Definition Rewrite – krackintheneck

Posted on October 26, 2021 by krackintheneck

Food is Food

All living things need food for survival. Food is an essential part of humans lives, and will continue to be forever. Whether it’s a Snickers candy bar or just an apple, every food has nutrients that will help living things grow and evolve. Food on its own, has evolved from the very beginning. A Granny Smith apple that we all know and love has not been the same size and shape from the beginning of time. Humans have genetically manipulated each and every food with out most of the public knowing. This also plays a part in humans evolving. For example, in 3000 B.C. the average height of a man was 5’3 and women were 5′ according to Jared Diamond’s The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race. Now, worldwide men on average are 5’8-5’9 feet tall while women are 5’3-5’4 feet tall. Nowadays, humans and many other living things are going to need bigger potions of food, and more nutrients to survive. Meaning foods thousands of years ago would not be enough for humans to survive in 2021. Since this is the case why does the public overall, look down upon genetically engineering foods? Most of the public are so used to seeing the same foods over and over again that they get accustomed to these foods, thinking that’s how every food should look. Then once this certain food has a deformity or is just different from what they are accustomed to, they will not eat it. This can be defined as food neophobia, aversion to new foods. As people age they are likely to stop trying new foods and just have the food they were exposed to when they were younger. “As children age, they tend to be less willing to accept new foods,” Elena Faccio states in Exploring Consumers’ Attitudes toward GMOs, Insects and Cultured Meat. If we would have any chance in switching to genetically modified foods, we would need to start giving these foods to younger children. This just shows that people will not even give genetically modified foods a chance because it’s different from what they are accustomed to. Neophobia “seems to be a negative predictor of willingness to taste non-traditional ethnic foods,”Faccio states. Food that is genetically modified, does not taste or even look any different from everyday foods. If anything scientists could construct any food and make it tastier or a more appealing shape if they really wanted to, but they are not looking to change the taste or look of staple foods because they do not want it to look any different. If genetically engineered foods were completely different from what the public are used to then genetic engineers will have no chance in the public changing to their product.

All foods have been “genetically” modified in any way, shape, or form since the beginning of time. Either most humans have neglected to notice this, or they simply do not know unless a food is labeled “GMO.” In The mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods in Brazil: Consumer’s knowledge, trust, and risk perception, it states that Brazil is the second biggest producer of GM foods worldwide. Brazil mostly genetically modifies contents in staple foods like soy and maize. In 2003, Brazil passed a regulation stating that “both packaged and bulk products in natura that contain or are produced using GMO above the limit of 1% should be labeled and the consumer should be informed about the gene donor species at the place reserved for ingredient identification.” Meaning the public needs to be notified about what scientists genetically changed to their food. Since every food is “genetically modified” than every food should be labeled accordingly. This will never happen, but it is definitely necessary. However, according to Mariana Piton Hakim, “in 2018, soy production was valued at 120 billion Brazilian Reais, while maize production amounted to 40 billion Brazilian Reais.” Showing that this country relies heavily on genetically modified foods. For the most part it seems to be working. Brazil has already adapted and are ready for the future. If any problems arise they will already be able to solve them and move on.

Genetically modified foods has a negative connotation from the public. If it isn’t because they are scared to try different foods, then it is most likely that they are scared to take risks. Everything has a risk that humans will not know the consequence until later in life, and then we adapt and evolve from those mistakes. Genetically modifying foods are yet to show any signs of risks, so as a human race we need to start moving in a their direction. If we start using them soon worldwide, we will find the problems and diagnose them earlier than later. Genetically modified foods are food that have their DNA manipulated in some way to benefit whatever the scientists are looking for. For example most genetically modified foods/crops have their genetic material modified, so they are pesticide resistant. Most of the public do not know enough about genetically engineered crops/foods because they are neglecting them due to their own beliefs. Genetically modified foods are being looked down upon by the public even though the public knows little to nothing about them. Most do not realize that we are going to have to go in the direction of genetically modified foods for survive in the near future. Humans are eventually going to overpopulate and will not have enough food for survival, but genetically modifying foods will definitely aid in saving the human race. Not to mention they can help the environment and cause less plants to die due to pesticides.

The bottom line is food food. Whether the food is genetically modified or not, humans need to adapt to the new culture for survival. Every food has been modified for our survival with or without us knowing. Everywhere across the world have their own problems. Third world countries have food shortages due to either overpopulation, or less animals than humans. Genetically engineered foods/crops could change their life and culture by not needing the use of these animals, and rely strictly on genetically modified foods. The public needs to change their ways soon so generations after us can already be into an adapted culture.

References

Faccio, E., & Guiotto Nai Fovino, L. (2019, October 19). Food neophobia or distrust of novelties? exploring consumers’ attitudes toward gmos, insects and cultured meat. MDPI. Retrieved October 21, 2021, from https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/9/20/4440.

Hakim, M. P., Zanetta, L. D. A., Oliveira, J. M. de, & Cunha, D. T. da. (2020, February 1). The mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods in Brazil: Consumer’s knowledge, trust, and risk perception. Food Research International. Retrieved October 21, 2021, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996920300788.

Must-read: Jared Diamond: Agriculture: The worst mistake in the history of the human race. Equitable Growth. (2016, June 28). Retrieved October 21, 2021, from https://equitablegrowth.org/must-read-jared-diamond-agriculture-the-worst-mistake-in-the-history-of-the-human-race/.

Posted in Definition, Definition Rewrite | Leave a comment

Definition – krackintheneck

Posted on October 26, 2021 by krackintheneck

Food is Food

All living things need food for survival. Food is an essential part of humans lives, and will continue to be forever. Whether it’s a Snickers candy bar or just an apple, every food has nutrients that will help living things grow and evolve. Food on its own, has evolved from the very beginning. A Granny Smith apple that we all know and love has not been the same size and shape from the beginning of time. Humans have genetically manipulated each and every food with out most of the public knowing. This also plays a part in humans evolving. For example, in 3000 B.C. the average height of a man was 5’3 and women were 5′ according to Jared Diamond’s The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race. Now, worldwide men on average are 5’8-5’9 feet tall while women are 5’3-5’4 feet tall. Nowadays, humans and many other living things are going to need bigger potions of food, and more nutrients to survive. Meaning foods thousands of years ago would not be enough for humans to survive in 2021. Since this is the case why does the public overall, look down upon genetically engineering foods? Most of the public are so used to seeing the same foods over and over again that they get accustomed to these foods, thinking that’s how every food should look. Then once this certain food has a deformity or is just different from what they are accustomed to, they will not eat it. This can be defined as food neophobia, aversion to new foods. As people age they are likely to stop trying new foods and just have the food they were exposed to when they were younger. “As children age, they tend to be less willing to accept new foods,” Elena Faccio states in Exploring Consumers’ Attitudes toward GMOs, Insects and Cultured Meat. If we would have any chance in switching to genetically modified foods, we would need to start giving these foods to younger children. This just shows that people will not even give genetically modified foods a chance because it’s different from what they are accustomed to. Neophobia “seems to be a negative predictor of willingness to taste non-traditional ethnic foods,”Faccio states. Food that is genetically modified, does not taste or even look any different from everyday foods. If anything scientists could construct any food and make it tastier or a more appealing shape if they really wanted to, but they are not looking to change the taste or look of staple foods because they do not want it to look any different. If genetically engineered foods were completely different from what the public are used to then genetic engineers will have no chance in the public changing to their product.

All foods have been “genetically” modified in any way, shape, or form since the beginning of time. Either most humans have neglected to notice this, or they simply do not know unless a food is labeled “GMO.” In The mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods in Brazil: Consumer’s knowledge, trust, and risk perception, it states that Brazil is the second biggest producer of GM foods worldwide. Brazil mostly genetically modifies contents in staple foods like soy and maize. In 2003, Brazil passed a regulation stating that “both packaged and bulk products in natura that contain or are produced using GMO above the limit of 1% should be labeled and the consumer should be informed about the gene donor species at the place reserved for ingredient identification.” Meaning the public needs to be notified about what scientists genetically changed to their food. Since every food is “genetically modified” than every food should be labeled accordingly. This will never happen, but it is definitely necessary. However, according to Mariana Piton Hakim, “in 2018, soy production was valued at 120 billion Brazilian Reais, while maize production amounted to 40 billion Brazilian Reais.” Showing that this country relies heavily on genetically modified foods. For the most part it seems to be working. Brazil has already adapted and are ready for the future. If any problems arise they will already be able to solve them and move on.

Genetically modified foods has a negative connotation from the public. If it isn’t because they are scared to try different foods, then it is most likely that they are scared to take risks. Everything has a risk that humans will not know the consequence until later in life, and then we adapt and evolve from those mistakes. Genetically modifying foods are yet to show any signs of risks, so as a human race we need to start moving in a their direction. If we start using them soon worldwide, we will find the problems and diagnose them earlier than later. Genetically modified foods are food that have their DNA manipulated in some way to benefit whatever the scientists are looking for. For example most genetically modified foods/crops have their genetic material modified, so they are pesticide resistant. Most of the public do not know enough about genetically engineered crops/foods because they are neglecting them due to their own beliefs. Genetically modified foods are being looked down upon by the public even though the public knows little to nothing about them. Most do not realize that we are going to have to go in the direction of genetically modified foods for survive in the near future. Humans are eventually going to overpopulate and will not have enough food for survival, but genetically modifying foods will definitely aid in saving the human race. Not to mention they can help the environment and cause less plants to die due to pesticides.

The bottom line is food food. Whether the food is genetically modified or not, humans need to adapt to the new culture for survival. Every food has been modified for our survival with or without us knowing. Everywhere across the world have their own problems. Third world countries have food shortages due to either overpopulation, or less animals than humans. Genetically engineered foods/crops could change their life and culture by not needing the use of these animals, and rely strictly on genetically modified foods. The public needs to change their ways soon so generations after us can already be into an adapted culture.

References

Faccio, E., & Guiotto Nai Fovino, L. (2019, October 19). Food neophobia or distrust of novelties? exploring consumers’ attitudes toward gmos, insects and cultured meat. MDPI. Retrieved October 21, 2021, from https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/9/20/4440.

Hakim, M. P., Zanetta, L. D. A., Oliveira, J. M. de, & Cunha, D. T. da. (2020, February 1). The mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods in Brazil: Consumer’s knowledge, trust, and risk perception. Food Research International. Retrieved October 21, 2021, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996920300788.

Must-read: Jared Diamond: Agriculture: The worst mistake in the history of the human race. Equitable Growth. (2016, June 28). Retrieved October 21, 2021, from https://equitablegrowth.org/must-read-jared-diamond-agriculture-the-worst-mistake-in-the-history-of-the-human-race/.

Posted in Definition, Definition Rewrite | Leave a comment

Safer Saws chickendinner

Posted on October 26, 2021 by chickendinner

Manufacturers “There’s no time left to waste,” says Steve Gass, the inventor responsible for SawStop. Gass is making a proposal claim, saying that since his innovation could protect people from serious injury, the bureacratic process for approving it should be hastened. Given the evidence he provides to back his position, such as that thousands of people suffer hand injuries from table saws a year, SawStop is overwhelmingly effective at preventing injury, and the approval process has dragged on for over a decade, he definitely has a point in urging for the process to be sped along.

Customers: “That sounded like a pretty good innovation,” wrote Chris Arnold about the SawStop, making the evaluatory claim, voicing his support for SawStop technology as a means to increase the safety of table saws.

Industry Spokespeople: “‘False positives’ or ‘nuisance trips’ produce downtime and expenses,” writes a spokesman for the Power Tools Institute. Here, the spokeman is claiming that if this safety feature is mandated, there will be unforeseen costs in money and time due to the technology being unable to differentiate between human skin and other materials more conductive than dry wood. This is a causal claim, and certainly an issue which will have to be considered when assessing table saw safety regulations.

Consumer Safety Advocates: “[C]onsumers suffer 40,000 table saw injuries each year, 4,000 of which are finger amputations,” reports the National Consumers League, a consumer adovate group. This is a claim of fact, assessing the number of injuries caused by table says on an annual basis, with the implication that more widespread implementation of SawStop technology would reduce the frequency of these incedents.

Injured Plaintiffs: “[S]ix people have already had fingers amputated today. And there’s going to be another 10 tomorrow,” says Joshua Ward, a victim of a table-saw injury. This is a factual claim, with the implication being that these injuries are the fault of a failure to more widely adopt innovations that would make table saws safer for use.

Government Officials: “[W]e failed you, and that we continue to fail the 10 victims per day that you mentioned earlier,” says Elliot Kaye, of the CPSC. This is an evaluatory claim, arguing that they have an obligation to push for safety regulation such as that surrounding table saws, and are in the wrong for not having done so.

News Reporters: “Congress has thrown up a roadblock against safer saws,” writes Chris Arnold of NPR, arguing that the government has failed in its duty to actively pursue table saw safety legislation. This is most directly a factual assertation, but is also an evaluatory claim, that Congress has a moral responsibility to hastily accept safety regulations.

Posted in Safer Saws FA21 | Leave a comment

Safer Saws-zzbrd2822

Posted on October 25, 2021 by zzbrd2822

Manufacturers


“Within a few thousandths of a second, the blade slammed to a stop.”


This is an evaluative claim, as it judges the characteristics of the sawblade and makes a judgement on how fast it can stop. A numerical claim is also made when the specific time of a few thousandths of a second was included. The manufacturers evaluate the effectiveness of the item and if it serves the purpose of the sawblade stopping in time to prevent injury.

Customers

“That’s amazing, I mean it’s like nothing even happened.”

This is an evaluative claim, as it judges the characteristics of the sawblade and providing a judgment on the effectiveness of the sawblade. This can also be a causal claim as the customer is claiming that nothing happened due to the effectiveness of the sawblade. This claim helps the customers by using an evaluative description of the product to advocate for their point.

Industry Spokespeople

“Table saws cause more injuries than any other woodworking tool.”

This phrase is a causal claim, since it is showing the effect that table saws cause the most injuries. This can also be an evaluative numerical claim, as it is indicating that there are more injuries with Table saws than other tools. The comparison between table saws and other tools can indicate a comparative claim as well. This information shows the dangers of using table saws and persuades people to use Saw stop.

Consumer Safety Advocates

“Roughly 10 people lose their finger per day due to table saws. 3000 a year.”

This is a numerical and factual claim, as the safety advocates have given a statistic on the number of people who lose their fingers per day and per year. A causal claim is made when it is said that table saws are the cause of people losing their fingers every day and every year. This claim helps the consumer safety advocates by using information to support their point.

Injured Plaintiffs

“If your device prevents even one person from going through what I have gone through it is a world class accomplishment.”

This is a causal claim stating that the Sawstop device can help prevent other people from any injuries that may have happened to the injured plaintiff. This is also an evaluative claim, as it judges the characteristics of the sawblade and provides a judgment on the effectiveness of the sawblade, deeming it a world class accomplishment. This claim helps the injured plaintiffs by using evaluative claims about the product and their experiences to advocate for their point.

Personal Injury Lawyers

“Every year, there are over 40,000 table saw injuries, resulting in more than 4,000 amputations.”

This is a causal claim, as it was described that due to the saws that do not have the safety precautions, there are over 40,000 injuries each year from them. These injuries then cause over 4000 amputations. This is also a numerical and factual claim, which is shown through the statistic provided about the number of people injured by table saws. This claim helps the personal injury lawyers by using information to advocate for their point.

Government Officials

“The injuries resulting from the use of table saws are, in many cases, particularly gruesome.”

This is a causal claim stating that the use of table saws cause injuries that are gruesome. This is also an evaluative claim, as it judges the characteristics of the injuries sustained by the table saws and provides a judgment on the extent of the injuries. The phrase “in many cases” indicates that there is also a numerical claim. This claim helps the government officials by using evaluative claims to advocate for their point.

News Reporters

“Sure enough, the blade came to a dead stop in about three one-thousandths of a second, leaving the dog with only a minor nick.”

This is an evaluative claim, as it judges the characteristics of the sawblade and makes a judgement on how fast it can stop. It also judges the extent to which the hot dog was affected by the table saw. A numerical claim is also made when the specific time of three one-thousandths of a second was included. The news reporters evaluate the effectiveness of the item and if it serves the purpose of the sawblade stopping in time to prevent injury.

Posted in Safer Saws FA21 | Leave a comment

Safer Saws- calamariii

Posted on October 25, 2021 by calamariii

Manufacturers: “If you accidentally run your hand into the blade it’ll stop it so quickly you just get a little nick instead of maybe taking some fingers off.” Steve Gass is using a comparison claim to show the difference between his SawStop and a regular table saw in terms of safety. His claim is well-founded as there is no sort of safety in the average table saw so the SawStop will perform better when it comes to the user keeping their fingers and overall safety.

Customers: “the company has testimonials from customers of more than 1,000 known “saves”—consumers who have written and sent pictures showing that they have been spared serious injury because of the safety design.” This is a factual claim that the National Consumers League makes in their press release, and shows that many of the people who have bought and used the SawStop have sent in the fact that it has worked in helping them stay safer.

Industry Spokespeople: “They cite both technical and practical/financial problems with mandating SawStop technology.” This is an evaluative claim from members of the Power Tool Institute, who would have the expertise to have a say in an issue such and regulations and mandates on power tools. They evaluate the idea that safety regulations with devices such as the SawStop could lead to issues that may have not been considered.

Consumer Safety Advocates: “The Commission voted unanimously (4-0) to approve publication of the draft notice in the Federal Register that will announce an extension of 60 days for the comment period for an advance notice of proposed rulemaking” This is a recommendation claim on extending the hearing for comments on the issue of saw blade contact injuries. They have the power to regulate votes for a hearing on the subject, and so therefore can convince the audience to adopt this ruling

Injured Plaintiffs: “It furthers that Bosch lobbied the Consumer Protection Safety Commission to keep ‘flesh detection and braking technology’ from being required on table saws.” An injured plaintiff states an evaluative claim in their lawsuit, describing what has happened and what should be done on the subject of table saw safety. It can be inferred that the plaintiff’s option on the course of action to take is to create mandates on table saw safety based on their injuries.

Personal Injury Lawyers: “Every year, there are over 40,000 table saw injuries, resulting in more than 4,000 amputations.” This is a factual claim from injury lawyers on the subject of table saws. The numbers on those who are injured by table saws is an indisputable fact that they would have used in advocating for their clients.

Government Officials: “When the Commission first considered this issue in 2006, the injury statistics and disturbing natures of these life-altering, yet preventable injuries were unacceptable.” This is a moral claim from Chairman Tenenbaum on how the issue of table saw safety has been negatively affecting people. Describing the injuries as preventable shows that Tenenbaum believes that something should be done about these injuries he sees as wrong, as nothing has been changed yet to prevent them.

News Reporters: “it’s unclear whether the Consumer Product Safety Commission will finally pass a rule requiring all new saws to have an active injury prevention monitoring system built into them.” NPR makes an evaluative claim on what they believe will happen on the issue of table saw safety mandates. As a news source, they have gained information and sources and have come to an indecisive conclusion on the future of these mandates and if or when the CPSC will institute mandates.

Posted in Safer Saws FA21 | Leave a comment

Safer Saws- friendoftacos

Posted on October 25, 2021 by friendoftacos
  1. Manufacturers “Within a few thousandths of a second, the blade slammed to a stop.” This is an evaluative claim. It judges the characteristics of the sawblade and judges how fast it can stop. The manufacturers evaluate the effectiveness of the item and how suitable it is for the situation of the sawblade stopping in time to not injure a person.
  2. News reporters -“kickbacks are certainly more dangerous.” This is a news reporter making a causal claim because the reporter is asserting a cause and effects. The reporter is explaining that the cause is more dangerous then stopping the saw from spinning. Claiming that the sudden stop of the saw is way mor dangerous
  3. Industry Spokespeople- “The saw can see the difference between a piece of wood and your finger.” This is a comparative claim that would serve the industry spokesperson. It compares the piece of wood to someone’s finger and shows that the sawblade can distinguish the differences. This claim attempts to compare two objects to demonstrate the effectiveness of the product they are speaking for.
  4. Consumer Safety Advocates- “Every year there are over 40,000 table saw injuries, resulting in more than 4,000 amputations.” This is a numerical claim. This claim helps the consumer safety advocates by using information to advocate for their point.
  5. Industry Spokespeople – The industry spokespeople describe the SawStop product “the various legal and patent issues surrounding the existence of a fairly new safety mechanism that promises (and in a large way follows through on) a system to provide unheard of safety with respect to the use of an electric saw.” This is an evaluative claim that discusses the SawStop product and judges the product based on the various legal and patent issues. The evaluative claim is arguing the quality of the product from the point of the industry spokespeople.
  6. Steve Gass – Steve Gass places his finger in the path of the saw blade to demonstrate the SawStop’s technology. As his finger becomes close enough for the sawblade to inflict pain onto Steve, the sawblade stops as soon as its feel’s Steve’s finger. After the blade stopped, Steve described the experience as a “buzz or a tickle” which is an analogy claim. This statement compares his experience with a dangerous saw as a gentle experience.
  7. Manufacturers – “The blade of the saw stops before it comes in contact with your skin.” Manufactures use this factual claim to prove the evidence behind their product. The manufacturer does not have any doubt in their product as demonstrated through this claim. The evidence in this claim is undisputable.
  8. News Reporters – “But as well as the technology works, the major tool companies have failed to put this kind of device on any of their table saws” This is an evaluative claim that judges the tool companies for not putting this kind of device on their table saws. It shows that tool companies have failed by not provided this technology that the reporter claims it works.
Posted in You Forgot to Categorize! | Leave a comment

White Paper-SunshineGirl

Posted on October 25, 2021 by sunshinegirl457

Working Hypothesis 1

Using yoga as a diversionary practice in penitentiaries will lower the overall rate of recidivism.

Working hypothesis 2

While using yoga classes as a way to ease the mind and spirit of prisoners in penitentiaries will be effective in some ways, it will not directly lead to an overall decrease in recidivism.

Sources

  1. “Can Yoga Overcome Criminality? The Impact of Yoga on Recidivism in Israeli Prisons”

Published April 14, 2020 Authors: Shaked Kovalsy, Badi Hasisi, Noam Haviv, Ety Elisha

This source covers a study done at the Israeli Prison Service on released prisoners. They participated in group yoga classes during their sentences and were studied over 5 years to log the recidivism rates. There was also a control group who did not practice any yoga in their jail times that was chosen carefully through a score matching system. When the two groups were compared it showed a lower recidivism rate in the first group. While it said further study was needed, the contributors of this paper concluded by recommending more types of alternative practices to assist in the rehabilitation process of inmates. The great thing about this article is that it has a lot of data and solid facts that can be used to form my opinion while writing my paper. 

  1. “A Systematic Review of Literature: Alternative Offender Rehabilitation—Prison Yoga, Mindfulness, and Meditation”

Published September 15, 2020 Author: Dragana Derlic

This article is more of a written gathering of ideas and not so much a formal study. It gives me background knowledge and a lot of new terms and quotes to use in my paper. It is more spiritual than the other sources and focuses on the well-being of the inmates. The main idea is that prisoners will not act out as much and will “calm down” if given the right healthcare and lifestyle. It favors the idea that these alternative methods to the standard prison policies are much more effective at creating better mental statuses and social connections, which are required to keep the prisoners from going back to their violent ways.

  1. “Participation in a 10-week Course of Yoga Improves Behavioural Control and Decreases Psychological Distress in a Prison Population”

Published October 2013 Authors: Amy C. Bilderbeck, Miguel Farias, Inti A. Brazil, Sharon Jakobowitz, Catherine Wikholm

Another study was done with yoga in prisons but this one was only a 10-week course with classes once a week and around 100 volunteers (including the control group) from different British institutions. Unlike the other study, the researchers did not continue the experiment for 5 years after to monitor rates of recidivism, they simply logged the inmates’ mood and psychological data like stress levels, cognitive behavior, and more. It was found that the classes lowered the stress and tendency to act irrationally in the participants significantly. This article might not have to do with the lowering of recidivism over time but there are a lot of psychological facts to back up any points I may make in my paper. 

  1. “Lessons in Flexibility: Introducing a Yoga Program in an Australian Prison”

Published in 2019 Authors: Anthony Hopkins, Lorana Bartels, Lisa Oxman

This study deals with a pilot yoga program for prisoners in the Alexander Maconochie Centre in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). The author teamed up with the ACT, the yoga teacher, and a psychologist who overlooked the whole experiment. Therefore this article has a little bit of everything I’m looking for- the prisons’ policies and the details of this study, the psychology behind it, and the spirituality factor which can all give me great quotes and phrases. The author and the psychologist both themselves participated in the program and gave first hand feedback of the positions, processes, exercises, etc. The article’s conclusion advocates for more alternative programs like this in prisons in Australia and elsewhere. A drawback from this study is that the sample size was only 8 which might leave some room for interpretation of error.

  1. “Yoga in Penitentiary Settings: Transcendence, Spirituality, and Self-Improvement”

Published in march 2017 Author: Mar Griera

This study is a multiple case study with the goal of better understanding the effects of yoga from a psychological standpoint as it is practiced by many people around the world but not yet fully understood as a rehabilitation method. This study focuses on the religious and meditative aspects instead of the physical benefits of the movements. It was said that yoga allowed the inmates to “transcend their everyday prison lives”. It used data from three different experiments in Barcelona penitentiaries. Again, the results were not based on recidivism but more so dealt with the changes in the inmates’ mindsets and spirituality. Something I like about this article is that it directly compares different prison policies around the world and the qualities of lifestyle. It discusses the Spanish constitution and prison methods which support mental and social growth and rehabilitation, as compared to the US where it is frequent for inmates to be alone and under cared for as a form of punishment for their crimes. One thing I dislike about it is that the data is all put into lengthy paragraphs and there are no images, charts, or graphs like in the other studies.

Weaker but quotable sources:

“Yoga Changing Lives in Prisons: For Many, Yoga can be a Pathway to Address Trauma”

Published July 30, 2016 Author: Rosemary Ponnekanti

“Norfolk Man Pardoned After 21 Years Uplifts Inmates who Practice Yoga to Reduce Recidivism”

Published August 18, 2018 Author: Cung Kim

“Prison Yoga as a Correctional Alternative?: Physical Culture, Rehabilitation, and Social Control in Canadian Prisons”

Publication date unknown Author: Mark Norman

Definition argument ideas:

The main argument for this is to identify the difference between the lowering of recidivism rates and the lower of stress. My hypothesis specifically deals with the tendency of the participants to not relapse back into a life of crime. This somewhat goes hand-in-hand with mood and mental stability but not necessarily all the time.

Cause/effect argument ideas:

These sources help me get an understanding of the studies done in prisons and the effect they have on the inmates, but don’t give me a solid idea of what will come of them. Yes it’s good to get a better understanding of alternative rehab methods for criminals but I’m not sure if this will translate to any major changes in penitentiary policies. What will come of these findings? In order to have a great effect on the world, the target audience would be wardens of institutions, but they appear to be more focused on the scientist and researcher aspects. Also, it might be expensive or impractical to implicate yoga classes in more prisons as the schedules are already so strict. Although, our prisons have drastically changed over the last hundred years so hopefully at some point in the future these ideas will spread and yoga classes will become more popular, or maybe even mandatory, in prisons.

Rebuttal argument ideas:

It can be said that the idea that yoga works as a rehabilitation technique does not hold true for all inmates. In most of my sources it does not specify the inmates’ crimes and if they have murdered or severely injured people, are sociopaths documented as criminally insane, have fallen into substance abuse, or have simply repeated minor offenses that made their sentence time accumulate. While I’m sure the researchers did a great job in picking their samples, that information is not clearly stated in each source and can lead to some variation of the argument.

I have turned this assignment in way later than I should have, but rather than just ignore it I needed to complete it late regardless. This is the foundation for my paper and all the research I do will be gathered here. I think I have a pretty satisfactory start with a solid topic and can definitely build upon this. The thing I like about my sources is that they all have the same idea but are very different. There are some that focus on the spiritual and meditative side of my topic, and others that go in depth into professional studies done. The studies all differ and take place in a variety of locations from Israel to Australia to Virginia. I also have a lot of great quotes starting to come together and I think with more dedication to and hard work in this class it will be doable. Also I would like to add that not all of these sources are available through the Rowan Library but they gave me temporary access to download them. I took pictures just in case I lost them. They are all full text, peer-reviewed articles with an exception for the additional weaker sources which are relatively short but still provide some good information.

Posted in White Paper | 5 Comments

Safer Saws – Lunaduna

Posted on October 25, 2021 by Lunaduna

Manufacturers:
“Within a few thousandths of a second, the blade slammed to a stop.” This quote is a numerical claim because it shows evidence of how the slaw blade stops before anything could go wrong. The claim was used to have the audience want to buy this product.

Customers:
“That sounded like a good kind of saw to me.”The customer believes that the saw would not cut off a finger. The claim would be a casual one, because the customer is just viewing an advertisement, such as the video.

Industry Spokespeople:
“The saw can see the difference between a piece of wood and your finger.” This could be a factual claim or a categorical claim. A factual claim would be how the spokesperson mentions that the saw can tell the difference and stop itself before bodily harm is influenced. Also, it could be a categorical claim by comparing the difference between a piece of wood and a finger. (The piece of wood will not stop the machine but a finger, will stop the saw.)

Consumer Safety Advocates:
“Every year, there are over 40,000 table saw injuries, resulting in more than 4,000 amputations.” This is a causal claim, saws in the past, and most of them now, do not have the technology to prevent injuries from occurring. (The flesh-sensitive technology has even been around for a little over a decade.)  

Injured Plaintiffs:
“Your typical $400 jobsite saw would potentially rise in cost to around $625.” This is a quantitative claim. Most people cannot afford the expensive technology, even though it can save a finger. That is why today most companies only use the cheaper saws because people will not buy the expensive ones.

Personal Injury Lawyers:
“More injuries than any other woodworking tool.” The claim explains how dangerous a table saw is, and how there could be a way to prevent the harm. The factual evidence proves that a table saw is extremely dangerous, and the flesh-sensitive technology would help stop the harm caused by the table saws.

Government Officials:
“To emphasize that the injuries resulting from the use of table saws are, in many cases, particularly gruesome.” (Inez M. Tenenbaum) This quote is a categorical claim because they are saying how the injuries are extremely horrible. (Gruesome) Inez is saying his opinion to try to convince the public to buy the technology.

News Reporters:
“This is a man who has faith in his creation.” This is an evaluative claim because it assesses the pride Steve Gass has in his work. He believes that his invention could put a stop to preventable injuries from a table saw.

Posted in Safer Saws FA21 | Leave a comment

Safe Saw Task – comatosefox

Posted on October 25, 2021 by comatosefox

Manufacturers: Steve Gass demonstrates again and again that his sensor has and can save people from serious injuries. “Table saws cause thousands of these really horrible injuries every year. This inventor, a guy named Steve Gass, had actually figured out a way to prevent just about all of those accidents.” Gass claims that his blade can sense flesh within 4/1000ths of a second and bring the blade to a stop. He is trying to make the best safety precaution on the market in order to prevent more injuries.

Customers: The articles have a hard time claiming whether or not the customers will buy the tables if the price rises. “Not sure how well that will be received by consumers who can keep themselves safe…” It is very hard to predict how consumers will react to price and product changes, even when it is an added safety precaution, some may be less willing to buy when the prices are increased. If the customer cares about their wallet they will buy the cheapest option regardless of safety. On the other hand those who care about the craft or even their employees, they may buy a table saw that has more safety precautions and durability.

Industry Spokespeople: “’SawStop is currently available in the marketplace to any consumer who chooses to purchase it,’ says Susan Young, who represents Black & Decker, Bosch, Makita and other power tool companies.” They will claim whatever their company is paying them to say. For those companies that had no sensory safety protocols a few years back, they tried relaying that customers that cared to buy a table saw with such safety precautions, could get it with SawStop. The National Consumers League should not force companies to make this mandatory on all saws, which in turn may cause less sales to the companies due to the necessity to increase the prices. “Safety doesn’t sell.”

Freelance Woodworkers: “Consumer choice can dictate whether this technology and its associated potential issues and added cost will gain widespread acceptance by consumers” Those who make this a living or frequent hobby would most likely feel inclined to buy a table saw that has more safety precautions. Steve Gass, the creator of SawSafe, as well as reporter Chris Arnold, are both interested in woodworking on the side or as a hobby. They both felt that the precautions were a good investment in the long run.

Consumer Safety Advocates: “The National Consumers League last month brought in injured woodworkers to meet with lawmakers and regulators. ” These advocates used those injured by table saws in order to claim the need for a mandated SawStop safety brake on all table saws. They try to advocate for those whose ability to work has been taken away due to serious injuries and has affected their ability to provide for their families. “They want to make the SawStop safety brake mandatory on all table saws.”

Injured Plaintiffs: All those who were injured while using table saws will likely claim that they would not have been injured if the company had more safety precautions. “My elbow entered the blade and it proceeded to pull my arm all the way through the blade, cutting 100 percent through the ulna bone — tendons, ligaments, nerves.” Adam Thull’s family, the man who has been affected by this injury, claimed that he is no longer able to work and provide for his family. 

News Reporters: “But as well as the technology works, the major tool companies have failed to put this kind of device on any of their table saws — even eight years after Gass offered to license it to them.” Chirs Arnold claims as well as other reporters that SawStop was a great idea, but sadly certain safety precautions took a few years to be implemented. Arnold claims that even in a meeting with table saw companies and the Consumer Product Safety Commission could not come to an agreement due to the companies denying the need to mandate the sensor in all table saws.

comatosefox’s Claim: Personally I know how much safety precautions can save someone years of suffering just for a few hundred dollars. On multiple occasions my own father has injured himself at work due to the power tools he has to use. Once or twice those have been the outcome of a table saw, just like Thull, there will be times where he was unable to work. Although it was nowhere near as bad as Thull’s but should be in companies best interest to enforce safety standards in order to prevent events like these in the future. Of course some of these articles are a few years old and some companies have released safer table saws.

Posted in Safer Saws FA21 | Leave a comment

Safer Saws-toastedflatbread

Posted on October 25, 2021 by toastedflatbread22
  1. Manufacturers: “it will stop it so quickly that you just get a little nick”-This quotation convinces the audience that the invention will protect you from being seriously injured. It uses words such as “so”, “just”, and “little” to elaborate on how it will prevent harm. It tells the audience that they can trust the machine to save them from amputation, and tries to convince them that even if they get nicked, it is better than the alternative. This is a causal claim because it is stating that the safety addition will result in protected, happy customers. 
  2. Customers: “That sounded like a good kind of saw to me”-This quote comes from a potential customer and expresses his feelings on the idea of a safer saw. This suggests that the person had positive feelings towards the idea, at least initially. “Good kind” is vague wording, so it is difficult to understand what the customer qualifies as being “good”..probably something that will not amputate a finger. The words “to me” make the statement personal and it is unclear if other customers feel the same way. This claim is opinionated, but still provides a good example of how this customer feels about the product. It is an evaluative claim because it examines the feelings toward the idea and associates the idea with success.
  3. Industry Spokespeople: “Bosch lobbied”-These words explain that the saw-making company, Bosch, worked to ensure that something would not occur. The word “lobbied” suggests that this is something that Bosch has strong feelings for. It holds some negative connotation, which leads readers to believe that Bosch was acting suspiciously. It also suggests that there is a reason for this action. I believe this is an ethical claim because it leads readers to believe that something ethically wrong occurred, no matter the reason behind it and that the company needs to answer for its actions.
  4. Consumer Safety Advocates:  “proposed rulemaking”-This section of the quote explains how there are suggestions to put guidelines on the saw-making manufacturers. The word “rulemaking” suggests that guidelines should be enforced in order for everything to run smoothly. The word “proposed” suggests that this is a work in progress and alludes to the fact that the subject was not functioning as it should. These two words successfully tell readers that there is an effort to change something that should be better regulated, and for that, this is an evaluative claim. It is arguing that action needs to be taken to ensure that organization is followed and rules are met.
  5. Injured Plaintiffs: “technology could have prevented his 2007 injury”-This quote claims that the subject experienced an injury that could have been avoided with correct care. The quote suggests that the machine used was not equipped with the necessary features to keep its users safe. It claims that the injury was caused by a lack of thoughtfulness and comes across as spiteful (rightly so in my opinion). This is an evaluative claim because it examines the plaintiff’s situation and rules that it was unjust.
  6. Personal Injury Lawyers: “more injuries than any other woodworking tool.”- This claim explains that this certain saw is very dangerous and is causing considerable harm to its users. Strong comparative language is used in this statement-the words “more” and “any ” prove that this subject is greater at something (in this case something negative) than other subjects. This type of language is a persuasive call-to-action to fix the issues and ensure that no other injuries occur. This is a comparative claim because it differentiates between the dangers of typical saws to this specific one.
  7. Government Officials: “preventable injuries were unacceptable”-This claim comes from a chairman who is expressing his opinion on the unjust results of under-inspected table saws. The claim uses the word “preventable” to add emphasis to the negativity felt about the injuries. It suggests that the injuries had no reason or right to occur, but happened due to laziness. The word “unacceptable” furthers the intensity of this statement by using strong negative language. This is an ethical claim because it uses emotional words to impact the readers and try to convince them to feel similarly. It is successful in bringing out emotions and creating a reaction
  8. News Reporters: “it saves a finger but mangles the machine”-This comes from a reporter who observed the machine and evaluated its pros and cons. This statement has both positive and negative connotations-it suggests that it protects humans but at the cost of the machine. Just the word “but” suggests that the reporter believes that the system is flawed in some ways. This is a causal claim because it states that in order to protect the finger, the machine must suffer. It does a good job of illustrating the benefits and downfalls of the invention.
Posted in Safer Saws FA21 | 1 Comment