Grady, Denise. "Study Maps 'Uniquely Devastating' Genital Injuries Among Troops." The New York Times 13 Jan. 2017.
Denise Grady’s article “Study Maps ‘Uniquely Devastating’ Genital Injuries Among Troops” discusses a recently released report by military researchers that focuses on genitourinary injuries in veterans. The report describes how 1,367 men in the United States military suffered injuries to their urinary tract or their genitals when they were serving in Iraq or Afghanistan between 2001 and 2013. The author describes the injuries as “ ‘uniquely devastating’ because they can impair a man’s ability to have sex, father children or urinate normally.” Grady also includes that the number of genital injuries has increased compared to previous wars because of improvements in body armor and battlefield medicine. She also explains that the terrain in Afghanistan forced many of the men to patrol on foot, leaving their groin areas vulnerable to explosions, which is the leading cause of the wound. Doctors at several medical centers hope to provide some of these men with penis transplants with deceased organ donors, but the operation has only been performed once in the United States and it was only last year. A new discovery in the report revealed that the blast injuries could have a delayed effect that destroys fertility even if the testicles seem unharmed. The Defense Department recognized that some members of the military were losing their ability to father children, so it created a pilot program to pay for freezing sperm or eggs before deployment. Congress also passed a law in September that allows fertility treatments with service-related fertility.
This New York Times published article is significant because it describes the serious injury that a large number of enlisted American men have been facing. A surgeon and lieutenant colonel at Brooke Army Medical Center, Dr. Steven J. Hudak explained that, “The amount of resiliency and inner and outer strength and personal courage the patients I’ve been asked to care for is quite inspiring, the courage they display when they face these things that 20-year-olds otherwise would not have to face.” These men fought for our freedom and our country in the Middle East and are facing substantial consequences when they return home because of the damage to fertility and the ability to have sex. Researchers even say that these men are at high risk for suicide, so it is important that this issue is acknowledged and respected. In addition, the planned penis transplantation for these men is a major medical breakthrough that could shape the way that transplants are conducted and could allow many men to regain what they have lost.
Denise Grady wrote a thoughtful and succinct article regarding the genital injuries among troops. She included relevant facts and statistics that allowed the reader to understand the scope of the issue and was able to cover the topic from both sides: the emotional one and the medical one. She explained the emotional devastation that these injuries have on the men and the medical breakthrough that their injuries could result in. Her article briefly mentioned genitourinary injuries to women, but she did not provide a thorough analysis of them at all. I think that she should have included more information on the medical approach to their injuries so that her entire article could have been more thorough and well-rounded.
I read Eva’s review of the article Study Maps ‘Uniquely Devastating’ Genital Injuries among troops. Overall, Eva wrote a very good review of this article and I enjoyed reading it for three reasons. The first reason was that she provided a very good summary of the article. The second reason that I enjoyed the article was because she included statistics of how many soldiers had been injured and it was a lot more than I expected. Finally, I enjoyed the article because she included what the US government was trying to do with the problem.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Eva wrote a very well written review there were two aspects that needed improvement. The first aspect that needed improvement was her use of quotations. Although Eva included one quotation in the second paragraph, she could have included more in her summary paragraph. This would have elevated her summary. The second aspect that she could have improved on would have been her discussion of the solution the government posed. Again, this would have elevated her review.
Overall, Eva wrote a very good review. Eva really opened my eyes to the horrors of war and greatly enhanced my knowledge of the topic.
I read the review of and the article “Study Maps 'Uniquely Devastating' Genital Injuries Among Troops,” by The New York Times, and I found it very interesting and informative. I liked how the author of review opened the review by grabbing the reader by giving statistics and evidence as to how this event is worsening every year. I also liked how the author addressed The Defense Department with evidence showing how dangerous this actually is and how it can severely affect these men and their abilities to sexually reproduce. Lastly, I liked how the author talked about what people are planning to do in terms of this injury and how this could critically affect our troops and the future of science. I really enjoyed reading both the article and the review because it had so many positives.
ReplyDeleteEven though this article had many good aspects, it also had negative aspects. First, I did not like how the author did not talk thoroughly about the medical standpoints, it would have made the article stronger if the medical information was included. Also, I did not like how that even though the author talked about what they want to happen, they do not provide details as to what is going to happen and how we can help this issue. Although there were some negative aspects, I really enjoyed reading both the article and its review.
I learned a lot from reading this article. First, I learned about a new outbreak within our troops, I believe we do not focus as much on our troops as we should be doing. Also, I learned about the history of genitourinary injuries in veterans, and how this has so severely affected them. Overall, I really enjoyed reading both the article and the review and I look forward to learning more about this topic in the future.
Eva's review of the article "Study Maps 'Uniquely Devastating' Genital Injuries Among Troops" was informative and enlightening. I liked how Eva gave a thorough but succinct summary of the article, allowing the reader to understand the issue. I also liked that she included a quote because it gave the reader a sense of the article's tone. Finally, she had a valid criticism of the article and I agree that more information about the medical approach to a penis transplant would be interesting.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I enjoyed Eva's review, I think she could have done a better job appealing to the reader on an emotional level, rather than just a factual one, perhaps through the use of individual experiences. I also think another quote would have greatly enhanced her summary.
Overall, Eva did a great job and her review shed light on a subject I previously did not consider. As a country, we should give back more to the men and women who have suffered to protect our country. I also learned about the general effects of genitourinary injuries and the personal devastation that they can lead to.
Eva’s review of the article "Study Maps 'Uniquely Devastating' Genital Injuries Among Troops" was particularly insightful. First, her summary of the article was quite thorough and incorporated all relevant details. Second, her use of a quote heightened her review and gave an indication of the article’s flow and tone. Third, her inclusion of statistics enriched the accuracy and credibility of her review.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the review was generally well written, there were a couple aspects that Eva could have improved upon. First, she could have included more information regarding solutions to this issue. Second, she could have been more concise in her summary.
This review was quite informative. Doubtless, our soldiers deserve the best medical treatment available and it is important to take a close look at some of the devastating injuries from which many are suffering.
Grady, Denise. "Study Maps 'Uniquely Devastating' Genital Injuries Among Troops." The New York Times 13 Jan. 2017.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/health/genital-injuries-among-us-troops.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=3&pgtype=sectionfront
I read Eva Cagliostro’s review of the New York Times article, “Study Maps 'Uniquely Devastating' Genital Injuries Among Troops,” and thought that she did a very good job. I particularly liked her summary of the article and its main points. She kept her summary short and concise, which summaries are supposed to be, yet still included enough information for the reader to understand what happened in the article. In addition, I enjoyed her use of quotes in her review. She includes the quote “The amount of resiliency and inner and outer strength and personal courage the patients I’ve been asked to care for is quite inspiring, the courage they display when they face these things that 20-year-olds otherwise would not have to face.” She includes this quote when explaining the importance and relevance the topic has to our lives. I thought that this quote emphasizes the validity of everything being said. I also liked how she gave details and specific numbers, especially when saying, “The report describes how 1,367 men in the United States military suffered injuries to their urinary tract or their genitals when they were serving in Iraq or Afghanistan between 2001 and 2013.” This number helped the reader conceptualize how many of them suffered these injuries.
Although Eva did a very good job in her review, she could use some improvement. For example, she could have discussed the solution the government posed in more depth, ultimately taking her review one step further. Lastly, she could have spoken more in depth about the medical topics. This could have made things slightly clearer for the reader and would have made her review much stronger.
I thought that the review was written very well and Eva chose a great article to talk about. I think that the topic is very interesting and different and Eva has further educated me on the topic. I never knew about this topic before reading Eva’s review and now feel knowledgeable on this topic. Overall, I really enjoyed Eva’s review and learned a lot from it.