Nate Kim
AP Bio, Mr. Ippolito
11/13/20
Current Event 7
O’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Uğur Şahin, the CEO of BioNTech, has announced that a breakthrough COVID-19 vaccine will end the pandemic. In collaboration with pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, BioNTech has created a vaccine that they report is 90 percent effective. The vaccine is so effective because it attacks the virus on multiple levels. First, the vaccine hinders COVID-19 from getting into our cells in the first place. If somehow the virus does get into our cells, T-cells (a type of white blood cell) are on standby to eliminate it. Sahin is confident in the fact that the virus “can’t defend itself against these mechanisms.” The virus was 90 percent effective at stopping people from showing COVID-19 symptoms in phase three trials. The product is not yet ready to be distributed to the public. In a closing statement, Sahin firmly stated that he believes his vaccine will be able to stop the virus and end the pandemic.
The arrival of a vaccine is something that the world community has been awaiting for a considerable amount of time. COVID-19 has completely altered the way society functions and social norms. For many, a vaccine and herd immunity signals a return to the way things were before. In the US right now, and in many countries worldwide, COVID-19 cases are starting to spike again. A vaccine of 90 percent effectiveness could make this possible. 90 percent, in the first place, is extremely high. For reference, the flu vaccine, which does a phenomenal job of stopping the spread of the flu virus, is 40-60 percent effective. Let that sink in. The Pfizer/ BioNTech vaccine is upwards of two times as effective as the flu vaccine, if they are reporting the truth. If the vaccine really has an effectiveness of this level, it’s almost surefire that COVID-19 is going to be eradicated.
This article does a great job of explaining what has happened and giving the straight facts to the public. The article is not extremely lengthy and it gives the facts in a straightforward manner. On the other hand, the article lacks skepticism. The article doesn’t remind the public to wait for further evidence and research. It speaks as if the vaccine is definitely exactly as reported. For a news article, that is preemptive. At this point, we only know what Pfizer and BioNTech have told us. It would be foolish to assume that the vaccine is exactly as advertised, until we are given new evidence. Also, the article does not provide any context of how effective “90 percent is.” In order to determine whether 90 percent was good or not, I needed to do additional research. Overall, this was a strong article in the facts regard, but it could have been better when talking about the validity of what was claimed by Pfizer and BioNTech.
Kelly Baclija
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Bio
November 14, 2020
O’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Kim, Nate. “ Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop Pandemic.” Bronxville AP Biology, 1 Jan. 1970, bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/11/nate-kim-ap-bio-mr.html.
Nate’s article discussing “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop Pandemic” by Natalie O’Neill is incredibly well written. One well-done aspect is that he first states that “The vaccine is so effective because it attacks the virus on multiple levels” and then he goes on to describe the reasons why in length-- this allows the audience to entirely understand how the vaccine works and strengths their perception. Another reason is that he defines any terms that the reader may not understand; for example, he writes that “If somehow the virus does get into our cells, T-cells (a type of white blood cell) are on standby to eliminate it”. This prevents the reader from having any difficulty in terms of interpreting the article and understand entirely how the vaccine works in a human body. Finally, later in his relevance paragraph, Nate includes the fact that “For reference, the flu vaccine, which does a phenomenal job of stopping the spread of the flu virus, is 40-60 percent effective”. Not only does this show that he did additional research outside the article, increasing his credibility, but it allows the audience to get an understanding of how effective the Covid vaccine would be compared to other vaccines we already have in use.
Although Nate’s article is enjoyable to read, there are a few aspects that could be improved. For instance, although he does describe how the vaccine works, it would be beneficial for the audience if he included other factors, such as if there are any possible side effects of it, how soon it could be available for the public, or if the government played any role in the development; because of these facts, the audience could have gained a full perspective of the vaccine’s creation. Also, he claimed towards the end of his review that the article “could have been better when talking about the validity of what was claimed by Pfizer and BioNTech”-- to make his review more well--rounded, he could have researched more of what the media and the public’s perception is about the vaccine for the audience to gain a better understanding of how likely it is to work.
I chose this article because, although I had heard about the new vaccine, I was not entirely sure how it worked and Nate’s review definitely strengthened my knowledge of it since I know specifically how it would work if it was released to the public. This is significant because, ever since March, our lives have revolved around Covid; wearing masks, social distancing, and many things being canceled as a result. If there was a vaccine, this would definitely change everything since our lives would be closer to going back to normal to how it was prior to the pandemic.
Julia Reich
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology
November 17, 2020
O’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Kim, Nate. “ Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop
Pandemic.” Bronxville AP Biology, 1 Jan. 1970, bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/11/nate-kim-ap-bio-mr.html
Nate’s review of “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic” written by Natalie O’Neill is very well written and also educational. One aspect well done is the intriguing introduction. He describes the subject of his article in the very beginning, which caught my attention; I found the article much more interesting. Secondly, he defines scientific jargon which may not be known to the average person. For example, he defines t-cells as a type of blood cell. Even as a high school student who has taken science every year since elementary school, I did not know what a t-cell was. A third aspect he did very well was including his opinion on the article. He critiques the article’s lack of skepticism regarding the actual effectiveness and truth about the vaccine. This subjective opinion was very important in influencing his audience by being realistic about stopping the pandemic.
There were a couple of aspects Nate could have improved in his review. First, though he did include his opinion on the vaccine and its effectiveness, he could have potentially included the opinion of others. If many others are also skeptical, this would further back up his claim. He could easily do this by looking at the comment section of this specific article and see what other people are thinking. Secondly, he could also explain how the vaccine prevents the virus from getting into our cells. Though the article may not have included the exact science and chemistry behind the vaccine and Covid-19 virus, Nate could have done outside research. This would be more interesting to read and his audience would understand exactly how the vaccine is supposed to work; for example -- if they potentially want to receive the vaccine. Overall, Nate’s review was very well written and fascinating to read.
I chose Nate’s article because the article title caught my eye. The Covid-19 pandemic has obviously taken a large toll on almost every nation and especially the United States. The idea of finding a nearly 100% effective vaccine which could potentially eradicate the virus is a concept that is not only amazing but also mind-boggling. If this vaccine is as effective as the CEO of BioNTech claims it is, life could be returning back to normal in a matter of months. Who even remembers a world without masks, social-distancing, and hand sanitizer?
Olivia Cevasco
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology - C Even
17 November, 2020
Current Event #7: Comment on Nate Kim’s Review
O'Neill, Natalie. “Scientist behind Pfizer's COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop Pandemic.” New York Post, New York Post, 13 Nov. 2020, nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/.
Kim, Nate. “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop Pandemic.” Bronxville AP Biology, 13 Nov. 2020, bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/11/nate-kim-ap-bio-mr.html.
Nate’s Review of “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop Pandemic” summarizes the efficacy of a breakthrough COVID-19 vaccine. Nate effectively captivates the reader by stating the vaccine could end COVID-19 and supporting that with its surprising effectiveness. He says that “Uğur Şahin, the CEO of BioNTech, has announced that a breakthrough COVID-19 vaccine will end the pandemic. In collaboration with pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, BioNTech has created a vaccine that they report is 90 percent effective.” These opening sentences are shocking, exciting and engage the reader because this vaccine will surely improve their health and lifestyle. Second, Nate does a wonderful job citing outside information to underscore the significance of this vaccine. He writes that “For reference, the flu vaccine, which does a phenomenal job of stopping the spread of the flu virus, is 40-60 percent effective.” In contrast to the regular flu vaccine, the COVID-19 vaccine from Pfizer and BioNTech is two times as effective, which gives the reader confidence in this treatment and enables them to understand why it is such a “breakthrough.” Finally, Nate does a good job assessing the weaknesses of the article, saying that “the article lacks skepticism. The article doesn’t remind the public to wait for further evidence and research. It speaks as if the vaccine is definitely exactly as reported.” Here, Nate questions the results of the research because there isn’t much corroborated evidence to support it. As science students, it’s vital to constantly question data and collect more to argue a thesis, so Nate does a brilliant job here.
I’d encourage Nate to include more details about this vaccine because his review seems repetitious. He says that “The virus was 90 percent effective at stopping people from showing COVID-19 symptoms in phase three trials,” and the 90 percent efficacy is repeated, but what other data was presented in these trials? Were there any side effects? Are there any risks to this vaccine? Does it work for different strains of the virus? When will it be available to the public? I’d also encourage Nate to find a more substantive article about this topic because the one he reviewed was somewhat brief, so he had to conduct more research to present a more well-rounded review. Nate says that, “In order to determine whether 90 percent was good or not, I needed to do additional research.” So perhaps he could have chosen a more substantive article to review that might include more statistics and make his process as a writer easier.
I chose to comment on Nate’s review because it’s timely and affects all of us. There’s been so much confusion about the COVID-19 vaccines and their results that I’m glad Nate was able to teach readers about one vaccine with proven results. I learned how this vaccine will work—blocking COVID from entering cells and using T-cells to fight it. Nate’s review changes my perception of the COVID-19 vaccine because I was skeptical of its efficacy and thought that it would be less effective than the normal flu vaccine; however, science shows that the opposite is true.
Katy McBride
ReplyDeleteNovember 15th, 2020
AP Biology, Mr. Ippolito
Current Event #7 Review
Link to Original Article: https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Link to Article Review: https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/
In his review of the New York Post article, “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic,” Nate did a great job of summarizing the article’s findings as well as analyzing and critiquing it. One thing that I thought Nate did really well was summarize the way in which the vaccine attacks the virus. As I was reading through the original article, I had a little bit of difficulty understanding how exactly the vaccine attacked the virus on two levels, but Nate’s description made it exceptionally clear. I think that this clear description of the way in which the virus is theoretically defeated by the vaccine really benefits the reader and makes the original article even more compelling. Another thing that I thought Nate did really was put the effectiveness of the virus in context. I think that some people don’t understand how impressive it is for the vaccine to have such a high level of success. I think in the world of medicine people tend to believe that vaccines and other procedures need to have exceptionally high rates of efficiency otherwise they are not worth it. Although this is definitely the case in some scenarios, it is not true for all procedures and products in the field of medicine. I think that by comparing the effectiveness of the Pfizer vaccine with the flu vaccine, which many people know of and get, it made the results of the Pfizer even more impressive. At the same time, this could also make some people skeptical of the trial and its effectiveness, because it might seem unrealistic to some people. Nate also did a really great job of addressing this concern, because by acknowledging it he made himself more credible. Through addressing this concern, Nate makes himself seem more credible because he acknowledges that his opinion on the matter is not the only valid one and makes himself seem more educated and aware of this issue, therefore boosting his credibility.
If I could make some slight adjustments to Nate’s review of the article, one thing that I would do is I would add some additional information in the first paragraph about how vaccines generally target viruses. I think this additional information would have been beneficial to the reader because they would be able to understand how the COVID-19 vaccine behaves differently from other vaccines. For example, he could have described how the flu vaccine behaves because he includes the flu example later in the article so it would have added a component of fluidity to the article. Another slight adjustment that I would make would be to possibly describe some of the other vaccine trials currently taking place. Although the Pfizer vaccine is certainly a great accomplishment, it would be even more profound if compared with other trials.
One thing I learned from this article that I hadn’t known before reading the article and the review is that the flu vaccine has an efficiency of between 40 and 60 percent. Prior to reading this article, I had thought that it was somewhere around 70% but I apparently was misinformed or mixed up my information. This new information makes the Pfizer vaccine even more impressive in my mind.
O’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It
ReplyDeletecan stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Kim, Nate. Bronxville AP Biology, 13 Nov. 2020,
bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/11/nate-kim-ap-bio-mr.html.
Nate Kim’s review of the article, “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic,” by Natalie O’Neill was well researched and informative. Nate’s introduction to this review was certainly captivating due it’s bold claim that this article could contain the answers to ending the global pandemic. This makes the rest of the review more interesting and also relevant, since the Coronavirus is a health risk that impacts the lives of every individual at the moment. Secondly, Nate’s inclusion of his outside research done about the effectiveness of the virus vaccine makes this review more credible and professional. Comparing the COVID-19 vaccine’s effectiveness to that of the flu vaccine, something countless people have taken annually is a smart comparison to make since the flu vaccines are so widely accepted and trusted. Also, to many, 90% does not initially sound effective enough to end the pandemic so providing context about other vaccines makes the information more reassuring. Lastly, Nate’s review was strengthened by his inclusion of definitions for a lot of the scientific vocabulary he uses; for example, Nate writes, “...T-cells (a type of white blood cell)...” to help clarify for the readers since the majority of the population wouldn’t know what a T-cell is.
Despite the many strengths to Nate Kim’s review, there were also some weaknesses that could be noted. The first is that the review seems very repetitive; the main fact that he focuses on within the review is that this upcoming COVID-19 vaccine is 90 percent effective. While this is a very important factor, other aspects of the vaccine should have been touched on more prominently. Additionally, Nate would have improved his review of this article if he had included information about the potential side effects of this vaccine rather than just the benefits of taking it. The repercussions from taking this vaccine are extremely important to discuss because it is a health standard that will be extremely widely implemented, maybe even mandatory to help prevent further spread of this virus that has temporarily shut down the world.
I chose to read Nate Kim’s review due to the relevance of this topic in today’s community. I had heard about an upcoming vaccine from friends and family members, but I knew very little information about the actual treatment until reading this review. A vaccine for this virus creates an opportunity for a safer society and for everyday life to revert back to many of the old “normal” ways. More importantly though, the Coronavirus has killed countless lives since its initial surge and a vaccine that could “end the pandemic” would save thousands who are at high risk for infection.
Holden D’Avico
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Bio/Current Event #7 Comment
11/17/20
O’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Kim, Nate. “ Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop
Pandemic.” Bronxville AP Biology, 1 Jan. 1970, bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/11/nate-kim-ap-bio-mr.html
Nate Kim’s review of “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic,” is very well presented and easy to understand. The first aspect that was well presented is his explanation and detailed description of how the vaccine works. I have heard the word “vaccine” many times throughout my life and get multiple vaccine shots every year, however, I never really understood how vaccines actually work in limiting the severity of certain viruses. Nate explained this very well in his first paragraph by providing us with a step by step process of how Pfizer’s vaccine works. The second aspect that was well presented appears in the second paragraph when Nate explains to us how significant and important this vaccine would be to our lives. Nate describes how our lives have completely changed because of Covid-19 and reading his review, it is easy to understand how important this vaccine can be in returning to our normal lives. The third and final aspect that was well presented is when Nate emphasizes the 90% effectiveness of the vaccine claimed by Pfizer: “Let that sink in. The Pfizer/ BioNTech vaccine is upwards of two times as effective as the flu vaccine,” (Kim). By telling the readers to look back and digest the information he presented, Nate emphasizes how significant 90% effectiveness is.
The first suggestion I have for Nate is to elaborate on how the vaccine would be distributed. In the last sentence of his second paragraph, Nate makes the bold statement that this vaccine would eradicate the virus. It would’ve been nice if Nate explained the steps and plan going forward in order to ensure that this vaccine does eradicate Covid-19 because with no explanation, I feel a little skeptical about this bold claim. My second suggestion is for Nate to explain what the original writer of the article could’ve done better in order to implement his suggestions. In Nate’s third paragraph, he explains that the writer was not skeptical enough about Pfizer’s claim, that we shouldn’t trust everything we say, especially a news company. Therefore, an example of how the writer could’ve re-worded her statement or article in a way that was more professional and realistic should’ve been included.
One fact that I was impressed with is that the yearly flu vaccine is only 40 to 60% effective. I always thought that the flu vaccine was almost 100% effective but Nate revealed that the flu vaccine is much less effective than I first thought. This fact was good to know because now I have much more confidence in biotech companies creating a new vaccine for Covid-19.
Article Citation:
ReplyDeleteO’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold
claim: It can stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/
11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Blog Link:
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/
Overall, Nate provided a very strong review of this article. One aspect of his review that was done well was his summary of the research. His writing is clear and concise, providing a very straightforward and factual account of the article. He not only describes that the vaccine is 90% effective and the various results of the trials, but delves into the biological mechanisms that allow the vaccine to fight off COVID-19. Another aspect of his review that was done effectively was his connection to the overall significance of the article. Nate notes the urgency of this process and the desperate need for a vaccine. He places the scientific development in a far larger social and scientific context by recognizing the immense impact this virus has had on this country and across the globe. Nate also effectively critiqued the article by recognizing the lack of skepticism or doubt in the article. Given the unprecedented nature of this virus and the speed with which this vaccine was developed, there are certainly going to be skepticism as to whether or not it is safe or effective. Nate recognizes this mindset and calls on the article to address those concerns.
While Nate’s review was overall very strong, there were certainly a few areas for improvement. For instance, Nate could have delved more deeply into how trustworthy this vaccine is and when it would be made available to the public. By discussing next steps for the various scientific groups, Nate would have given a more comprehensive review of what direction this research is headed. Another aspect that could be improved upon is his connection to the overall significance. While Nate touches on some key and important points, he could have discussed in more detail the social, political, economic, and medical importance of this vaccine. This scientific research is a “light at the end of the tunnel” for many individuals, so Nate could have delved into its significance from a variety of lenses.
Overall, I chose this article and review because it is incredibly relevant. As I have been reading articles and looking at research from these various scientific groups to learn more about the vaccine, I am still left with questions regarding the safety, validity, and timeline of these vaccines. This review certainly gave me a new perspective on this topic by juxtaposing the COVID-19 vaccine’s effectiveness with vaccines for the flu. I will continue to research this topic on my own in an attempt to gain a more intricate understanding of this scientific breakthrough, one that is incredibly relevant to everyone’s lives at this moment in time.
Erin Foley
ReplyDeleteAP Biology C Block Even
Current Event #7 - Comment
Nov. 17th, 2020
Kim, Nate. “ Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop Pandemic.” Bronxville AP Biology, 1 Jan. 1970, bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/11/nate-kim-ap-bio-mr.html.
O’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Nate’s review of the article “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic.” is engaging and informative in its summary, as well as thoughtful in its critique of the article. Firstly, Nate begins his review with a bold statement that grabs the reader’s attention, that a recently confirmed “COVID-19 vaccine will end the pandemic”. The pandemic is currently one of the most important aspects of our society, and now, as cases rise, it is increasingly on everyone’s mind. Thus, by commencing the review with the idea of the pandemic ending, Nate ensures that no reader will be able to stop reading. Moreover, Nate’s description of the vaccine was very to-the-point, making his review, though brief, very informative. Rather than giving an in depth explanation of the vaccine’s biological mechanisms, he makes the vaccine much easier to understand, giving a simple algorithm to its actions. “First, the vaccine hinders COVID-19 from getting into our cells in the first place,” he says, “If somehow the virus does get into our cells, T-cells (a type of white blood cell) are on standby to eliminate it.” This allows the reader to grasp the effectiveness of the vaccine without getting lost in the specifics. Finally, Nate’ critique of the article made his review comprehensive. He argues that the article is preemptive, as it “doesn’t remind the public to wait for further evidence and research. It speaks as if the vaccine is definitely exactly as reported.” This critique emphasizes the importance of skepticism/critical thinking in both journalism and reading, a concept that did not come across in the article.
Despite its strong points, Nate’ review could’ve been improved with a few simple changes. Firstly, he could’ve used more effective rhetoric when describing the societal impact of a vaccine. For instance, he mentions that “COVID-19 has completely altered the way society functions and social norms,” but it could’ve been more effective to discuss the specific, emotional ramifications of the pandemic - i.e. the 1.3 million deaths, the economies that have been shattered, the many people that have been sent into poverty. This would reinforce the significance of this article and therefore of Nate’s review. Secondly, Nate’s review could’ve been more informative had he included more details about the vaccine - when it will be available, to who it will be available, etc., etc. - so that the reader has a more thorough takeaway from the review. He does say “The product is not yet ready to be distributed to the public”, but this leaves the reader with many unanswered questions, thus he could improve his review by addressing them.
Overall, Nate’s review gave me the specifics of a popular current event, thus leaving me a more informed citizen who is better able to grasp the mechanics of the new COVID-19 vaccine. This news is extremely uplifting, as no one was left unscathed by this pandemic, and the idea of a vaccine certainly seems like the light at the end of the tunnel. That is why I chose to read this review - I was so excited by the idea of a vaccine, but I realized that I didn’t know much about how a vaccine operates other than that it prepares your immune system to deal with a virus. After reading this review, I understand that the COVID-19 vaccine evokes T-cells, which is what makes it 90% effective.
Ava Black
ReplyDeleteCurrent Event
11/17/20
O’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Kim, Nate. “ Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop
Pandemic.” Bronxville AP Biology, 1 Jan. 1970, bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/11/nate-kim-ap-bio-mr.html
Nate’s review of “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop Pandemic” by Natalie O’Neill was very well written and informative. Nate did a good job reviewing this article in an organized manner, using transition words such as “First”, to allow the ideas to flow. I also thought that Nate did a great job of explaining certain words and concepts, which made his current event easier to understand. For example, he explained that T-cells were a certain type of white blood cell. These small definitions also made it clear that Nate himself understood this topic. Nate also did a good job of explaining the significance of this vaccine breakthrough. He made the importance of this vaccine extremely obvious, stating that it is about two times more effective than the flu vaccine. Finally, I think Nate did a great job of explaining his skepticism regarding the facts presented in this article and whether the source was very reputable. He explains that the article only provides evidence from what Pfizer and BioNTech have stated and does not contain any skepticism.
One thing that Nate could improve on was going into more detail when he summarized the article. I felt that this summary was more of a baseline and that I was not being provided with all of the information. For instance, it would have been helpful for Nate to give some background information on what BioNTech is and what it has accomplished in the past. Furthermore, I would have liked to know more about how the vaccine was discovered as well as how it might be distributed.
I chose Nate’s article because his topic caught my attention. I wanted to learn more about this potential new vaccine and how effective it might be. I learned that this vaccine attacks the virus on multiple levels, causing it to be extremely effective. In fact, it was shown to be 90 percent effective at preventing people from showing COVID-19 symptoms in the past three trials that were conducted. That being said, there is still a lot of uncertainty regarding the distribution and reliability of this vaccine. Overall, Nate did a great job of informing me about this topic.
Hugh Duffy
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Bio
November 14, 2020
O’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Kim, Nate. “ Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop Pandemic.” Bronxville AP Biology, 1 Jan. 1970, bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/11/nate-kim-ap-bio-mr.html.
Nate’s review of “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Makes Bold Claim: It Can Stop Pandemic” by Natalie O’Neill was a very insightful piece on an extremely important current event. If this vaccine is approved and distributed, it would be one of the most effective vaccines ever produced. On top of this, the vaccine itself was made in a fraction of the time it takes to make an average vaccine. This is truly an innovation. I think Nate emphasized the important parts of the article skillfully, removing any bulky paragraphs and getting straight to the point. This is important when it comes to delivering information, as it is crucial to not convolute a story with word vomit. Additionally, Nate explains the innovative ways in which this vaccine operates, stating that it attacks the virus in multiple ways. I think readers enjoy this type of information, as it bulks up the summary and ensures a curious reader doesn’t have to scout out the original article. One thing I think Nate could have improved on was assessing the challenges that the production of this vaccine is facing from the public. Many United States citizens are skeptical about taking a rushed vaccine; Gov. Andrew Cuomo even stated that New York would “not accept” a vaccine distributed under the Trump administration (ironic given his past with Covid-19). What will make the American people confident in this vaccine? Can we guarantee that this pandemic will be over once it is distributed? These are all questions we must wait to find the answer to, but it would have been nice to read about the reaction of the public in Nate’s review.
I really enjoyed reading Nate’s review of this insightful article. Overall, his introduction was intriguing and captivated me as a reader. He compacted information neatly, making for an easy and comprehensive text.
Casey McKhann
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Bio/ Current Event 7
November 19th, 2020
O’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
Hyperlink:https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2020/11/nate-kim-ap-bio-mr.html#comment-form
This week I read Nate’s review of “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic.” The review was very informative and clear. Nate did a very good job breaking down the article and the breakthrough that had been made. He was clear in emphasizing the extreme importance of the vaccine at the current time. He also was sure to transmit trustworthy information, making it clear that the vaccine was not immediately available or ready to be distributed. I thought the review was most interesting when Nate got in depth about how the vaccine would work within the human body and the process which it would take. Nate also did a great job of highlighting the articles strengths and weaknesses.
While I think Nate’s review was incredibly well done, there were certain areas which he could have improved. I think he assumed a little bit when he should not have when he said that the vaccine would ensure the surefire eradication of the COVID-19 virus. Despite this issue, I thought the review was free of flaws and was very well done.
I chose to read this article review because I recently read a separate article on a vaccine being produced by a separate company which mentioned the Pfizer vaccine. I wanted to become more informed about this particular vaccine. This review has allowed me to come to the decision that both vaccines would be extremely beneficial and the support of the production of both is crucial. Going forward, I will understand that a vaccine is not an immediate solution, but will keep in mind that help is on the way.
Riley Morgan
ReplyDeleteAP Bio, Mr. Ippolito
11/13/20
Current Event 7
O’Neill, N. (2020, November 13). Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic. New York Post. Retrieved from https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/man-behind-covid-19-vaccine-says-it-will-bash-the-virus-over-head/
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/
The review Nate Kim performed on the article: “Scientist behind Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine makes bold claim: It can stop pandemic” is very interesting and informative. He talks about Uğur Şahin, the CEO of BioNTech, who announced that a breakthrough COVID-19 vaccine will end the pandemic. I like how he was straightforward with the information. When he stated that “The arrival of a vaccine is something that the world community has been awaiting for a considerable amount of time” , it was a good way to put the information because he did not use any unnecessary detail and got the point across to set the stage of the article. I also appreciate how he was able to make his sentences flow nicely, putting the reader at ease while reading. His sentences: “For reference, the flu vaccine, which does a phenomenal job of stopping the spread of the flu virus, is 40-60 percent effective. Let that sink in.” is just one example of his wonderful sentence flow. I also like how Nate described the relevance of the article. This makes the reader more engaged and shows that he put work into drafting the review.
One thing Nate could improve on is explaining the flaws in this article. He needs to state the things that are wrong with it to get the full picture. He also lacks detail in his. writing. He could provide a longer analysis that makes the reader feel he has read the full article and knows what it is about. This short analysis leaves the reader unfulfilled.
I chose this article because it was very interesting and I enjoy reading things like this. I also wanted to see Nate’s writing style as I have never looked at one of his reviews before. By reading this article I learned about a new COVID-19 vaccine. It was very informative. It will change my perception because now I have another piece of knowledge that I can use.