Mod 3: I have a bad headache :(

Please answer the following questions using a minimum of five sentences each.

1. If you had to choose between losing feeling or losing the ability to move, which would you choose, and why?
If I had to choose between losing feeling or movement, I think I definitely give up my feeling. I would rather go through life being continuously numb, than spend my life being a meat sponge. What good is feeling if you all you can feel is yourself laying on a bed or sitting an a chair your entire life? The way I look at it, you can compromise witht he loss of feeling, but once you lose your ability to move, your choices and options in life are pretty limited. As long as you can move, you can still a somewhat normal life. To me this choise is basically a no brainer.

2.For experimental purposes, animals’ spinal cords are damaged so that scientists may see the results and determine if regeneration of nerve tissue is possible. Do you think the potential benefits of this type of research outweigh the harm to the animals? Why or why not?
This is a tricky question for me to answer. I don't believe in harmful testing of animals, but I also can see the benefit of it for the sake of human medicicine. Personally, I dont think we should harm animals in experiments. Instead I think we should use case studies with animals, the same way we do wtih humans. If an animal already has a damaged spinal cord, then we could observe the results and such. But I am definitely not a fan of doing harmful experiments on animals.

3.Imagine what life would be like without a specific part of your brain and explain.
That would suck man! I love all of my brain. I couldnt imagine myself living without both hemispheres of my brain. In the video they showed people who lived with only their left hemisphere. I dont think I could adapt to that kind of life. It hurts my head just trying to think about it. I don't think i could handle that kind of situation. Although if I had to choose between suffering through seizurres and losing half of my brain, in the end, I would most likely give up my right hemisphere. Although I hope that I never have to make that choice!

Mod 2: The Mod of Champions

1. In our culture, the masses often believe everything the media says word for word, and the media uses this to it's advantage. When a study finds a correlational link, such as a link between Tylenol and asthma in children, the media can then state that  "Tylenol may raise asthma risk in children," which is not what the study said. By delivering the findings this way, people will infer the report the wrong way, and assume that Tylenol can lead to asthma in children, when this could be completely untrue. The media is essentially twisting the findings of the study. For all we know, the correlational link between the two could have been a negative one, not even a positive correlation. Just because the media says something, does not always necessarily make it the truth.


2.When the media delivers a report such as saying that "Tylenol may raise asthma risk in children", they know that their report is taken out of context, and therefore might not be true. Instead of phrasing the statement as a fact, the media could rephrase the finding to say that "A recent study found a correlation between Tylenol and asthma in children." The problem with this though, is that this is nor nearly as interesting. People are much less likely to get worked up over a correlational link found by a study, instead of a casual link that implies that the two are related. The problem with the media, is that they will always chose the angle that will get a reaction. Nine times out of ten, that reaction will be a miss implied casual link, not an accurately portrayed correlational one.