Review of “Barbra Streisand Cloned Her Dogs. For $50,000, You Can Clone Yours.”

Ellie Parson

Mr. Ippolito

AP Biology

2/28/18

Citation:

Stevens, Matt. “Barbra Streisand Cloned Her Dogs. For $50,000, You Can Clone Yours.” The New York Times, 28 Feb. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/science/barbra-streisand-clone-dogs.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront.

Review of “Barbra Streisand Cloned Her Dogs. For $50,000, You Can Clone Yours”

In the New York Times article “Barbra Streisand Cloned Her Dogs. For $50,000, You Can Clone Yours,” Matt Stevens discusses a recent comment made by singer Barbra Streisand during an interview involving cloning. In an interview by Variety, Streisand mentioned that two of her three dogs were clones of her previous dog, which gained attention from readers. Her dogs, Miss Scarlet and Miss Violet, were clones made with genetic material from her older dogs mouth and stomach. Despite common belief that clones are completely identical copies, the two dogs “have different personalities”( Barbra Streisand, 1) according to Streisand. With this topic on the reader’s mind, Stevens shifts the focus of the article onto the history availability of cloning to the public. As most people already know the major discoveries in the scientific world of cloning, Steven’s briefly mentions Dolly the Sheep, and the many other animals that have been cloned after her. He then fixates on scientists in South Korea who successfully cloned a dog in 2005. The dog cloned, named Snuppy for “Seoul National University puppy” (Stevens, 1), is an Afghan hound who was born from a yellow Labrador retriever. Three years later, the South Korean scientists joined a company in California and offered in an auction to clone five dogs. Another lab in South Korea called Sooam Biotech “cloned more than 600 dogs”(Stevens, 1) by the year of 2015, and each cloning process cost around $100,000. Similarly, a company in the U.S. called ViaGen Pets asks for $50,000 dollars for a clone, and offers a short cloning process of 60 days. From this point in the article, Stevens concentrates on the question of whether the cloned dog (or pet) will be identical to the original pet. The laboratory Sooam claimed as it can clone virtually any dog, those clones will not be totally akin to their originals. ViaGen also shared a similar statement on their website, explaining that the clones are genotypically identical, but can be phenotypically different due to the fact that “the environment does interact with genetics to impact many traits” (ViaGen, 1). Finally, Stevens describes the process of cloning while answering the question regarding its safety. For dog cloning specifically, one must get their dog’s DNA, send it to a lab, and from there scientists place the DNA into an egg. The egg will grow into an embryo that will be placed into a surrogate dog, who might give birth to a clone. Stevens highlights controversy in this process, as the Sooam laboratory has not confirmed who happens to the dogs used as an egg donor and surrogate after the process is completed. In addition, “the cloning process works only 33 to 40 percent of the time” (Stevens, 1) in the Korean company. At the end of his article, Stevens returns back to Barbara Streisand and her luxury life with her dog clones, concluding with the thought that so far, their lives seem to be going just fine.

The topic of cloning an organism, whether a family pet or a human being, is extremely relevant society. Cloning currently rises heated debates among those who believe the process is unnatural or ungodly and those who approve of the process as a part of the development of science. Many religious people in society look down upon cloning as they believe scientists who clone are “playing God,” or in other words assuming the powers of a god and artificially controlling life. Although no clones of human beings exist, it appears to be entirely possible as multiple clones of other mammals are successfully living. Certain methods of genetic handling within humans have existed for years. Celebrities such as Chrissy Teigen have used selective genetic processes like preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) to ensure their child is the gender they want before even having the baby. As PGD is not cloning, it does allow mothers to choose the gender of their child before it is born, qualifying it as another way of “playing God.” The popularity of processes like PGD and cloning often raise questions in society, such as “What type of cloning is morally correct?” and “How will human clones be treated if they are ever made?” The newest generations, the Millenials and the groups to follow, will probably have to answer these questions. In regards to pet cloning, some may argue against it as cloning a dead dog may be unhealthy for the owner’s grieving process. However, clones are not exact copies, so a clone will probably act and look different from the original dog. One problem that remains unanswered is where surrogate dogs end up after they give birth, and the controversy surrounding it is valid for many people. If it is revealed that the dog surrogates are killed, dog cloning may gain many opposers in the near future.

In this article, Matt Stevens wrote in an entertaining way that kept his readers’ attention and amused them. His introduction with Barbra Streisand, although not entirely involved with science, was a clever way to present dog cloning to an audience that may not be attracted to science articles. He also included quantitative data throughout his article, providing enough numerical information to qualify the article as a thorough scientific article. Stevens also organized the article into parts that were small and easy to read. Even though the article was well written, there were some areas that lacked in greatness. For example, Stevens included some information about the process of cloning, but did not elaborate on the part of the process that involves placing the DNA of one organism into the egg of another organism of the same species. A quick solution could be for Stevens to include a small paragraph of a few sentences explaining how scientists are able to take the DNA from a mouth cell and use it in an embryo because all (or most) cells in an organism have the same genome. He could also explain the process in which the DNA of the egg was replaced with the other organisms DNA. Another area that had room for improvement was that as STevens included many links in his article for more information about the history of cloning, he hardly wrote about how Dolly the Sheep came to be. In order to help his readers gain a holistic understanding of cloning, Stevens could add a paragraph describing the story of Dolly and how her existence changed the science world.

Columbia University Science Honors Program

At last, butterflies get a bigger, better evolutionary tree

Cindy Kwok

Feb 16, 2018

Florida Museum of Natural History. “At Last, Butterflies Get a Bigger, Better Evolutionary

Tree.” ScienceDaily, ScienceDaily, 15 Feb. 2018, www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180215153902.htm.

I read the article called “At Last, Butterflies Get a Bigger, Better Evolutionary Tree” from the Florida Museum of Natural History. The article is about the studies that Lepidopterists Akito Kawahara and Marianne Espeland have done in order to get a more in depth understanding of butterflies and their relation to other species. Before the Kawahara and Espeland study, butterflies, certain information such as “insights into community ecology, how species originate and evolve, climate change and interactions between plants and insects” had been known. However, a complete map of relations between butterflies did not exist. As a result, Kawahara and Espeland attempted to expand the information by at least 35x increase in genetic info and 3x increase in the taxa. Also using fossil records, their teams have noted several developmental milestones for butterflies. In order to make such complicated and specific “map” of butterfly evolution, the scientists analyzed “a dataset of 352 genetic markers from 207 butterfly species representing 98 percent of tribes, which are a rank above genus but below family and subfamily”. This allowed them to discover that swallowtails were the first family to branch off when previous studies believed that swallowtails and other butterflies shared a common ancestor. The tree that Kawahara and Espeland only show 207 species out of approximately 18,800, but this is a huge first step to understanding the history of butterflies.

This article was important to humanity because it is also important to understand our past nda understand how thing have evolved and became the way they are today. Although the study does not specifically relate to humans, the experiments and the way these scientists have started to map out the butterfly lineage can help bring new light to understanding our own history. As “complex” creatures, it is probable that much of our evolutionary past has not been discovered similar to how not much has been understood about butterflies despite the large amounts of information from previous studies. This just goes to show that new studies can easily disprove findings from older studies and how there is always a room for error.

Overall, there were both pros and cons to the article. One pro was that I liked how it defined certains words like taxa for readers who may not understand what it means. This makes it easier for anybody to read rather than just scientists (more specially biologists). This helps to broaden the amount of readers the article draws in. Another pro is how the article articulates about the findings about butterflies by showing both areas where the new research both agrees and disagrees with older research. One con is that at the bottom, it gives a little backstory about one of the researchers and why they decided to study butterflies. Although it may be interesting, it is not necessarily important and does not contribute much to the article.

“This Mutant Crayfish Clones Itself, and It's Taking Over Europe"

Sarah Goodell

Mr. Ippolito

AP Bio: Current Event Review

12 February, 2018

Current Event #16

Zimmer, Carl. “This Mutant Crayfish Clones Itself, and It's Taking Over Europe.” The New York

    Times, The New York Times, 5 Feb. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/02/05/science/mutant-crayfish-clones-europe.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=8&pgtype=sectionfront&mtrref=www.nytimes.com&gwh=BB4B6A66ABFC062AC1C1619A95BF2F9B&gwt=pay.

This week, I read the article titled “This Mutant Crayfish Clones Itself, and It's Taking Over Europe” by The New York Times author Carl Zimmer. In this article, Zimmer discusses how these six-inch-long marbled crayfish are miraculously able to clone themselves, thanks to a mutation 25 years ago which also gave rise to their species. In 2003, scientists confirmed that these crayfish did have the ability to clone themselves. They tested this theory by sequencing small bits of DNA from the animals, noticing that they were very similar to another type of crayfish native to North and Central America. Dr. Frank Lyko, a biologist at the German Cancer Research Center, sequenced the genomes of 15 other specimens, which allowed him a clearer look at the origins of the marbled crayfish. As Zimmer writes, “...instead of reproducing sexually, the first marbled crayfish was able to induce her own eggs to start dividing into embryos. The offspring, all females, inherited identical copies of her three sets of chromosomes. They were clones.” Therefore, Dr. Lyko discovered that these animals originally evolved as a result of a mutation when two slough crayfish mated, creating only female offspring.

Although this topic is not one that brings up an issue that needs to be dealt with, Zimmer’s article is relevant because he discusses one of the wonders of the natural world. His article brings up the idea that life is ever-changing and as humans, we can never predict what will truly occur. The fact that these crayfish are able to duplicate without male counterparts and developed because of one mutation in a few offspring demonstrates the miracles of life. The natural world is also still much of a mystery to humans because we have very little way of knowing if this new species of crayfish will survive for another 100,000 years or for only another 100 years. This topic is important to learn about because it emphasizes the idea that there is always more to discover and it is critical for us to understand as much as possible about our changing world.

Zimmer did a great job writing this article; however, he can improve upon a few points in the future. Firstly, Zimmer provided his audience with a chronological summary of events over the past 30 years, beginning with the discovery of this new species of crayfish and ending with the most recent study on these animals. Although Zimmer included a couple quotes from Dr. Lyko, he can try discussing more studies and expanding on how these scientists performed their studies, research, and tests to discover more about these animals and their incredible ability. Overall, Zimmer did a great job writing a thorough, yet understandable article for his diverse audience, but could include more detail about the specific studies in his next works.

Changes in Gene Activity May One Day Reveal the Time of Death for Crime Victims

Isabella Dibbini

Mr. Ippolito

AP Biology

14 February 2018

Pennisi, Elizabeth. “Changes in Gene Activity May One Day Reveal the Time of Death for Crime Victims.” Sciencemag, 13 Feb. 2018, www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/02/changes-gene-activity-may-one-day-reveal-time-death-crime-victims.

The article “Changes in Gene Activity May One Day Reveal the Time of Death for Crime Victims” by Elizabeth Pennisi discusses how in the future, it may be possible to determine the time of death solely based on the changes in the victim’s genes. Recently, computational biologists have taken the first steps toward predicting the death of a person based on observing their gene activity after death. Computational biologist Roderic Guigó has been measuring gene activity in tissues from hundreds of people, both living and dead. Through his studies, his goal was to determine how gene activity changes as the time to preservation is extended. Guigó and his colleagues looked at thousands of samples of tissues, each of which included data on the time between the death of the donor and the preservation of the sample. Guigó reflects on his experiment when he states “The response to the death of the organism is quite tissue specific.” For example, there was very little change over time in the brain’s gene activity. However, more than 600 muscle genes either quickly increased or decreased activity after the loss of life. He furthered his studies by developing a software that “learned” the patterns of 399 people. In addition, they tested how well the machine software predicted the time of death of 129 other people. He and his colleagues came to a certain conclusion: “The software discovered, for example, that in blood, decreased activity of genes involved in DNA production, immune response, and metabolism—but an increase in those involved with stress responses—signaled the person had died about 6 hours before preservation.” Therefore, by analyzing the genes with the help of this particular software, Guigó and his team were able to provide a time frame in which they believe the individual had died.  

Millions of people die each day from various causes. In the future, studying gene activity could ultimately help scientists pinpoint the exact time of death. By developing new softwares, each day we are getting closer to determining this. This discovery of the change in gene activity is just the beginning of new discoveries. By conducting these experiments now, it can only benefit our society in the future.

Throughout this article, the author makes statements and supports them with concrete evidence. In addition, the structure of this article is well planned out. The author begins by introducing his main argument and then goes into depth about the tests that Guigó and his team did, to further this idea. While this article was well written, there are a few things that the author could have done to make their story more compelling. One suggestion that can be made to improve this article would be to incorporate additional plans on how scientists would further this study. Overall, this article was interesting and very well written.

New Form of Water, Both Liquid and Solid, Is 'Really Strange

Hannah Beldotti

AP Biology

February 13, 2018

Current Event #16

Chang, Kenneth. “New Form of Water, Both Liquid and Solid, Is 'Really Strange'.” The New

York Times, The New York Times, 5 Feb. 2018,

www.nytimes.com/2018/02/05/science/superionic-water-neptune-uranus.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=9&pgtype=sectionfront.

This week, I read the article, “New Form of Water, Both Liquid, and Solid, Is “Really Strange.” The author elaborated on a form of water that is simultaneously a liquid and solid. This “superionic” water, “consists of a rigid lattice of oxygen atoms through which positively charged hydrogen nuclei move.” Although it has not been found on Earth, the new form of water is thought to be available on Neptune and Uranus’ mantles. Author Kenneth Chang explains the water in greater detail by stating, “The heat melts the chemical bonds between the hydrogen and oxygen atoms. The high pressure keeps the larger and heavier oxygen atoms stacked in a fixed crystal alignment — a solid — while the hydrogen nuclei, or ions, flow through — a liquid.” In the article, different experiments that scientists have performed and investigated are stated along with an explanation of how they study the water. For example, to stimulate the “superionic” water, researchers at Lawrence Livermore and the University of Rochester, increased the pressure and temperature of water to create similar conditions to those in Uranus and Neptune. Kenneth Chang, science reporter for the New York Times since 2000, goes into great depth on the experiment, “...first squeezed water between two pieces of diamond with a pressure of 360,000 pounds per square inch...The researchers then took the compressed ice, packed in carry-on luggage, to the University of Rochester where it was blasted by a pulse of laser light...heating it to thousands of degrees and exerting a pressure more than a million times that of Earth’s atmosphere.” The results of the experiments aided scientists in providing an explanation of Uranus and Neptune’s, “lopsided, off-center magnetic fields.”

Overall, I thought the author did a commendable job of thoroughly explaining the discovery and experimentation that came with it. However, there were some improvements that should be considered. First, the author continuously says how “Long theorized to be found in the mantles of Uranus and Neptune, the confirmation of the existence of superionic ice could lead to the development of new materials,” yet, he never elaborates on the materials. I think it would have been more effective to state new materials that scientists are working towards developing. Secondly, the author neglects to inform the reader of how this study societal impact. However, it can be assumed that this is not entirely known. On the other hand, I applaud the author’s detail throughout the article. For example, when he described the experiments that scientist performed.

I came away from reading the article with a lot of new knowledge acquired. Not only did I learn about the chemical composition of superionic water, but I also learned how scientists stimulate it and conditions on other planets. Also, I learned how this information can be applied to theories having to do with our solar system. Overall, I thought this article was well written, informative, and interesting.

America’s Ski Trails Are Vanishing. This Olympian Has Taken Up the Cause.

Charlie Gay

AP Biology

Mr. Ippolito

2/13/18

Current Events 16

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/08/climate/snow-olympics.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=6&pgtype=sectionfront

Pierre-louis, Kendra. "America's Ski Trails Are Vanishing. This Olympian Has Taken Up the Cause." The New York Times. The New York Times, 08 Feb. 2018. Web.

I read the article "America's Ski Trails Are Vanishing. This Olympian Has Taken Up the Cause." This article starts off by explaining the impact that global warming has had on ski trails across the United States. For example, Kendra Pierre-Louis wrote, “In the United States, the average time between the last frost of the spring and the first of the winter has expanded by 10 days since the first half of the 20th century.” Louis got most of her information on the topic from olympic skier Jessie Diggins. Diggins is trying to stop global warming because she is worried that her kids will have no snow to ski on once they grow up. Diggins gave examples of the huge decline of snow in recent years. For example, a town in Wisconsin had to cancel the biggest cross country skiing race last year because of lack of snow. Diggins even talked about the downsides of skiing on man made snow. One of her teammates broke his leg because the man-made snow was too fast. Diggins hopes to put an end to global warming. She says, “I’m supporting the carbon fee and dividend solution, because it puts a fee on carbon and returns the revenue to households.” Diggins is hoping that her efforts will allow her kids to be able to ski on actual snow.

This article is very relevant to our society today. Diggins gives us a first hand experience of how global warming has affected her life. We, as everyday people, should take this article as a warning. We should try to do everything that we can to stop global warming. Even the smallest things can help save skiing for everyone. If you like skiing or other winter sports, as I do, this article should connect deeply with you. Something needs to be done to stop global warming. Every year there is less snowfall in the United States most popular ski resorts. This article should serve as a warning to everyone.

I really enjoyed reading this article. One thing that I really liked about this article is that it allowed us to read exactly what Diggins had to say. The author did not change her words at all and I think this allowed us to have a valuable first hand experience. I also liked how this article gave examples of how global warming has affected the earth already. Usually global warming articles talk about the effects hundreds of years down the road and I think that this does not have as strong of an affect on the reader. One thing that I think this article could have done better is they could given more numerical evidence of the decrease in snow. We just had to take Diggins word for it and were not provided with much evidence. I would have liked the article to give actual numbers of the snowfall in certain resorts over the past twenty years or so. Other than that this article was very well written and very interesting.

Innovative restoration of coral reefs helps protect Caribbean islands

Mairead Cain

Mr. Ippolito

A.P. Biology

13 February 2018

University of California, Santa Cruz. "Innovative restoration of coral reefs helps protect Caribbean
islands." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 12 February 2018.
<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180212130830.htm>.

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180212130830.htm

For my current event report, I decided to read and analyze the article “Innovative restoration of coral
reefs helps protect Caribbean islands,” from the online news source Science Daily. The article discusses
the protective nature of coral reefs in the Caribbean along with the reef restoration plan currently in
motion. Scientists at the Nature Conservancy and UC Santa Cruz are leading the efforts in research.
Aside from their magnificent beauty, coral reefs prevent harsh waves from hitting shorelines at full
force. Their presence prevent severe shoreline corrosion and subsequent flooding. This shoreline
corrosion is causing problems for homes and other structures on the shorelines of various Caribbean
islands. “In an attempt to adapt, villagers have built makeshift barriers with tires and driftwood to slow
the erosion threatening their homes, but these efforts have been largely unsuccessful.” The researchers
are looking into projects that create artificial reef which will allow for the recreation of natural reefs and
prevent shoreline corrosion. “The reef restoration structure is made from inexpensive and
locally-sourced materials and labor, easy to assemble on-site, suitable for high wave energy or
hurricane exposure, and specially designed to encourage habitat restoration and enhancement.” The
study not only has a solution to the current issue of corrosion, but also plans for the future development
of natural coral reefs in the area. Michael Beck, a lead marine scientist, described the project. "Reef
degradation destroys the natural breakwaters for tropical coastlines in the United States and across
more than 60 other nations. Our study identifies how severe this problem can be, and we used that
information to design an innovative reef restoration solution to help people and nature."

Considering the fact that this article describes a possible solution to the dwindling amounts of coral
reefs in the Caribbean, it is evident that the project will have a profound effect on the future of coral
stability. In the article itself, the researchers responsible for the important project would often discuss
the benefits that will spawn from their proposed idea. “Live coral fragments from the existing reef
were placed onto the structure to encourage natural reef growth.” Future developments concerning this
project could lead to further scientific advancements in the prevention of coral reef depletion. If
scientists are able to perfectly integrate natural coral reefs into their artificial counterparts, this
method could be used successfully all across the world.

Overall, I believe the article “Innovative restoration of coral reefs helps protect Caribbean islands,”
was very well written and equally informative. The authors easily simplify the advanced science to
allow all readers to be able to interpret the information given. Many of the terms used are also defined
and described. The authors go into amazing description when discusses how exactly this project will
help coral reefs. In an effort to improve the article, the authors should have discussed the exact plan
earlier on in the article. There were moments when I was confused on what, exactly, they were
discussing. It would have also been beneficial to ask the researchers responsible for the crucial
discovery about how they plan on educating the world on their new method.

At Site of Japanese Volcano's Supereruption, an Immense Lava Dome Lurks

Olivia Doyle

Mr. Ippolito

AP Bio

13 February 2018

St, Nicholas. “At Site of Japanese Volcano's Supereruption, an Immense Lava Dome Lurks.”The New York Times, The New York Times, 9 Feb. 2018. www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/science/japan-volcano-supereruption.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=3&pgtype=sectionfront.

This week, I read an article entitled “At Site of Japanese Volcano’s Supereruption, an Immense Lava Dome Lurks”. The article discussed scientists’ exploration of the Kikai Caldera, a massive volcano that once caused a superruption known as the Akahoya eruption 7,300 years ago. Scientists at the Kobe Ocean Bottom Exploration Center investigated the caldera using seismic and geological analyses, and were surprised to find a massive lava dome. The dome reportedly has a more immense buildup of lava than those of the Yellowstone and Long Valley calderas. Dr. Tatsumi says of the findings: “The lava dome is chemically different from the supereruption, suggesting that a new magma supply system had been developed after 7,300 years ago.” According to Dr. Tatsumi, it is rare to find a lava dome underneath a caldera, and that this finding shows that there is activity at Kikai Caldera similar to the preparation stage for the supereruption. However, Janine Kripper, a volcanologist not involved with the study, said that further investigation must be done at the site in order to determine if it really is a single large dome or just individual buildups of lava.

This discovery, although largely inconclusive, could be very important in the future for scientists. Although Kripper argues that the findings may be not completely supported, she does say “Calderas occur around the world and the more we know about the differences and similarities, the more we can understand the hazards and how to prepare for potential eruptions in the future.” Evidently, calderas require further research before we can conclusively say that they are dangerous. However, it is important that scientists study Kikai Caldera, as the occurrence of a superuption at this site could eject 10 cubic miles of magma, covering almost all of the country of Japan. In order to keep Japan safe, it is crucial that scientists study the activity of the caldera to ensure that another eruption is not in sight or could be prevented.

In my opinion, the author did a good job of explaining the study of Kikai Caldera. He included quotes from different scientists on their views of the discovery so that the reader could understand the importance of it. He also described how the scientists went about their study so the reader could gain insight into the process of the investigation. However, I think the author should have given a clear explanation of what a caldera is and the structure of the volcano before diving into his explanation of the study, as it would have cleared up any confusion for the reader. Overall, though, I found this article to be very well-written and informative and I am interested to read about future investigations of the Kikai Caldera.

Scientists Are Tracking How the Flu Moves through a College Campus.

Mia Gradelski

AP Biology

Current Event 16 Review

February 12, 2018

Cunningham, Aimee. “Scientists Are Tracking How the Flu Moves through a College

Campus.” Science News, 8 Feb. 2018,

<www.sciencenews.org/article/scientists-are-tracking-how-flu-moves-through-college-campus.>

During this season when many students are absent from school and the rise of flu shots are more prevalent, it is interesting to stop and ponder about how this contagious flu can spread and infect other people rapidly inside a dorm room. Throughout the article, readers are introduced to many of the unusual findings done by students at Universities and Colleges regarding their perspective on the issue. This is called the “C.A.T.C.H Virus which stands for Characterizing and Tracking College Health.” The article goes in depth to explain how the trajectory of the virus is uncommon but the infections are in close contacts to one another. The article then transcends into the main project that the article focuses on which is the study of a classroom of freshmen that he asks multiple questions to based on their insights on illnesses. The author constantly keeps a bias attitude towards the findings and opinions of the students. Towards the middle of the article, many key questions are represented that are important in evaluating the common cause of the flu virus and what factors lead to spread so immensely. When the author states, “If we don’t understand how [viruses] are transmitted, it’s hard to come up with policies that are really going to work.” In addition, the article continues following up on Milton and his colleagues report using specific examples from his tests. For example he found, “Of 134 fine aerosol samples taken when patients were breathing normally, 52 contained infectious influenza virus.” This lures readers not only to question the assumption that people are making when they feel treated but what are the limiting factors to the spread of influenza. Lastly, the article goes into more depth regarding the full effect of this continuing test and how the “size of the current flu outbreak may be on the researchers side” but they leave the most prevalent message that “One one person gets sick, it goes around to everyone on the floor” and there is no way out of it.

Throughout the article, there are key facts that we can be mindful of especially as a student from college or junior high. This article demonstrates that influenza can spread in up to 2 days to another person in contact with a sick person. This leads readers to be more aware on the effect of the virus and how it can be prevented. I’ve learned that even breathing close enough to another person in the same air can penetrate the flu to start. I couldn’t believe that little gestures such as sneezing or coughing into tissues can still lead to a risk of catching the flu for another person.

Overall, this article was very well published having detailed examples of tests and statistics gathered from many colleges across the US. Some strengths that were evident are the complexity of the labs. For example, almost in every paragraph there is a reference to the C.A.T.C.H. study and what it “aims to find out if what’s in the air is catching.” In addition, it was interesting to hear from different sources by sourcing “Donald Milton, an environmental and occupational health physician-scientist”  not just one college that could have raw data. Some weaknesses that I noticed while criticizing this article was the lack of a solid option. There was a ton of evidence from multiple sources, but the article felt overwhelmed rather than hearing the author write about the evidence in a cohesive manner put into an argument. In order to improve upon this, the author should’ve gathered the best supporting evidence and create his own summary relating to what he had found.

Woodpeckers show signs of possible brain damage, but that might not be a bad thing

Gigi Chrappa

Mr. Ippolito

February 6, 2018

Current Event #15

Field Museum. "Woodpeckers show signs of possible brain damage, but that might not be a bad thing." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 2 February 2018.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180202140910.htm

This article, “Woodpeckers show signs of possible brain damage, but that might not be a bad thing” quickly peaked my interest due to the intriguing title. I never really considered the possibility that woodpeckers could get brain damage from their “claim to fame”, woodpecking. Curious, I continued reading, and eventually came to the conclusion that woodpeckers have an increased amount of tau proteins. While in both humans and birds tau proteins are necessary for proper brain function, for humans too much of the protein can be debilitating and cause emotional/physical/mental strain. However, the study, which is still in progress, has yet to conclude whether this increase in tau protein causes brain damage in woodpeckers. Although this study is inconclusive at the moment, the researchers already have ideas as to what to do with this current information. For example, as woodpeckers can withstand 1,200g to 1,400g of force (whereas a force of 60g could actually give a human a concussion), bike developers will continue to model their helmets after the woodpecker’s skull structure. In addition to this, the information may be put towards research on neurodegenerative diseases.

Although this study did not necessarily achieve its goal of determining whether woodpecker’s receive brain damage from their constant pecking, this research will help many fields of science in the near future. We see this impact in today’s society already; companies modeling their bike helmets after the bird’s strong skull. Another probable use would be for football equipment: making more structurally sound equipment would reduce the amount of head injuries greatly. In addition to this, the studying of tau proteins provided extra information and knowledge which will be useful in several fields of research such as that of neurodegenerative diseases. It’s amazing that such a minor phenomenon that we see in our everyday lives may actually lead to injury and disease prevention in the near future.

This article was incredibly well written, allowing for ease while reading. In particular, the article succeeds in providing an immensely interesting introduction that encourages the audience to continue reading. Then, the article continues with a well phrased and composed explanation of the tau protein while providing all of the necessary information on woodpeckers and their habits. This was vital to the reader’s understanding as these are uncommon topics that definitely need further explaining for the average reader to fully comprehend the overarching topic/theme. In addition to this, I enjoyed how the author actually included how the research will impact society. It was interesting to see a scientist’s view on how the research could apply to our daily lives in the future. While the author wrote a neat and effective article, there were areas in which he/she could improve upon. For instance, it was a tad frustrating to read that there was absolutely no idea whether the woodpeckers had brain damage or not when reading the article for that sole purpose. Instead of the way (s)he phrased this, (s)he possibly could have continued his/her article with more benefits found from the experiment as to not let down the readers as much. In addition to this, it would have been interesting, if possible, for the author to have included several graphics. Whether it be photographs, graphs, microscope slides, or tables, it would have made the article less dry, ‘black and white’, and overall, more engaging. Overall, the article was very captivating and I enjoyed learning about the woodpeckers and their large impact on society.