Michael T. Osterholm, a professor at the University of Minnesota's School of Public Health. “But if you jiggle the key enough times, occasionally it will open the door. The virus is moving closer to the key that would really open the door. That's when you get sustained human-to-human transmission.” The only available treatment are Tamiflu and Relenza, which are simply medicines for basic influenza.
Probably the most informative and interesting sections are the overview and current situation. It encompasses all the previously assessed information and relates it to citizens. There is a chart of avian flu cases and deaths since 2003 presented by the WHO and other informative visuals, such as, How to Avoid Risk. One can particularly find the set-up of these sections useful. The author presents the audience with a quesiton (e.g. “Is the United States Preparded for a Pandemic?”) (Glazer, 4), and then proceeds to provide the answer. Domestic efforts, liability, and quarantines are all presented in sections as solutions to the problem. Unfortunately what worries scientists the most is the fifty-percent death rate of this disease (Glazer, 4). An interesting topic also presented is the economic effects. Countries will shut down their borders and cut off trade, which will cause a severe medicine shortage in the United States, because we import eighty percent of our raw materials (Glazer). Scholarly journals not only present the entire subject, but also provide solutions and other information pertinent to the topic.
To sum up the information, scholarly journals usually contain an outlook section towards the end. We are left with a question, in this case, economic disaster? (Glazer) While many disagree on the severity of this epidemic, most agree that there will be another flu epidemic and that we should caution ourselves because chances are vaccines will be in short supply if it sneaks up on us (Glazer). This article contains useful information on how the government and other organizations are researching and providing answers to this threat. It presents the problems, how many vaccines will be needed, when vaccines will be available and how many can be produced? It really stresses the need to start now, because of scientists beliefs that there will be another flu epidemic and the medicine needed is not going to meet the number of people acquiring the disease. They also tell the stories of several people who died of the avian flu in Asia while the flu was believed to be a severe threat.
Just by providing an overview of the contents of a scholarly journal, one can see that it encompasses a much higher amount of information. Editorials are intended to get the reader interested and provide an opinion, but one should always view scholarly journals when researching or learning everything they can about a subject. There is such a large amount of good information that it is hard not to learn more from them and this scholarly journal is a good start to inform oneself about this biological threat.
Works Cited:
Glazer, S. (2006, January 13). Avian flu threat. CQ Researcher, 16, 25-48. Retrieved January 30, 2007, from CQ Researcher Online, http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2006011300.
Global Warming: The Ocean Might Be Our New Enemy.
Global warming is a worldwide problem that appears to becoming worse every year. In 2006 America experienced its warmest winter to date. Every year about 5.5 billion tons of carbon of carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere. However, 2 billion tons of the carbon released is assumed to be absorbed in the ocean and in the biosphere.
As temperatures steadily climb scientist look at other sources of energy. In the last two decades, ocean exploration shows an abundant amount of methane hydrate in deep ocean sediments. For over 20 years in Messoyakh, Russia it has been used as a commercial production of gas. Methane hydrates is an ideal fuel because it only releases carbon dioxide and no other harmful pollutants. At the same time the chemical energy in all known methane hydrate is twice the amount than any fossil fuel, which makes it desirable among scientists to be able to exploit this amount of energy.
Even though this maybe more helpful than fossil fuels, the National Science Foundation’s Ocean Deep-drilling Program suggest the ocean may have helped in global warming. Scientist found microscopic methane bubbles that are nutrients for the “methane ice-worm,” which is the foundation for the deep-sea food chain. Although the energy released raises the ocean temperature it also releases carbon dioxide that could escape into the atmosphere. To further prove this idea, many people have been looking closely at the Artic ice melting. Many believe that the atmospheric heat has caused the ice to melt but there is not enough information from satellite remote-sensing data to prove that idea. On the other hand, since 1990 the Atlantic Ocean has become warmer and has been thinning the Artic ice which has caused an increase in the amount of ice that has been melting.
It is know that the United States is the world’s largest consumer of energy (about twenty-five percent). Thanks to Clinton’s Oceans Act in 2000, which does an eighteen month review of all ocean and coastal activities; the United States has begun to find fundamental steps for slowing the process of global warming. At the same time finding safe ways to mine for methane hydrate to be used for fuels in order to prevent large amount of energy from warming up the ocean and atmosphere. A supplement of methane hydrate for oil and coal the US can delay major energy crisis and gain economic benefits from reduced energy imports.
Throughout campuses across America students have been made aware of the dangers of global warming and encouraged to take a stand and try to slow down the process. This article shows what scientists are trying to do as much as possible to find other methods for fuel energy. Although, scientists also know that carbon dioxide and CFC’s are not the only things that cause a rise in temperature. I was surprise to learn that the ocean as has an affect on global warming and causing ice to melt in the Arctic. By watching the news, ocean patterns like the Gulf Stream has caused large amounts of warm water to travel up to the northern pole which has caused a rise in water levels from melted ice. As mention beforehand, a lot of the ice contains methane bubbles that can release carbon dioxide instead of being absorbed by the ocean. For America and the rest of the world we need to look at all causes for global warming in order to stop the process.
Source
Lai, Chung-Chieng A. David E. Dietrich, and Malcolm J. Bowman. “Global warming and the mining of oceanic methane hydrate.” Topics in Catalysis. 32.3–4 (2005): 95-99. http://www.springerlink.com/content/pn31475q37871408/fulltext.pdf
As temperatures steadily climb scientist look at other sources of energy. In the last two decades, ocean exploration shows an abundant amount of methane hydrate in deep ocean sediments. For over 20 years in Messoyakh, Russia it has been used as a commercial production of gas. Methane hydrates is an ideal fuel because it only releases carbon dioxide and no other harmful pollutants. At the same time the chemical energy in all known methane hydrate is twice the amount than any fossil fuel, which makes it desirable among scientists to be able to exploit this amount of energy.
Even though this maybe more helpful than fossil fuels, the National Science Foundation’s Ocean Deep-drilling Program suggest the ocean may have helped in global warming. Scientist found microscopic methane bubbles that are nutrients for the “methane ice-worm,” which is the foundation for the deep-sea food chain. Although the energy released raises the ocean temperature it also releases carbon dioxide that could escape into the atmosphere. To further prove this idea, many people have been looking closely at the Artic ice melting. Many believe that the atmospheric heat has caused the ice to melt but there is not enough information from satellite remote-sensing data to prove that idea. On the other hand, since 1990 the Atlantic Ocean has become warmer and has been thinning the Artic ice which has caused an increase in the amount of ice that has been melting.
It is know that the United States is the world’s largest consumer of energy (about twenty-five percent). Thanks to Clinton’s Oceans Act in 2000, which does an eighteen month review of all ocean and coastal activities; the United States has begun to find fundamental steps for slowing the process of global warming. At the same time finding safe ways to mine for methane hydrate to be used for fuels in order to prevent large amount of energy from warming up the ocean and atmosphere. A supplement of methane hydrate for oil and coal the US can delay major energy crisis and gain economic benefits from reduced energy imports.
Throughout campuses across America students have been made aware of the dangers of global warming and encouraged to take a stand and try to slow down the process. This article shows what scientists are trying to do as much as possible to find other methods for fuel energy. Although, scientists also know that carbon dioxide and CFC’s are not the only things that cause a rise in temperature. I was surprise to learn that the ocean as has an affect on global warming and causing ice to melt in the Arctic. By watching the news, ocean patterns like the Gulf Stream has caused large amounts of warm water to travel up to the northern pole which has caused a rise in water levels from melted ice. As mention beforehand, a lot of the ice contains methane bubbles that can release carbon dioxide instead of being absorbed by the ocean. For America and the rest of the world we need to look at all causes for global warming in order to stop the process.
Source
Lai, Chung-Chieng A. David E. Dietrich, and Malcolm J. Bowman. “Global warming and the mining of oceanic methane hydrate.” Topics in Catalysis. 32.3–4 (2005): 95-99. http://www.springerlink.com/content/pn31475q37871408/fulltext.pdf
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Safe in Your Own Home??
Have you ever considered the fact that your health may be at risk based on your choice of residence? If not, you may need to rethink your answer to that question. A scholarly journal, “Health and Place” recently published an article entitled, “Neighborhood and HIV infection among IDU: Place of residence independently predicts HIV infection among a cohort of injection drug users,” revealing a shocking study that investigated a poor Canadian neighborhood and its surrounding areas, deciding whether or not the environmental conditions were a risk factor for HIV infection in injection users. The study, conducted by medical professionals, found this claim to be somewhat true, bringing to surface a question in all of our minds; can we feel safe in our own surroundings?
Recently it has became known within the field of public health that certain environmental areas have been more subject to the spread of infectious diseases among injection users than others. These areas are usually characterized by extreme poverty, high crime rates, homelessness, unsatisfactory housing, and high levels of alcohol and drug abuse. (City of Vancouver, 2000; Wood et al., 2004b) The scientists conducting the study felt that Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) is a disease more likely to be transmitted in these conditions.
Overall, the study conducted to determine whether or not one can feel safe from the spread of infection in his or her own surroundings was very informative. It revealed harsh truths that the public should be aware of and after learning of the problem officials should target high-risk environments with effective distribution of medicines and strive to prevent the spread of disease locally. Hopefully the knowledge acquired from this study will open everyone’s eyes to some of the major health problems affecting the world around us.
To Know Or Not To Know...
Would people really want to know what lies ahead for them, especially concerning the length of their lives? Science is approaching the ability to make expert predictions, specifically in the concentration of certain diseases such as Huntington’s disease. Huntington’s is frequently used as an example in Biology courses as an autosomal dominant disease.
When you stop to think about it, there is not much that is more horrifying than the prospect of being susceptible to a deadly, irreversible disease that you did not even know you had until well until your life. One of the most terrifying aspects of this disease includes the fact that by the time a person realizes they are in fact a victim of Huntington’s they have already reproduced and passed the gene on, leaving their child with a 50% chance of also developing the disease.
The onset for Huntington’s is somewhat random, and the patient cannot fully be prepared to be attacked by the progressive neurodegenerative disease. However, once the disease has instilled itself into a patient there is no going back as there is no cure or treatment to date.
Presymptomatic testing can be given to healthy or asymptomatic individuals to let the patient know or be aware of their future health in regard to the inherited disease that they are tested for. The uncertainty of what age Huntington’s may begin is a sufficient enough cause for many patients to desire to be tested. Those that are at-risk for Huntington’s feel that there is much to be gained in knowing for certain the outcome of their health, including the medical, social, and mental preparations that must be made.
It is helpful to these patients, particularly in an economic sense, to be aware of what is to come. Long term diseases such as Huntington’s and Parkinson’s disease increase economic burdens for patients over the extended periods of time.
An experiment was conducted to further understand what the close relatives of Huntington’s Disease patients feel in relationship to the idea and outcomes of presymptomatic testing and also the prospect of testing positively. These opinions were then compared to that of medical doctors and randomly selected people with no direct knowledge of the illness.
The experiment was conducted in India, with a random group of participants in each sub-category. Each volunteer was given a short description of Huntington’s Disease and also listened to a speech given by a doctor. All of these subjects were asked to assume that they could be at risk in the future of developing Huntington’s Disease, which no doubt affected the outcome of their decisions.
The family members of Huntington’s patients almost equaled the doctors in their willingness to undergo genetic testing. While a higher number of controls than found in the other two groups were willing to be tested, the family members least wanted the results to be shared, while an almost equal proportion of doctors and “control people” wanted their friends to know. Doctors were concerned about becoming sick after the test results were unveiled, and less than half in all the groups would be willing to communicate results with their spouse. Almost all of the doctors felt that the test results would affect their decision to have children, compared to a relatively smaller number in the other two groups.
What does this all mean? The amount of information one has about the disease vastly affects what the person would do concerning being tested. Not only does it affect the decision to participate in the testing to begin with, but also with whom to share the information when the results come back and then what course of action would be best to take. Knowledge, with this disease as with many other things, will affect any long-term decisions.
References
http://www.neurologyindia.com/article.asp?issn=0028-
3886;year=2006;volume=54;issue=4;spage=359;epage=362;aulast=Nagaraja
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/huntington/huntington.htm
When you stop to think about it, there is not much that is more horrifying than the prospect of being susceptible to a deadly, irreversible disease that you did not even know you had until well until your life. One of the most terrifying aspects of this disease includes the fact that by the time a person realizes they are in fact a victim of Huntington’s they have already reproduced and passed the gene on, leaving their child with a 50% chance of also developing the disease.
The onset for Huntington’s is somewhat random, and the patient cannot fully be prepared to be attacked by the progressive neurodegenerative disease. However, once the disease has instilled itself into a patient there is no going back as there is no cure or treatment to date.
Presymptomatic testing can be given to healthy or asymptomatic individuals to let the patient know or be aware of their future health in regard to the inherited disease that they are tested for. The uncertainty of what age Huntington’s may begin is a sufficient enough cause for many patients to desire to be tested. Those that are at-risk for Huntington’s feel that there is much to be gained in knowing for certain the outcome of their health, including the medical, social, and mental preparations that must be made.
It is helpful to these patients, particularly in an economic sense, to be aware of what is to come. Long term diseases such as Huntington’s and Parkinson’s disease increase economic burdens for patients over the extended periods of time.
An experiment was conducted to further understand what the close relatives of Huntington’s Disease patients feel in relationship to the idea and outcomes of presymptomatic testing and also the prospect of testing positively. These opinions were then compared to that of medical doctors and randomly selected people with no direct knowledge of the illness.
The experiment was conducted in India, with a random group of participants in each sub-category. Each volunteer was given a short description of Huntington’s Disease and also listened to a speech given by a doctor. All of these subjects were asked to assume that they could be at risk in the future of developing Huntington’s Disease, which no doubt affected the outcome of their decisions.
The family members of Huntington’s patients almost equaled the doctors in their willingness to undergo genetic testing. While a higher number of controls than found in the other two groups were willing to be tested, the family members least wanted the results to be shared, while an almost equal proportion of doctors and “control people” wanted their friends to know. Doctors were concerned about becoming sick after the test results were unveiled, and less than half in all the groups would be willing to communicate results with their spouse. Almost all of the doctors felt that the test results would affect their decision to have children, compared to a relatively smaller number in the other two groups.
What does this all mean? The amount of information one has about the disease vastly affects what the person would do concerning being tested. Not only does it affect the decision to participate in the testing to begin with, but also with whom to share the information when the results come back and then what course of action would be best to take. Knowledge, with this disease as with many other things, will affect any long-term decisions.
References
http://www.neurologyindia.com/article.asp?issn=0028-
3886;year=2006;volume=54;issue=4;spage=359;epage=362;aulast=Nagaraja
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/huntington/huntington.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)