Only since reading this article have I really noticed that viewers really are addicted to television me being one of them. I didn't realize how much television does change your emotional mind set you become dependent and when you aren't watching can have extreme outbursts.
People feel it is metaphorical like saying you are addicted to ice cream but some people watch television just to enjoy their day. Television can get addicting if you aren't careful with how much you watch. The idea of the addiction is being debated on a psychiatric level and in the addiction level itself. Most people use television as a sedative
In recent news a man named Justin Harris in Atlanta Georgia, left his infant son Cooper strapped in the car while he was at work. Sunny Hostin (author) begins this article by telling a person relation to a similar situation. She tells us that her and her husband had forgotten their baby in the car while making a trip in the store, although her daughter was safe the same an not be said for young Cooper who did not survive the incident. The author remembers the feeling of being ashamed and even horrified even after her daughter was safe; many witnesses say that Harris was frantically asking himself "What have I done?" Which brings up the main argument; Even if it was an accident should he be punished? Along with another pressing argument, was it an accident? Due to the authors shared experience she does not believe he should be punished because she knows the feeling and believes it was an accident. There are many others however, posting things on Facebook such as "If he's not punished for his gross negligence, then that sends a get-out-of-jail-free card to all parents who are evil and want to murder their children." Hostin goes on to ponder the idea that how could they punish everyone for an accident that happens once every week of every year from spring to early fall. I believe the authors main purpose and urgency in this article is bring awareness to the issue of parents leaving their kids in cars during the hotter months of the year. "But what if this was just a tragic accident -- the type of accident that happens every single year? In 2013, 44 children died from vehicle-induced heat stroke. About 450 children in the U.S. have died this way since 1998."
I agree with the author at this point because there is no solid evidence that Harris did this on purpose. If it was an accident, the turmoil he feels alone will be enough punishment to last the guy a lifetime. I do agree with the fact that this is a pressing issue in the United States alone, especially in states where the climates can reach severe conditions. The statistics of how many children have died last year alone is sickening almost. So, why is this man the focus lately if he is among hundreds of parents who have done the same thing? Although the police believe there may be more to this story, at this point I don't believe there is any reason for this man to be sent to prison.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/20/opinion/offenheiser-minimum-wage/index.html?hpt=op_bn6 “Why raise minimum wage?” is an article that the writer , Raymond Offenheiser gives his opinion and his points he found supporting why minimum wage should be raised. What constitutes the writer’s urgency? You can tell this issue is really important and urgent to this writer because in the article he keeps bringing up the idea of people suffering and how if the wage was raised they would benefit greatly , “raising the minimum wage to $10.10 would lift more than 5 million Americans out of poverty and help 14 million children see a boost in their family income”. Who is the audience? The audience in this article is the adults of American. You know this because he is targeting the people who can actually make a difference about this topic they would also have to be educated to care about this topic as well. “Raising the minimum wage would equally help Americans who live in Republican and Democratic districts, rural and metropolitan” So if you live in America you will be affected by this debate
I do not agree with the writer in this article. He does have very well reasoning and good sources but I think every business individually should get to decide what it gets to pay their workers based on the business’s own income and profit. The government shouldn’t get to control that. Yes there is a ton of people on minimum wage but they could have prevented it and did well in high school, went to college and got a better job that does not pay minimum wage. If minimum wage gets raised the products that the business sells will go up and then the people who aren't on minimum wage will suffer. I do not think that is very fair, that is why I disagree with this author.
What are the major arguments? What word choices strike you as particularly important?
This article addresses the question “Should smokers pay higher health insurance premiums”. The author doesn’t express a definite stance on this topic because there are different arguments that he addresses for both sides. An argument the author gives supporting the idea of having smokers pay higher premiums is that smoking is the number one cause of death that can be prevented. It also says that “smokers disproportionately incur health care costs due to the debilitating diseases that result from the habit”. By saying this, the author does acknowledge that smoking cannot be ignored. The author then expresses the opposing side to the topic. An argument used is that requiring smokers to pay higher for health insurance possibly could make smokers quit or could just prevent them from getting health insurance at all. The author also researched and found out that most smokers are of lower income, therefore they wouldn’t be able to afford the extra cost for health insurance. After giving arguments for both sides, the author concludes that, “As the fight against tobacco continues to evolve, so should our policy ideas.” By saying this the author does agree to a change in policies for smokers without giving a definite opinion. Important words i found that the author used in the article were disproportionately, debilitating, and stubborn (referring to the presence of tobacco). The author used other forms of loaded language to hint his opinion on tobacco use. After hearing both sides of the argument in this article, I do believe that smokers should be required to pay a higher health insurance premium. Smokers should realize that they are contributing to their own death by smoking. The many people hospitalized with diseases due to smoking bring the medical costs upon themselves. Granted, it is an addiction so there should be more services offered to those who are trying to quit because it is a very difficult thing to do.
In this editorial, the author wants the audience to take action on getting veterans the care they need.”It is tragic to hear how prevalent post-traumatic stress disorder has become among our servicemen and women” In this quote the author is sad to hear about these soldiers having this disorder when they are just trying to fight for our country. The author wants people to open hospitals and help get veterans the help they need and deserve. Some reasons the author gives me to believe this arguement are that the veterans are getting sick from helping our country.”One novel solution is to create public-private partnerships between the Defense and Veterans Affairs Departments and community partners that are engaged in research, treatment, education and outreach on military mental health issues, including substance use disorders and traumatic brain injury.” The author explains that we need this to help the veterans get better so they don’t have this disorder anymore. I believe this solution is true because the only way to get it fixed is by a trained medical professional. It doesn’t just go away on its own. I agree with helping these veterans because they do so much for our country like risking their own lives to help out. There needs to be more research and studies over this disorder to help all these innocent people out. The least we could do is get people to help them and work with them on this disorder.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/25/opinion/hostin-hot-car-child/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 The opinion of this article is whether a father should be charged with murder and sent to prison for the rest of his life after leaving his son in a car, which led to the death of his son. Or whether his sons death is punishment enough. What does the writer want the audience to do? This writer wants parents everywhere to stop leaving their children in cars, whether it by accident, or you know you’ll only be a few minutes in the store. Don’t leave your children in your car. It could be devastating! What reasons does the writer give you to believe an argument? Justin Harris could give you one very good reason why you shouldn’t leave your child in your car. His son died. But he is not the only parent that lost their child because they left their child in a car. Over 44 children died this year alone from being left in a car, and an even scarier statistic, 450 children have died in the US since 1998. So should Harris spend the rest of his life behind bars? Or is his son's death enough punishment?
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/07/23/to-solve-border-crisis-reduce-foreign-aid/ What gets under the writer's skin? Rep. Blackburn is really getting irritated with the immigration crisis on the southern border. "Approximately ten thousand unaccompanied alien children crossed our southern border in May and June"(Blackburn). Not only are these children crossing the border illegally they are coming over here and taking money from the government without working. That means that hardworking tax paying Americans are paying for these illegal aliens. She also has an issue with the amount of money we are giving these central American countries every year. "According to www.foreignassistance.gov, we provided the following amounts of foreign aid to the aforementioned countries in FY2013: 1) El Salvador - $27,438,00; 2) Guatemala - $83,898,00; 3) Honduras - $51,971,000. That is a total of $163,307,000"(Blackburn). We are paying a total of 163 million dollars to these countries every year, and what do we get in return, illegal immigrants flooding our border.
Who is the audience? Blackburn's target audience is any hard working American that is tired of this border crisis. Any American who is tired of this problem just getting pushed back and ignored while Obama deals with "other problems" facing the american population. This problem has needed to be dealt with for years and has just been ignored, she is calling out for help from the people to convince the president that he needs to deal with this problem. I do agree with the author for many reasons, such as this problem needs to be dealt with soon, and that we need to stop aiding these countries if they are just going to send us unaccompanied minors to deal with.
The writer tries to give me a reason to believe him by saying the viewers are dropping off. He has stats showing that 17 of the 30 teams home attendance has gone down. That the world Series tv viewer ratings have gone down steadily. There is more than one audience here. One audience is the all of the people that go to baseball games, watch the games on tv, the people that love baseball. The other audience is all of the people that have shown less interest in the game. Both audiences might be getting the message that if they want to save it, then show your support.
I do not agree with the author. I would agree that football is what the nation likes the most, but you could argue that it too is on its way out because of the injuries. It is true that household names like Jeter and Rivera are retired or on their leg. But other young, great players will take their spots in Puig and Trout. There are many, many people who still love the game and go out to the ballpark to watch their team play. It may have a bit of a drop off, but will never go away. There are too many kids that love and play the game and adults that love to watch baseball, that it would ever go away.
What reasons does the writer give you to believe an argument? The writer’s argument is that Physician’s pay shouldn’t be cut to save money because there are many unnecessary things that the doctors do for their patients. “‘They kept me down in that E.R. for two days!” she said. “They did X-rays, EKGs, CAT scans, God knows what. They had an ear, nose and throat specialist come by. They called a pulmonologist. They told me to follow up with my cardiologist. I told them it had nothing to do with it. It was the fish!’” The treatments they gave this patient were not useful for her condition, yet they were very costly. The writer gives us proof using statistics and experiences from patients who have had treatments that they didn’t need. What are the major arguments? The first major argument the writer gives us is that cutting a physicians pay causes them to have to see double the patients they usually see just to keep their income the same, making it harder for them to get close to their patients. “An internist I know in private practice used to see 15 patients a day. ‘Now reimbursement is so low I have to see at least 30,’ he told me. ‘If I stay in the room more than 10 minutes, my assistant will call me and tell me to hurry up.’” Another argument is that “physicians’ salaries account for a relatively small fraction of health care costs”
I agree with the writer’s argument because the amount of income the Physicians receive is not a big factor in their business losing money. There are many things that the practice could do to save money without taking any from their employees. If they were more careful about what treatments they used on their patients they would save a lot of money because many of the treatments the patients receive are not necessary for them to get better. I believe that doctors need to have a set amount of income that cannot be taken away. When the amount of money they make lessens, they need to work twice as hard, causing them to make more mistakes, and making it hard for them to get to know their patients.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/08/13/georgia-town-to-atheists-stop-bullying-our-kids/ The article "Georgia town to atheists: Stop bullying our kids" is about The American Humanist Association (AHA) protesting a Georgia small town for the coaches and football players praying together. It gets under the writer's skin that atheists would waste time going on a witch hunt through public schools in search of anything religious. "While the American atheists are picking on high school kids, Christians in Iraq are facing unspeakable atrocities." (Starnes) The audience of this article includes all people of faith. The writer of this article wants the audience to stand of to people and organizations such as the AHA. "Unless people of faith stand up, liberty will be lost." (Starnes) I agree with the writer that the AHA are out of line. Christianity is not being taught in this school district. The coaches and players are expressing their freedom of religion in a non-invasive extra-curricular setting. The players pray of their own free will. I believe that time could be better spent actually helping people rather than bullying high school Christians.
The opinion article I read was called “Why an Ebola epidemic is spinning out of control” by Laurie Garrett. The article was about the Ebola epidemic occurring in the countries Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone and was trying to convince the target audience (doctors, and people interested in the spread of disease) that the Ebola outbreak isn’t controlled because there isn’t any governance or peace in the three countries. In the first third of the article, the author shows that this is the first Ebola epidemic to cross country borders and has infected over one thousand people, then gives out a piece of information stating that when a country’s hero (who was a doctor helping fight the epidemic) was hospitalized with the Ebola disease, the public fear levels rose because they realized that even the doctors can get the disease. After that the author types that the Ebola disease has been controlled before, he states that it can be controlled again if the twelve nations that are either infected or at risk to be infected work together. In the second third of the article the author says that if not controlled, ebola outbreaks kill up to 70% of those it infects, and then shows the troubling spendings of the countries of Sierra leone, Liberia, and Guinea, who all spend a small amount of money on health. She went on to show bad incidents happening in Guinea, including the spreading of ebola to the capital, the public attacking a Doctors without Borders Clinic, and the Red Cross having to abandon a part of the country after being attacked. Then it is shown that the epidemic spread to Sierra Leone by a traditional healer and that the authorities were losing track of ebola sufferers. In the the final third of the article the author writes that rumors and stigma are threatening the halt of ebola and even the World Health Association says that the epidemic is beyond anybodies control. She continues to show that these several countries have all had horrible history, including mass rape, murder, and civil war.
I agree with the authors stance on the subject of the ebola epidemic because the group of countries affected by the epidemic are all countries with minimal public sanitation, little to no education, horrible history, horrible government, and even more atrocious current events and actions that show the low structure of the governments and low intelligence of the people that reside there. In conclusion, these countries are utterly doomed unless they communicate effectively and quickly to combat the ebola epidemic, and with the events happening, it is seemingly never going to occur to them to halt their destructive actions.
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/16/science/how-viewers-grow-addicted-to-television.html
ReplyDeleteOnly since reading this article have I really noticed that viewers really are addicted to television me being one of them. I didn't realize how much television does change your emotional mind set you become dependent and when you aren't watching can have extreme outbursts.
People feel it is metaphorical like saying you are addicted to ice cream but some people watch television just to enjoy their day. Television can get addicting if you aren't careful with how much you watch. The idea of the addiction is being debated on a psychiatric level and in the addiction level itself. Most people use television as a sedative
http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/25/opinion/hostin-hot-car-child/index.html?hpt=op_t1
ReplyDeleteIn recent news a man named Justin Harris in Atlanta Georgia, left his infant son Cooper strapped in the car while he was at work. Sunny Hostin (author) begins this article by telling a person relation to a similar situation. She tells us that her and her husband had forgotten their baby in the car while making a trip in the store, although her daughter was safe the same an not be said for young Cooper who did not survive the incident. The author remembers the feeling of being ashamed and even horrified even after her daughter was safe; many witnesses say that Harris was frantically asking himself "What have I done?" Which brings up the main argument; Even if it was an accident should he be punished? Along with another pressing argument, was it an accident? Due to the authors shared experience she does not believe he should be punished because she knows the feeling and believes it was an accident. There are many others however, posting things on Facebook such as "If he's not punished for his gross negligence, then that sends a get-out-of-jail-free card to all parents who are evil and want to murder their children." Hostin goes on to ponder the idea that how could they punish everyone for an accident that happens once every week of every year from spring to early fall. I believe the authors main purpose and urgency in this article is bring awareness to the issue of parents leaving their kids in cars during the hotter months of the year. "But what if this was just a tragic accident -- the type of accident that happens every single year? In 2013, 44 children died from vehicle-induced heat stroke. About 450 children in the U.S. have died this way since 1998."
I agree with the author at this point because there is no solid evidence that Harris did this on purpose. If it was an accident, the turmoil he feels alone will be enough punishment to last the guy a lifetime. I do agree with the fact that this is a pressing issue in the United States alone, especially in states where the climates can reach severe conditions. The statistics of how many children have died last year alone is sickening almost. So, why is this man the focus lately if he is among hundreds of parents who have done the same thing? Although the police believe there may be more to this story, at this point I don't believe there is any reason for this man to be sent to prison.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/20/opinion/offenheiser-minimum-wage/index.html?hpt=op_bn6
ReplyDelete“Why raise minimum wage?” is an article that the writer , Raymond Offenheiser gives his opinion and his points he found supporting why minimum wage should be raised. What constitutes the writer’s urgency? You can tell this issue is really important and urgent to this writer because in the article he keeps bringing up the idea of people suffering and how if the wage was raised they would benefit greatly , “raising the minimum wage to $10.10 would lift more than 5 million Americans out of poverty and help 14 million children see a boost in their family income”. Who is the audience? The audience in this article is the adults of American. You know this because he is targeting the people who can actually make a difference about this topic they would also have to be educated to care about this topic as well. “Raising the minimum wage would equally help Americans who live in Republican and Democratic districts, rural and metropolitan” So if you live in America you will be affected by this debate
I do not agree with the writer in this article. He does have very well reasoning and good sources but I think every business individually should get to decide what it gets to pay their workers based on the business’s own income and profit. The government shouldn’t get to control that. Yes there is a ton of people on minimum wage but they could have prevented it and did well in high school, went to college and got a better job that does not pay minimum wage. If minimum wage gets raised the products that the business sells will go up and then the people who aren't on minimum wage will suffer. I do not think that is very fair, that is why I disagree with this author.
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2013/11/smokers-pay-higher-health-insurance-premiums.html
ReplyDeleteWhat are the major arguments? What word choices strike you as particularly important?
This article addresses the question “Should smokers pay higher health insurance premiums”. The author doesn’t express a definite stance on this topic because there are different arguments that he addresses for both sides. An argument the author gives supporting the idea of having smokers pay higher premiums is that smoking is the number one cause of death that can be prevented. It also says that “smokers disproportionately incur health care costs due to the debilitating diseases that result from the habit”. By saying this, the author does acknowledge that smoking cannot be ignored. The author then expresses the opposing side to the topic. An argument used is that requiring smokers to pay higher for health insurance possibly could make smokers quit or could just prevent them from getting health insurance at all. The author also researched and found out that most smokers are of lower income, therefore they wouldn’t be able to afford the extra cost for health insurance. After giving arguments for both sides, the author concludes that, “As the fight against tobacco continues to evolve, so should our policy ideas.” By saying this the author does agree to a change in policies for smokers without giving a definite opinion. Important words i found that the author used in the article were disproportionately, debilitating, and stubborn (referring to the presence of tobacco). The author used other forms of loaded language to hint his opinion on tobacco use.
After hearing both sides of the argument in this article, I do believe that smokers should be required to pay a higher health insurance premium. Smokers should realize that they are contributing to their own death by smoking. The many people hospitalized with diseases due to smoking bring the medical costs upon themselves. Granted, it is an addiction so there should be more services offered to those who are trying to quit because it is a very difficult thing to do.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/01/opinion/new-ways-to-treat-veterans.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
ReplyDeleteIn this editorial, the author wants the audience to take action on getting veterans the care they need.”It is tragic to hear how prevalent post-traumatic stress disorder has become among our servicemen and women” In this quote the author is sad to hear about these soldiers having this disorder when they are just trying to fight for our country. The author wants people to open hospitals and help get veterans the help they need and deserve. Some reasons the author gives me to believe this arguement are that the veterans are getting sick from helping our country.”One novel solution is to create public-private partnerships between the Defense and Veterans Affairs Departments and community partners that are engaged in research, treatment, education and outreach on military mental health issues, including substance use disorders and traumatic brain injury.” The author explains that we need this to help the veterans get better so they don’t have this disorder anymore. I believe this solution is true because the only way to get it fixed is by a trained medical professional. It doesn’t just go away on its own.
I agree with helping these veterans because they do so much for our country like risking their own lives to help out. There needs to be more research and studies over this disorder to help all these innocent people out. The least we could do is get people to help them and work with them on this disorder.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/25/opinion/hostin-hot-car-child/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
ReplyDeleteThe opinion of this article is whether a father should be charged with murder and sent to prison for the rest of his life after leaving his son in a car, which led to the death of his son. Or whether his sons death is punishment enough.
What does the writer want the audience to do? This writer wants parents everywhere to stop leaving their children in cars, whether it by accident, or you know you’ll only be a few minutes in the store. Don’t leave your children in your car. It could be devastating!
What reasons does the writer give you to believe an argument? Justin Harris could give you one very good reason why you shouldn’t leave your child in your car. His son died. But he is not the only parent that lost their child because they left their child in a car. Over 44 children died this year alone from being left in a car, and an even scarier statistic, 450 children have died in the US since 1998. So should Harris spend the rest of his life behind bars? Or is his son's death enough punishment?
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/07/23/to-solve-border-crisis-reduce-foreign-aid/
ReplyDeleteWhat gets under the writer's skin?
Rep. Blackburn is really getting irritated with the immigration crisis on the southern border. "Approximately ten thousand unaccompanied alien children crossed our southern border in May and June"(Blackburn). Not only are these children crossing the border illegally they are coming over here and taking money from the government without working. That means that hardworking tax paying Americans are paying for these illegal aliens. She also has an issue with the amount of money we are giving these central American countries every year. "According to www.foreignassistance.gov, we provided the following amounts of foreign aid to the aforementioned countries in FY2013: 1) El Salvador - $27,438,00; 2) Guatemala - $83,898,00; 3) Honduras - $51,971,000. That is a total of $163,307,000"(Blackburn). We are paying a total of 163 million dollars to these countries every year, and what do we get in return, illegal immigrants flooding our border.
Who is the audience?
Blackburn's target audience is any hard working American that is tired of this border crisis. Any American who is tired of this problem just getting pushed back and ignored while Obama deals with "other problems" facing the american population. This problem has needed to be dealt with for years and has just been ignored, she is calling out for help from the people to convince the president that he needs to deal with this problem. I do agree with the author for many reasons, such as this problem needs to be dealt with soon, and that we need to stop aiding these countries if they are just going to send us unaccompanied minors to deal with.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/15/opinion/downey-baseball-drop-off/index.html?hpt=op_bn9
ReplyDeleteThe writer tries to give me a reason to believe him by saying the viewers are dropping off. He has stats showing that 17 of the 30 teams home attendance has gone down. That the world Series tv viewer ratings have gone down steadily. There is more than one audience here. One audience is the all of the people that go to baseball games, watch the games on tv, the people that love baseball. The other audience is all of the people that have shown less interest in the game. Both audiences might be getting the message that if they want to save it, then show your support.
I do not agree with the author. I would agree that football is what the nation likes the most, but you could argue that it too is on its way out because of the injuries. It is true that household names like Jeter and Rivera are retired or on their leg. But other young, great players will take their spots in Puig and Trout. There are many, many people who still love the game and go out to the ballpark to watch their team play. It may have a bit of a drop off, but will never go away. There are too many kids that love and play the game and adults that love to watch baseball, that it would ever go away.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/opinion/busy-doctors-wasteful-spending.html?_r=0
ReplyDeleteWhat reasons does the writer give you to believe an argument?
The writer’s argument is that Physician’s pay shouldn’t be cut to save money because there are many unnecessary things that the doctors do for their patients. “‘They kept me down in that E.R. for two days!” she said. “They did X-rays, EKGs, CAT scans, God knows what. They had an ear, nose and throat specialist come by. They called a pulmonologist. They told me to follow up with my cardiologist. I told them it had nothing to do with it. It was the fish!’” The treatments they gave this patient were not useful for her condition, yet they were very costly. The writer gives us proof using statistics and experiences from patients who have had treatments that they didn’t need.
What are the major arguments?
The first major argument the writer gives us is that cutting a physicians pay causes them to have to see double the patients they usually see just to keep their income the same, making it harder for them to get close to their patients. “An internist I know in private practice used to see 15 patients a day. ‘Now reimbursement is so low I have to see at least 30,’ he told me. ‘If I stay in the room more than 10 minutes, my assistant will call me and tell me to hurry up.’” Another argument is that “physicians’ salaries account for a relatively small fraction of health care costs”
I agree with the writer’s argument because the amount of income the Physicians receive is not a big factor in their business losing money. There are many things that the practice could do to save money without taking any from their employees. If they were more careful about what treatments they used on their patients they would save a lot of money because many of the treatments the patients receive are not necessary for them to get better. I believe that doctors need to have a set amount of income that cannot be taken away. When the amount of money they make lessens, they need to work twice as hard, causing them to make more mistakes, and making it hard for them to get to know their patients.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/08/13/georgia-town-to-atheists-stop-bullying-our-kids/
ReplyDeleteThe article "Georgia town to atheists: Stop bullying our kids" is about The American Humanist Association (AHA) protesting a Georgia small town for the coaches and football players praying together. It gets under the writer's skin that atheists would waste time going on a witch hunt through public schools in search of anything religious. "While the American atheists are picking on high school kids, Christians in Iraq are facing unspeakable atrocities." (Starnes) The audience of this article includes all people of faith. The writer of this article wants the audience to stand of to people and organizations such as the AHA. "Unless people of faith stand up, liberty will be lost." (Starnes)
I agree with the writer that the AHA are out of line. Christianity is not being taught in this school district. The coaches and players are expressing their freedom of religion in a non-invasive extra-curricular setting. The players pray of their own free will. I believe that time could be better spent actually helping people rather than bullying high school Christians.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/24/opinion/garrett-ebola/index.html?hpt=op_t1
ReplyDeleteThe opinion article I read was called “Why an Ebola epidemic is spinning out of control” by Laurie Garrett. The article was about the Ebola epidemic occurring in the countries Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone and was trying to convince the target audience (doctors, and people interested in the spread of disease) that the Ebola outbreak isn’t controlled because there isn’t any governance or peace in the three countries. In the first third of the article, the author shows that this is the first Ebola epidemic to cross country borders and has infected over one thousand people, then gives out a piece of information stating that when a country’s hero (who was a doctor helping fight the epidemic) was hospitalized with the Ebola disease, the public fear levels rose because they realized that even the doctors can get the disease. After that the author types that the Ebola disease has been controlled before, he states that it can be controlled again if the twelve nations that are either infected or at risk to be infected work together. In the second third of the article the author says that if not controlled, ebola outbreaks kill up to 70% of those it infects, and then shows the troubling spendings of the countries of Sierra leone, Liberia, and Guinea, who all spend a small amount of money on health. She went on to show bad incidents happening in Guinea, including the spreading of ebola to the capital, the public attacking a Doctors without Borders Clinic, and the Red Cross having to abandon a part of the country after being attacked. Then it is shown that the epidemic spread to Sierra Leone by a traditional healer and that the authorities were losing track of ebola sufferers. In the the final third of the article the author writes that rumors and stigma are threatening the halt of ebola and even the World Health Association says that the epidemic is beyond anybodies control. She continues to show that these several countries have all had horrible history, including mass rape, murder, and civil war.
I agree with the authors stance on the subject of the ebola epidemic because the group of countries affected by the epidemic are all countries with minimal public sanitation, little to no education, horrible history, horrible government, and even more atrocious current events and actions that show the low structure of the governments and low intelligence of the people that reside there. In conclusion, these countries are utterly doomed unless they communicate effectively and quickly to combat the ebola epidemic, and with the events happening, it is seemingly never going to occur to them to halt their destructive actions.