 |
| Niaz. "Debate Logo" January 11, 2008 Open Public Domain |
The debate in general discusses the issue of mapping gene sequencing within neurology and its affects on healthcare or diagnostics. In laments terms, the argument centers around whether the medical process of mapping the genes of the mind poses a risk to the patient's overall mental health, and if the technology is reliable enough to be used in diagnosing illnesses.
Source I
URL: My first source comes from Medscape.com a ".com" web resource for doctors and physicians that features peer-reviewed medical journal articles, daily medical news, and a drug database. It was launched in New York and is staffed by retired or freelance doctors.
Author: The author is Bret S. Stetka, MD who is the Editorial Director for Medscape writing numerous articles with the company's affiliate WebMD. He has many social media avenues that explain his work and are supported by the companies themselves; including, Twitter, LinkedIn, and the Medscape staff bios.
Last Updated: The article was last updated on May 18, 2015. The article has the most recent studies of the issue and the debate that ensued from the issue.
Purpose: The article is made only to present the issue and the two opposing sides opinions/ arguments. It is informing the reader of gene sequencing and its properties; while then presenting three main points the two opposing sides bought up. The article even presents poll results to show support for each opinion.
Graphics: There are no graphics regarding the article; just images concerning ads and other article links.
Position on Subject: The article attempts to have a unbiased position on the issue, presenting both sides of the argument and listing evidence presented. However they give longer paragraphs and quotes to supporters of the medical process, and notes its victory popularity wise.
Links: All links send the reader to any cited reference window, as they are bracket links, all of which are found on the Medscape.com and is merely a pop up window.
Source II
URL: My second source comes from Nature.com a ".com" organization and an independent online news organization based in New York. The company has spent close to 150 years serving medical and technological professionals in designing tools for molecular biology.
Author: The article was composed by Erika Check Hayden, who has worked for Newsweek reporting on numerous bio medical issues. She has a Twitter account as well as links on her account to the official Nature News twitter page.
Last Update: The article was posted on March 11, 2014. Therefore the article's facts and arguments may be dated compared to the Medscape article and debate references. There are no signs of updating since.
Purpose: The main purpose for this article is to persuade its audience in opposing the implementation of genome sequencing technologies in today's hospitals, yet debunks any theories that such mapping could be detrimental to one's health. It also satirizes the idea of a debate on the issue through the tone of its title, and presentation of pro-sequencing data.
Graphics: There are no accompanying graphics with the article, only surrounding ads and pictures for other articles.
Position on the Subject: The article is entirely anti-sequencing due to its satirical perception of its implementation into hospitals. I find that the research is sloppy and needs more evidence/ clinical experience before use.
Links: The links around the article either direct the reader to other Nature.com articles and news feeds or to related articles to the Genome sequencing debate- but only those written by the company. Most of its recommended links redirect to recent issues unrelated to the article.
No comments:
Post a Comment