Gene editing- as previously discussed, can revolutionize the medical field and improve human lives on an incredible scale. It can be considered one of the most extraordinary and fundamental discoveries in research. However, it raises numerous complex legal and ethical concerns, making it rarely, if not banned, used. This blog post will delve into this matter’s background, challenges, techniques, and current legality.
Gene editing is the “ability to make highly specific changes to the DNA sequence of a living organism, essentially customizing its genetic makeup.” The primary tool used for this is CRISPR-Cas9: a molecular device derived from naturally occurring DNA sequences in bacteria and archaea. It has allowed researchers to target a specific DNA sequence where they introduce cuts into the genome to remove and insert new DNA sequences. Among other methods, such as TALENs and ZFNs, CRISPR has emerged as the most effective, making it crucial in genetics and medicine.
CRISPR has been used in therapies treating certain human diseases such as diabetes, sickle cell disease, cancers of blood-forming tissues like leukemia and lymphoma, chronic infectious diseases like AIDS, and inherited impairment in vision, to name a few. However, the journey to reach this point hasn’t been easy. Early attempts to use gene editing focused on minimizing the consequences instead of correcting genetic mistakes. Although effective in some cases, it was tricky and limited.
But, just like everything else, there is always a legal and ethical side. The implications for gene editing are extreme, considering these are actual human lives and genetic material at play. The legality of human gene editing varies across countries. China, India, Ireland, and Japan outlawed gene editing while the U.S. hasn’t banned it, a moratorium imposed under the vigilance of the FDA and guidelines from the NIH. In the UK, “the legislation of medical use of mitochondrial replacement is likely to lead to legal permission for the modification of germline nuclear genome that can be adjusted by genome-editing technology.”
Additionally, while some countries explicitly prohibit human germline engineering in reproduction, others allow ut with certain exceptions. The “Declaration of Helinski-Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects” (“Declaration of Helinski” for short) serves as a widely accepted ethical principle for medical research involving human subjects and is referenced in the judgment against Jiankui He.
The first gene-edited human babies were born in China in late 2018, triggering widespread criticism and debate over the experiment. The twin infant girls carried an edited gene that reduced the risk of HIV infection. The researcher- Jiankui He- faced three years of jail due to China’s guidelines and regulations banning gene editing. This event highlighted the need for “urgent improvement of ethics governance at all levels, the enforcement of technical and ethical guidelines, and the establishment of laws relating to such bioethical issues.”
Another well-known case of using human-genome editing is that of Victoria Gray. Victoria Gray has sickle cell disease, an inherited red blood cell disorder in which the cell sickles and becomes hard and sticky, forming the shape of a ‘C’. She had volunteered to participate in the first attempt to use CRISPR to treat her disease. The disease that had plagued her since she was a baby, leaving nightmarish nights and horrible pain in its wake, now existed in memory as something that only once existed as part of her life.
Gray was diagnosed with sickle cell disease as an infant. She was considering a bone marrow transplant when she heard about the CRISPR study and jumped at the chance to volunteer.
Considering this, wouldn’t it be beneficial to use CRISPR more often to make life easier for individuals? To overcome something that could hinder or even harm us? When we have something that can change people’s lives, why should we ban the use of it?
We must establish ethical guidelines for selecting patients, defining eligible diseases, and implementing restrictions on who can use CRISPR and under which circumstances. Oversight by government organizations or regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, could ensure responsible usage for this activity. By doing this, we can prevent misuse of this for non-medical practices, such as cosmetic alterations.
Human gene-editing is a powerful tool that, while beneficial, serves a number of significant legal and ethical issues. While this technology holds the key to improving the lives of individuals facing life-threatening illnesses and genetci disorders, it requires careful regulation to balance the benefits and harms. If we want to use CRISPR and other similar technologies to advance the human race and improve the lives of those in need, we need to establish appropriate laws and regulations so it doesn’t get out of gads.
With the growing advancement of technology, we are able to solve many problems we originally couldn’t. I’m not talking about things like faster communication or instant food delivery, but something on a more…serious level. Gene editing, in vitro fertilization, infertilization, etc. With breakthroughs like gene editing, in vitro fertilization (IVF), and mitochondrial replacement therapy (MRT), we have the power to address infertility and genetic diseases. However, as we celebrate these achievements, we must also consider the potential difficulties and legal challenges that come hand in hand. So let’s take a look at what these may be.
Here are the main points we’ll cover in this post:
The Concept of Three-Parent Children
The Complexity of Parental Rights
Roles of Surrogacy in the Process
Health Risk and Protection of Donors
Weighing the Benefits and Risks
The Concept of Three-Parent Children
Let me first explain what IVF (or three-parent child) is. So a three-parent baby is pretty much an offspring from the genetic material of three parents; one male and two females. There is mitochondrial replacement therapy (MRT) and three-parent, in vitro fertilization (IVF). This is usually done so to prevent the inheritance of mitochondrial disease; a 1 in 400 maternally-inherited mutation that can cause a range of illnesses. There are no cures for this, hence the use of MRT.9
One way to do so is by injecting a small amount of cytoplasm from an egg cell (ovum) of a healthy donor into the mother’s egg, which is then fertilized by the father’s sperm and implanted in the mother’s uterus using IVF. Another way is to remove the nucleus from a donor egg and replace it with the nucleus from the mother’s egg cell. The egg is fertilized with the father’s sperm and then transferred to the mother’s uterus for normal gestation. And there are many other ways this could be performed. But they all generally require one thing, an egg from a healthy donor.10
The Complexity of Parental Rights
Given that, would the donor be a biological parent to the child? Not really. The donor is never the legal parent, meaning they are not responsible for the child and have no parental rights to the child. They waive all rights to any children born due to the egg donation under the terms of an egg donation contract.5 This includes the right to initiate contact with the child in the future. In assisted reproduction (IVF, egg donation, etc.) the woman who gives birth to the child is always the mother, even if the eggs were donated by another woman. Besides having no right to the child, there are other requirements as to who is allowed to donate eggs.4 Candidates can be disqualified for lifestyle habits (such as smoking or a history of drug use), health concerns (genetic disorders, obesity, etc.), usage of certain types of contraception, and basic commitment to scheduling appointments. Egg donors should also be no older than 29, as egg quality and quantity diminishes as women reach their mid to late 30s
The Role of Surrogacy in the Process
But if it was in the case of surrogacy, things would be different.
In surrogacy, another woman is asked to have a baby for them. She is called- in Texas- as the gestational mother. In this, the couple must be married and have to make a written agreement with the woman called a gestational agreement. In this agreement, it explains the legal relationship that each person has with the child. It talks about who will provide healthcare for the mother and baby during the pregnancy, the gestational mother giving up all parental rights to the child, other donors – if involved- also needing to give up all parental agreement, the gestational mother having the right to make all healthcare decisions for herself and the embryo, and the intended parents become the child’s legal parents after being born.
Of course, in this the court is also a part of the agreement. You must ask the Court to approve the agreement before the gestational mother gets pregnant, file a Petition at Court, and have the intended file a birth notice after birth. If the court does not approve of the gestational agreement then the gestational mother is the legal mother. If the gestational mother decides to keep the child, the intended parents have no legal rights to the child, and if they want to become the legal parents they would have to adopt the child.11
Health Risks and Protection of Donors
Besides having no right to the child, there are other requirements as to who is allowed to donate eggs. Candidates can be disqualified for lifestyle habits (such as smoking or a history of drug use), health concerns (genetic disorders, obesity, etc.), usage of certain types of contraception, and basic commitment to scheduling appointments. Egg donors should also be no older than 29, as egg quality and quantity diminishes as women reach their mid to late 30s. Not only that, they are screened and checked for genetic diseases.
Donors can be carriers, meaning they have the recessive allele for the mutation and do not develop or have symptoms of the disease despite testing positive. That doesn’t necessarily mean they are unhealthy, but rather they carry the mutation. It would only affect the child if the father is a carrier of the same disease. Despite this, these donors would be disqualified.
There are many risks, however, with donating eggs. For example, long-term effects include aggressive breast cancer, loss of fertility, and fatal colon cancer. Even without any family history of these illnesses, it is suspected the egg donation is the cause. Infertility rates continue to increase and the desperation for fertility services follows. Young women are lured into donating, often unaware of the health risks when they apply as they are offered monetary compensation during a financially vulnerable moment in their lives. When it is said there is “no known risk” it simply means that there is a complete lack of data than an absence of risk, making it misleading.7 This now leads to another question; is it right for these donations to continue when it can be harmful to the donor? Should we risk providing for someone else’s life when we risk our own? These women have their own futures ahead of them so is it right that they have to suffer when they do something to help others?
The answer is complicated. There’s a 0.000004% risk of dying, 0.1% risk of internal bleeding, 0.5% risk of infection, and a 2-6% chance of developing pain and swelling in the ovaries as a result of the self-injected hormone treatments.3 With this. We still need to research more about whether egg donation is safe for donors long-term. Despite the probability these effects come from egg-donation, there could be a way to prevent them with further research. That could potentially make egg-donation safer and help with the growing infertility rates. But for now, there is- as far as I have read- not many laws or regulations protecting women from things like these.
Weighing the Benefits and Risks
Why not just use adoption instead? Adoption is the other and safer option-in this case- for those with infertility. However, adoption doesn’t give all the benefits donors do. 2
Mainly, the pregnancy experience. Having a donor allows parents to carry and deliver their adopted child themselves as they live through the pregnancy experience. Parents also have legal rights and responsibility for the embryos prior to attempting a pregnancy. Donations also cost less than adoption, and have a short wait to them. However, it is noted that donations will not always result in live birth, while adoption with a reputable agency will bring a baby into the home.
Now in case of a divorce, what happens then? Could the father make a claim that the mother shouldn’t get the baby as she is infertile? Would he use that against her? There should be some law or requirement that prevents either parent from being held unfairly simply for this reason. Something like this shouldn’t be held against you in any way at all.
Conclusion
With the rapidly increasing rate of infertility in today’s world we’re taking advantage of new technology to solve this problem. Using egg donors, IVF, and MRT we have come up with a number of ways to produce a child to infertile couples. But, with the ability to do so, there are going to be legal issues involved. Among this we have parental rights on the child, protection and health risks of donors, surrogacy rights, and more. There are also many restrictions regarding who is a donor or surrogate in order to make sure there is a healthy child produced. Despite the few successful attempts to use three-parent child methods to produce an offspring, the ethical and legal complications for this arise, making us question whether this is appropriate or not. For example, ‘should we be risking the life of a donor simply for the want for a child’, or, ‘is it right for a surrogate to give up a child they raised and worked hard to take care of for 9 months to someone else’. These questions remain in doubt, with very frail answers to them. Only with more research can we actually make a proper law to protect those who need it for becoming a donor or being a part of three-parent children.
So there’s been huge news regarding students using AI-based websites such as ChatGPT to complete their work for them. This includes using it to write essays and do assignments they should be doing themselves. Now, I’ve just recently discovered ChatGPT and even discovered it is restricted by my school. Funny story actually. I started using a different device at school than my school-issued one, and I had ChatGPT pulled on up one of the tabs to experiment with it. I accidentally clicked on the tab at school, it refreshed, and popped up as restricted for Academic Fraud. So yeah, it’s banned at my school. At many schools, actually. But that’s besides the point. The whole point is, really, how we could use AI such as ChatGPT at school for BENEFICIAL purposes. No I don’t mean to get a wonderful and fake report card from cheating in order to get a new phone. No no no. I mean, to have a TRULY MODERN way of learning using ChatGPT and other such resources. So let us begin.
The advancement of technology has become a major breakthrough in our lives, and yet we’re still working on improving it. Technology is outdated when it becomes inefficient and a faster method to do something is found. Every new technological invention is made to be faster than the current, yet will get replaced by a newer faster version. Take writing for example. We used to write essays and papers by hand, and spend painstaking hours creating something to perfection. Especially at a time where ink was commonly used. Imagine how many times the U.S. Constitution could have been re-written due to a spelling mistake. After quills we had pens and pencils. Then typewriters and after that, computers. Computers started advancing and becoming smaller and more powerful. We now have speech recognizing devices like Alexa or Google Home. There’s even development in Natural Language Processing and Neural Networks so we can use our thoughts to write. Technology will never last in one form forever. It’ll keep advancing and soon the world will as well. People will need to keep up with this in order to survive. Those who didn’t will go extinct. (Not literally but you get the idea.)
So how does this relate to ChatGPT? Well for starters, we can’t ignore the presence in technology in our lives. It’s everywhere around us. However, simply banning it our trying to prevent it from being used isn’t working. Schools are trying to ban the use of ChatGPT and other similar sites to prevent students from cheating. Is that really necessary though? Although ChatGPT can be used to generate essays and do work for students, it can also be used as a supplement to help enhance the learning experience.
Schools are made solely to teach kids. To make them proficient in the basics of where the current world is today. It’s preparing us for the world by kind of, fueling us with essential information. They want us to learn and then test us to make sure we’ve understood that concept. But the way everyone learns is different. Some can pick up on things quick and ace the topic while others need more time. Even when explained it can be difficult to understand. Sometimes the questions asked aren’t answered and students are left worse than they began. ChatGPT can solve that. It can provide one-on-one tutoring to help them learn at their own pace and even provide practice tests and answers to help them understand. ChatGPT can take the most difficult thing and simplify it in a way you could understand. Perhaps it’s easier written like a poem or maybe composed like a song. ChatGPT could do that and create something truly remarkable that will benefit you.
ChatGPT could even be used for research assistance. They can help students find and organize research needed by providing summaries, related articles and more. Ever had a difficult time finding an answer to one question? How many articles or websites would you have had to search through to either give up in defeat or finally get it? ChatGPT can help with that. It can quickly pull up exactly what you need. Now, as ChatGPT is an AI model, and like all AI, is imperfect, something’s may be incorrect. AI can only do as much as it is told to do. Hence, it can only have information up to the amount it’s been programmed with. ChatGPT is limited to knowledge up to 2020 (as far as I know) so recent events may not be provided. Even still, it may mess up. Like, earlier today just for fun I asked ChatGPT to list the members of SEVENTEEN in order by age. It took about three tries for it to successfully list all 13 members by age. The first time it started off almost 4 members late and repeated some of them. The second time one member was missing. After correcting the AI for a final time only did it successfully do what was asked.
Instead of banning AI websites like ChatGPT altogether, maybe they should create a feature that disables them. ChatGPT could be used to learn about new topics and develop a full understanding of them, but turned off when it comes to testing. Simply copy and pasting isn’t learning. If one uses ChatGPT in a way it should be intended- to answer questions and fill the gaps we are unfamiliar with- then is it really that harmful? I don’t think so. Is it wrong to try and learn? In certain circumstances yes, most likely, but otherwise?
As a way to conclude this post I wanted to share some other AI websites I found that are similar to ChatGPT, except with their own respective characteristics.
ChatSonic (The underlying technology behind ChatGPT but going beyond ChatGPT’s limitations)
Rytr (A way to generate ideas to help get started on a post)
WordTune (A way to articulate your thoughts or when they sound awkward)
Essaybot (I would consider this one cheating as it gives you a pre written paragraph re-worded, but otherwise this is an option)
Talk to Books (Exploring ideas by getting answers from books)
These were some quick websites I found on the internet. I’m not trying to promote the use of AI websites to do your work. Instead, I’m trying to explain it’s benefits and how it can be used to enhance our learning and working process in order to be more successful. That is not equivalent to copy paste. Anyways, I hope you all have a wonderful evening and I will see you next post. Bye!
Cryptocurrency. We’ve probably all heard about it by now. Bitcoin….and bitcoin…and yeah…That’s all I really know (knew) about it. That was before I got a WONDERFUL- emphasize wonderful- opportunity to take some time off and actually learn something about it. And really, it wasn’t that bad. So let me enlighten you a little about cryptocurrency, how it really works, and how it relates to Central Bank Digital Currencies. (CBDC).
So let’s start with the basics. What exactly is cryptocurrency? Well, for starters, cryptocurrency is “a digital payment system that doesn’t rely on banks”, or a third-party, “to verify transactions.” In short, it’s a digital currency that is an alternative form of payment by using encryption algorithms. (We’ll get into more of that later.)
Cryptocurrency is created through something called mining. No, not like mining for gold. (Although it would be funny.) But really, mining is “the process of validating cryptocurrency transactions and creating new units of cryptocurrency”. It uses powerful computer hardware and software to-drumroll please- solve complex math problems. Yep. Cryptocurrency is literally made from solving complex math problems. Using powerful computer hardware and software, of course.
But really this is more complex. You see, cryptocurrencies use blockchain technology. A blockchain is a distributed database or ledger that is shared among the nodes of a computer network. Think of it as a ledger, or even a database. As a database, a blockchain stores information electronically in digital format. It’s a form of a public ledger, which is “a series of blocks on which transaction details are recorded after suitable authentication and verification by the designated network participants.” (It’s best known for their crucial role in cryptocurrency systems, for maintaining a secure and decentralized record of transactions.
Compared to a typical database, a blockchain structures its data into blocks which are strung together, rather than into tables. This structure makes an irreversible timeline of data when implemented in a decentralized nature. As a block is filled it finalizes and becomes part of this timeline.
So why would cryptocurrency be made? What was the main purpose? Anything made is often to make something easier. We always innovate something new to make what we’re already working with easier, faster, and simpler. Well, for starters it was to engage in financial transactions without exclusively relying on banks or governments. When we usually partake in transactions, a third-party, such as a bank, is used to do so. Whenever we perform transactions, our money doesn’t immediately get transferred to the other person. For transactions from different banks, it can take one to five days. Why does this happen? Well, it’s excessive to continuously pay a transaction to another bank in small amounts. If I make a transaction of $10 dollars to another person, someone else could be making a transaction of $50 to another. Instead of continuously processing transactions in amounts like this, something called the Delta of Transactions takes place. This process happens over a periodic basis. So let’s say I make a transaction of $30 to someone at another bank, and someone at that bank needs to pay a transaction of $10 to someone at mine. Instead of updating a don performing every transaction, the banks will wait until the end of the day, and transfer the net amount to each other. In this case, since the other bank will ‘gain’ $30 and ‘lose’ $10, my bank will transfer $20 to the other bank. That is the net amount.
What cryptocurrency does is take out this step. Because we rely on the bank or a third-party to deliver the transaction, this Delta of Transactions process takes place, and our payment gets transferred after a while. But with cryptocurrency, it happens immediately. The thing with cryptocurrency is that your money stays with you. Compared to all your money being with the bank, you have your money. So whenever you want to process a transaction, it happens immediately because you’re doing it yourself. The only problem is that, if your money is with you, you could lose all of it. Cryptocurrency needs a cryptocurrency wallet. It’s something that stores the public and/or private keys for cryptocurrency transactions. Basically like a vault or a bank account. It holds the keys and allows you to access your coins. Because it’s with you, if you lose that ‘wallet” you end up losing all your money. If you have money stored in the bank, if you lose your wallet, you would still have money, and not have lost all of it. However, there are certain situations where cryptocurrency is actually beneficial. Let’s take the Bahamas for example. The Bahamas consists of 70 scattered islands, and it can take over half a day to simply reach the bank. As a result, the Bahamas established a style of cryptocurrency called Sand Dollar to make money easily accessible.
So I mentioned CBDC at the very beginning. CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) is digital currency issued by a central bank, rather than a commercial bank. While CBDCs are controlled by a central bank, cryptocurrencies are almost always decentralized, meaning they cannot be regulated by a single authority. CBDCs are pegged to the value of a country’s fiat currency. This fiat currency is issued and regulated by a nation’s monetary authority or central bank. ( Such as the US Treasury) In the US along with many other countries, many people do not have access to financial services. The main goal of CBDC is to “provide businesses and consumers with privacy transferability, convenience, accessibility, and financial security.” It would also reduce the risks of using digital currencies in their current form. Cryptocurrencies are highly volatile and have a constantly fluctuating value. This can cause severe financial stress in many households and affect the overall stability of an economy. Bitcoin was made anonymously. Despite being believed to be made by a pseudonym group, nobody knows who created it. That being said, they can do whatever they want with Bitcoin. Who knows if they choose to make Bitcoin valued at a high price or suddenly drop it really low. To prevent this but still provide digital currency, governments are starting to create CBDCs.
So lastly why would this be important. Well for starters, everything in this world has to do with money. There’s nothing free in this world. The world revolves around money. You go to school to get a job to earn money. You need money to get food, get a house, and perform the basic functions to live. As technology develops, cryptocurrency or even digital currency would become widely used like regular currency. We need to learn how it’s used and the benefits of disadvantages to using it so that we’re prepared in the future. If I get a job and my boss asks if I could be paid in cryptocurrency or CBDC, I need to understand what happens when I use it. Although it’s not as useful now, we would eventually get to a point in time where it would be. This would eventually become a way of payment, and we need to understand how it works. It’s our money after all.
Newton’s 3 laws of motion. Since we’ve learned them, we’ve only really applied them in science problems to define in which scenario they occur, or just to define how things work. Put that way, it sounds boring.
Newton’s 1st Law- Inertia: An object at rest or in uniform motion will stay that way unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.
Newton’s 2nd Law- Acceleration: An object acted upon by an unbalanced force will accelerate in the direction of the greater force.
Newton’s 3rd Law- Action Reaction: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
Let’s start with the first one; inertia. An object at rest or in uniform motion will stay that way unless acted upon by an unbalanced force. Meaning, something will stay the way it is until something messes it up or changes it. For this first part, let’s apply these laws to productivity.
Things will only be completed when effort is applied. Unless you actually put some work or effort into doing something, it’ll actually get completed. But, just saying it’ll happen and not doing anything will not do anything. In order to get it progressing or a change in motion, you need that extra work, or unbalanced force, to make it possible.
Ah yes, acceleration. An object acted upon by an unbalanced force will accelerate in the direction of the greater force. I think the meaning is pretty straightforward. Things will go in the direction of the greater force. Anyway, before I relate this to a real life situation, I want to bring up the formula used to calculate acceleration. A=F/M: Acceleration= Force/ Mass. Let’s put this in terms of productivity.
F being the force applied, m is the mass of an object ( or in this case something we want to get done), and a is the acceleration of an object ( or the progress of our task). As mass must stay constant for the second law to work, force applied becomes proportional to the acceleration. So, the more effort, or force, you put into the goal, the faster the goal progresses towards completion. Similarly, the more blog posts you publish, the more exposure you get. ( However, I’m not really sure about that one. Hmmmmmmm.) How quickly or how much you get something done is equivalent to how much you dedicate to it and how complex the task is.
But, let’s be honest. Do we all finish everything in one go? Ehhhhh no. Maybe you do, and if so, I am impressed. Don’t get me wrong, I do commit and get my work done, but I’m more of the person to procrastinate on doing things that moment, and will split things into very unequal chunks to get it done. Continuing on what I said, we usually would split a lengthy, time-consumingly complex task into sections or chunks to complete each time within a deadline, or until completion. This is usually a better strategy when working as you can complete the tasks with the same amount of force, such as time, energy, effort, as compared to it all together. This leads to the final law, Action-Reaction.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. In a common classroom example, if you push against a wall, the wall is pushing back. When a rocket is launching, it pushes against the ground, and the ground pushes back. For anything that happens or anything that you want to do, there is an equal and opposite reaction, or an equal amount of resistance that is there to stop you.
For example, when we choose to do something, we often complicate it to a point they are enormous and out of reach, putting ourselves in a mindset that makes us almost unable to do it. To solve it, we have to clarify each specific aspect.of it, and make it simple. Different ways include making it easy for yourself, or focusing on the small actions. If we want to do something that changes us, or make some impact in ourselves, we need to start simple. Taking big steps at first is never the way to go. That’ll only make it worse, and have a greater amount of resistance on us. This will make us want to quit. Start small, with easy things that you can change. Then, as you get used to that, add more.
So, the three laws of motion are very easily seen in productivity.
Things won’t get done unless you do it first- Inertia
Progress is equal to energy or time put in and the complexity of the task- Acceleration
The more complex a project is, the higher the resistance of completing it is- Action Reaction
But, besides productivity, what else can we apply these 3 laws into? Maybe, social interactions or relationships? Well, let’s think of the bond as the object, and the interactions or parts of life as unbalanced forces.
Let’s say you want to become more sociable and want to make new friends. As of right now, the relationship between you two is the way it is as there haven’t been any changes. You two are both strangers to each other who make very minimal small talk or just notice each other there. However, once you start taking the initiative to get to know them, things change. The different unbalanced forces here include curiosity, attraction, fascination, etc. You probably became curious about a person and were impressed by them and wanted to know them better, or were attracted to them by some aura they have or their personality. This is the first thing that changes your relationship. These different forces are what is causing it to be changed, and to become in motion.
Depending on how the relationship progresses, you two can become really good friends and experience another “stagnant” period in your relationship. This one is after the unbalanced forces. After being acted upon by those forces which caused your relationship to change, it would be in motion as it keeps changing with different experiences. However, after some time, it will calm down and you two will be normal with each other. This is another state of inertia. Everything is good between the two of you. However, what happens when you progress further and develop a stronger friendship?
When you create a stronger bond or friendship with someone, it’s very natural. Making a new friend can be exciting as it’ s something new and you can’t wait to create more memories or hang out with them more. But, friendships that are really strong and old aren’t like that. You have fun together, but it’s like a natural part of your routine. You don’t need to think about it because you already know you’ll have fun. Those unbalanced forces that originally created this new relationship have faded, and are no longer at play as much as before. What’s left is something created, and now the force or effort needed to keep it growing. Using the formula A=F/M, force is the effort put in to keep it growing, and acceleration is how much your relationship grows. Like we talked about in the previous example, the amount your relationship grows depends on the amount of force and how much you want it to grow.
Lastly, Action-Reaction. In this one, I believe a relationship grows as much as it can falter. As much as you may want to bring it forward, there’s the same amount that can cause it to break. There’s something pushing back. However, it’s not always negative. See it this way, if there’s a problem or a huge dispute that tears you and your friends or others in a relationship completely apart, just know that there’s an equal and opposite solution to this. To the factor that tore you apart, there’s a factor that can bring you together. Something with equal effect, value, and meaning.
As a recap, the three laws of motion can be seen in relationships as:
Initiative to take the relationship further- Inertia
Making your relationship grow, or the amount of effort put into improving your relationship is equal to the amount it grows- Acceleration
For every dispute that occurs, there’s always a counter that can bring you back- Action-Reaction
Before I finish, I want to explain something regarding the first law. Although everything I’ve mentioned above is relatively positive, there are many negative factors as well. Let’s be real. Life isn’t perfect. We don’t live in a perfect society, a perfect world, nor are we perfect ourselves. There are many flaws that can’t be changed and are bound to happen no matter what. The same is here. These laws of motion can provide a reason for almost anything that happens. The reason something bad or good happens is either a result of one of these laws being put in play. Here are some alternate examples.
An existing relationship gets broken up. You could have a very strong, long-lasting friendship with someone, but something happens that could cause it to come apart. I have a personal example. I had a friend who I’ve known for some time. We used to do so many things together. Hang out, raise money, create a business” in our school’s annual event, and so much more. But, over time as we grew up, she started finding other friends. Friends who had the same taste in fashion or the same likes as her. This third-person/group took away the other in this friendship. Now, we aren’t as close friends as before. We may briefly talk to each other, but the conversations are like we’re foreigners or brief acquaintances with each other. The result of a third party coming in resulted in the friendship breaking apart.
The best way I would describe Action-Reaction is karma. Although they are slightly similar, the same idea is seen within both principles. The general idea behind karma is that each action a person takes will affect them at some point in the future. They both emphasize how there is a reaction that comes with each action. But, did you know that they both connect to each other?
In karma, if you were to do something good, there’s something good that will happen to you in the future. Similar to if you were to do something bad. With the third law, if you were to do something, something equally opposite would push back on it. They both are a way of putting something at rest/balanced, and they both are a result of each other. Using our good deed example, applying both principles, there will have to be something opposite to the deed to fulfill the third law. You gain something and lose something else. That puts it in balance again. However, we know that nothing can stay the same. There will eventually be something else that disrupts this ( inertia + acceleration) and has an equal reaction. As the previously done good deed occurred, you’ll get another good thing in the future. That good thing comes back again, and another opposite force will come to balance it again. Then another act will result in karma. They both sort of connecting with each other.
What other ways can you apply the three laws of motion to? Productivity and relationships are just two of the many ways these three rules can be seen in our daily lives. Without knowing, we apply them in everything we use,and frankly, that’s quite fascinating. Anyways, I hope you got to see a different perspective of the three laws being used, and I will see you next post. Bye!
a natural instinctive state of mind deriving from one’s circumstances, mood, or relationships with others.
There are several types of emotion. Happiness, disgust, anger, disappointment, sadness, etc. When we say someone is being emotional, we often think of the negative sides of it. Crying or sorrowful. We don’t realize that it could also mean being overjoyed or heartwarmed. So many different factors affect how our emotions change. Setting, mood, relationship, situation to name a few. Let’s break it down.
For many students, coming back in-person to school from remote learning can be stressful. Everything changes and we have to remember a lot of our old good habits from before. We have to have a lot more focus now as we were very easily distracted in the previous year. We also need to get back in the habit of managing homework after school as we can no longer easily complete it during other periods. Not to forget, we aren’t used to walking around every period anymore. Instead of disconnecting and clicking on the next meeting, we have to quickly transition from one class to another all over the school. Then we have after school activities which take out time from our afternoons when we get back from school. This leaves kids working from late in the night to early in the morning. This then results in not having enough sleep, and not focusing well during classes. The cycle then continues. This builds up so much stress in students, it’s unbearable, and starts to affect their emotions. It can result in students becoming frustrated in everything, or even having meltdowns.
Even though crying cannot solve anything, it really helps to let everything out. After crying it’s like a huge burden from inside is lifted, and it becomes easier to start working again. That’s what happened to me. Not too long ago I came home and had a meltdown. I realize now that it was over something small and could be easily fixed, but back then, I really just couldn’t do anything about it except let it out. Sometimes, in certain situations, it’s best to let your emotions out instead of letting them stay inside for too long. However, when we do it’s considered childish. At this age, we should have better control on our emotions compared to small kids. We know better than to cry over trivial things and be able to deal with problems in more mature ways. Hence, when someone does cry, they’re seen as weak.
But let me ask this. If someone is overjoyed and lets out tears of happiness, are they considered weak? Tears can be let out as a form of expression. It’s often associated with sorrow and pain, but isn’t it also for happiness or delight?
Then again, there are limits to when you should let your emotions out. Simply because crying isn’t weak doesn’t allow one to be able to cry all the time. If so, then you actually are weak. It’s not right to cry over the smallest, fixable things. Things that easily can be solved should not have tears be shed upon. Not only is it unnecessary, but it’s a waste of time. For example, if you have so much work and little time to do it, instead of crying about it, why not just grit your teeth and get it over with? In the time spent moping around, you could have used it to get started or be half-way into an assignment. Now, you’ll only end up taking more time to complete it.
Being emotional has two meanings. You can be emotional by being overjoyed, or you could be emotional by being upset. It’s not always a bad thing to be emotional, but you shouldn’t necessarily be crying about the things that can be fixed. Control your emotions instead of letting them affect your actions and thoughts.
Man has always been curious. Starting from fire and to the world beyond our own, we have always wanted to explore further. But who is the start of these? Ambitious, daring people who want to step beyond the boundary lines. Those who didn’t want to sit around waiting for something to happen, and wanted to do something on their own. The same thing happens here, except now with billionaires and space.
Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Richard Branson {Source: cnn.com}
What is the point of the space race?
We all presume that these billionaires are going to space to make some money. They have their eyes on the moon or even on space itself so they can start Space Tourism. But, what does it do? Sure, they’ll earn more money and become richer, but other than that what does it mean? It means that they’ll have a title. A mark. Or, a legacy. They want to be written in History Books, so, even years after they die, their names live on. But, they want their names to be known as the first private-funded non-astronaut to go to space.
If you’ve seen the Virgin Galactic Unity 22 Spaceflight, you saw that Richard Branson was riding a bike before giving the astronauts a hug. They all look happy and it seems like a welcome, but really, it’s like saying, you’ve trained your whole life for going to space but I have so much money that I can go anytime I want. We all know Neil Armstrong’s immortal line, “ That’s one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind.” Here, this line is more like, “ That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for myself.” This whole Billionaire Space Race will only benefit themselves when they could focus on greater problems instead.
But, think about the billionaires’ perspective. They’ve worked hard their whole lives to reach where they are now, and if they die without making some mark, wouldn’t it be like a waste? ( Well, not exactly a waste.) But, wouldn’t it be your ambition to leave something of yourself behind if you’ve achieved something? As a way of proudly saying, I did it. Something for history to remember you by. But, we’re always attracted to the shiny things and never the dull ones. That’s why the billionaires are setting their sights on space to make their mark.
Is it necessary?
No. Period. Going to space, especially right now, is not at all necessary. We’ve already been to the moon and have been in space. It’s not necessary to do it again. What is necessary, is to focus on our current problems. The pandemic, for one, and even the ones we originally started with. ( Not to mention the intense heatwaves we’ve been experiencing lately. The recent space projects are just adding more heat to it.) Poverty, hunger, lack of education, etc. Instead of spending so much money on things we’ve done, spend it on what isn’t. Again, one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind. If these billionaires want their names to be in history books or to have a legacy, why not have one about solving a hunger crisis, or building roads in Africa, or even creating electricity that millions of poor families can use, and is free. Sure, these might be small steps, but at least they’ll have a greater impact on the world, and not just themselves. At least it’ll be a great leap for mankind.
What should billionaires do instead with the money?
Everyone’s first answer to this would be, donating it. However, I say not. First, donating just money isn’t going to change anything. If you give money to feed a man, he’ll only be fed once. Then you’ll have to donate again and again. They’ll become more dependent on those giving money when they should become independent. It sounds heartless, but it’s reality. The only way they’ll get out of poverty, is if they can start doing it themselves.
True story. A few days ago I and my friends went to a roller rink. There were 4 of us in total, and only two- including me- knew how to skate. The other two were new at skating, so we had to teach them. We gave them instructions and demonstrated, but they weren’t learning anything. They were mostly dependent on us to hold their hands so they wouldn’t fall and to move them. But, once we let them go and went skating ourselves, the two of them got the hang of it themselves. They became self-reliant to learn how to skate and figure out what works best for them. If they had kept depending on us to help them, they wouldn’t have learned how to skate at all. Same thing here.
Instead of just donating money for others to feed those who are starving, we should instead teach them how to feed themselves. If you feed a man a fish, he’ll be full once. But, if you teach him how to fish, he’ll never go hungry again. Moreover, we should start using successful strategies other countries used to decrease poverty rates. For example, how America is fighting poverty. President Lyndon B. Johnson declared war on poverty in 1964 in the United States, and now, a larger share of poor Americans are in their prime working years, and fewer are elderly.
In 1960, the poverty rate in the US was 22.1%, and in 2013 it became 14.5%. Through the Food Stamp Act of 1964 and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, to name a few, America started to win its war. Why not establish some of these ideas for countries like India or Africa? It could make an impact like it did with America.
But also, just money cannot solve these problems. We need proper action, and that takes time. Just giving money to organizations or foundations to solve things won’t work. Billionaires should try to come up with unique solutions and create something with all the resources and money they have which can solve these problems faster, and bring us forward. Like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. We need proper action, and not just money.
Donate time, energy, and resources to get things done. Try to take matters into your own hands and work hard again for mankind to make a leap. You’ve worked your butts off when you were kids to get this far, so shouldn’t you keep doing that? Just because you now have money doesn’t mean you should stop working hard. It’s as if you’re giving up. Maybe I don’t know how hard you’ve worked, but I do know that you shouldn’t stop working hard, even if you’ve succeeded in one thing.
There’s one more idea as well. Even though space travel should not be the top priority on our lists right now, billionaires and NASA could team-up. NASA has the resources and budget for missions, but very few people. Billionaires have the people. Together, they could save money and resources on both ends, and get more missions done. NASA’s missions are really slow, and if the two team up, not only could NASA speed up their missions, but the billionaires could also get their goals accomplished and have their people or even themselves in space. Plus, with the extra money that NASA previously had in their budget, now replaced with mostly billionaire’s money, the government could solve more problems in the US regarding hunger, poverty, and even global warming.
Then why is India going to Mars?
There have been many, many arguments about this topic, and I want to say, those who start it don’t understand.
India has a population of 1.36 billion people, and about 60% of people live on $3.10 a day. Despite this, India continues to plan Mars missions. Families barely have money to send their kids to school, or even feed them a proper meal, or even one at all. Some marry their daughters before they’re of legal age because they don’t want her to suffer and want her to have a happier life. They work several odd jobs, and the money they make from that is barely enough to keep themselves afloat, and yet they try every day. I can’t put myself in their shoes. No matter how much I write about their problems and struggles, I’m never going to understand. I’ll never know what it is like to go hungry for days, and not be able to sleep. I’ll never know what it’s like to have to drop out of school after a few years just so I could get a job and start earning money to help my family live. I’ll never know how it’ll feel if my parents or family members were sick or hungry, and not be able to properly help them. I’ll never be able to feel the pain and the actual struggles they go through unless I’ve gone through it as well. People who do, get angry at their government because they aren’t helping their families, simply because their kids are hungry, they’re sick, and they’re tired. And I would too. But, because of that, they won’t understand why.
The Indian government is trying to create an opportunity for their people. America is known for being a land of opportunities, and so many people from all around the world travel there just for that. Indians dominate engineering and medical fields, and make up so many other jobs. Why? Because there is opportunity here. India started space exploration to create an opportunity for their people. To stop the bleed that has been ongoing for years and years. Their talents are all being used in another country, so ISRO is made for them to stay. Why go all the way to work at NASA when you can work at ISRO, here?
If India didn’t focus on space exploration and worked more on decreasing poverty levels, what would happen? There would be a bigger bleed. More families and kids would thrive, and they would look for jobs and opportunities. However, since there aren’t enough opportunities available, they go to America. I’m not saying India shouldn’t focus on poverty, but that they should also focus on creating more opportunities, such as ISRO, so more Indians can stay and build the country.
But, opportunity is not the only reason ISRO exists. Going to Mars is crucial for India to make a name for itself. Before, India would be known for it’s bursting population and how most of it is in poverty. Or worse, simply looked down upon or not included in the landscape. But, as soon as word came out they were going to space, everyone was intrigued. Sure, people were doubtful, and even mocking them for trying, but India stood firm to say they were here. They were trying to make themselves heard and were trying to say, look at us, a country with a huge population, few resources, and most of which is in poverty, and yet we could go to the moon or even travel to Mars. They made themselves heard, and made themselves a part of the landscape.
The Billionaire Space Race is unnecessary, and in reality, a waste of money. While there are so many pending problems in the world such as roads that need to be built in Africa, poverty in India, and hunger all around the world, these billionaires are trying to be the first ones in space or establish a legacy in a shiny area. Who cares? You can go to space any time you want. In fact, it should be our last priority. We’re just making it out of a pandemic and have another variant coming around. People aren’t able to get vaccinated in certain areas or even fed! Families have to give up what little food they have for their kids so they can try to keep their families afloat. Africa needs roads to go to markets, school, jobs, doctors, and even for trade and specialization of tasks that us fundamental for economic growth. Instead of setting your eyes on a shiny toy, why not fix the broken ones that we have. Like Neil Armstrong said, a giant leap for mankind. Do it so we, as a world and species, can go forward. Not just you.
What’s the difference between a right and freedom? Well, a right is a legal, social, or ethical principle of freedom. It’s like a rule about what is allowed of people. To have a right is to have some sort of legal claim or just on something. Freedom is the power or RIGHT to act, speak, or think as one wants without interference or restraint. In the Constitution, we have something called The Bill of Rights, which are the first 10 Amendments. They guarantee rights and liberties to the individual such as freedom of speech, press, religion, assembly, and petition. but we’ll get to that later. So, knowing this, what’s the problem? Well, the problem is knowing when something is a right or freedom.
The first problem, vaccines. As we all know, we finally have a COVID-19 vaccine. While many would be impatiently, or even patiently, waiting to get vaccinated, others would be staying far away and opposing the vaccine. But why? Many cite that its religious beliefs. They believe that a vaccine won’t help them and that God will save them and give them a cure. Before I say anything else I want to share a story, but I don’t know the name of it is. You may have heard it before. So, the story goes that a flood is coming to a town. Everyone evacuates except a man. He stays inside his house and says that God will save him. As the water starts to rise, a man in a canoe comes to him and offers him to come with him. The man refuses and says that God will save him. A helicopter then comes and the crew throws a ladder. They tell the man to climb it but the man refuses, saying that God will save him. A person swims to the man and says to get on his back. The man refuses, and yet again says that God will save him. When the man drowns, he goes to heaven and asks why God didn’t save him. God says that he sent a canoe, helicopter, and even a person to save him but the man refused. This should be similar to the vaccines. The vaccine is something that God has “made”/created to save you from the pandemic. A cure or help can be shown in many different ways, so why not as a vaccine?
In my opinion, I think that vaccines should be mandatory order in America. In India, people are so used to getting vaccinated that they assume that it’s a part of life and that it’s natural. Plus, it’s a mandatory order. Why not establishing something similar to this in America? Since getting vaccinated is mandatory, it has been integrated and remembered as something normal and natural in life. It’s not really something to question or have doubts about. If we try something like this in America, would it also become thought of as something natural and a part of life?
If the government issues a mandatory order that everyone gets vaccinated, there will obviously be some complaints. For example, some people may complain that this will be a violation of their freedom of religion or press/thought. Like I said before, people may believe that vaccines aren’t going to help them or cure them and instead god will help them. Why don’t we try to convince them that a vaccine is a cure from God? ( I’m tying this back to my story concept from above.) Some other reasons why people aren’t getting vaccinated include distrust. The WHO organizes a press conference when a new vaccine is released. Of course, they answer questions that are common and from reporters, but why can’t there be any questions from people. Maybe they already do this, but why not hold a survey where you can write down your concerns and what you would like to have asked at the conference? I think that may reduce some tension of getting vaccinated and may cause more people to get vaccinated.
Anyway, I hope that you all are safe and doing well. Happy Holidays, and have a Wonderful Christmas. Let’s hope that 2021 will be much better.
Hello!!! You may wonder why my post is a little early today, and I will tell you why. I have only two weeks of summer left so my parents have decided to cut down my homework and my schedule so, I can finish my HW anytime I want, and be free after that. I’m choosing to finish it in the morning because, I am working on a secret project in Minecraft, which I will not name, because, it is a surprise. Anyway, this is part 2 of the Global Warming Blog. We will be talking more about global warming, climate change, and candidate opinions, and, also talk about the Greenhouse effect.
What is the greenhouse effect?? Well, the greenhouse effect is a process that warms the Earth’s surface. “When the Sun’s energy reaches Earth’s atmosphere, some is reflected back to space, and the rest is absorbed and re-radiated by greenhouse gases.” The absorbed energy warms up Earth’s atmosphere and the surface of the Earth. This is why cars heat up in the sun, as well. The sunlight passing through the windows of the car is mostly absorbed by the interior surfaces, then radiated back in the air as heat. It is a good thing, as it does absorb infrared radiation that the Earth emits, and then re-emits most of it, to warm the atmosphere to a comfortable temperature.
Anyway, in the last post, I know that we talked about the different candidates’ opinions on global warming- or climate change- and I forgot to include one thing that I always do, which is, share my opinion. In this post, I’m going to share what I think about global warming.
Well, as a kid, my teachers or peers are always talking about global warming and how the glaciers and ice caps are melting because of it. Over the years overhearing this over and over again, one can only believe it. So, this may be on my kid-student- learner side, when I say that I believe in global warming. My belief may possibly change when I later become an adult or even sooner, but for now, I believe in it. Scientists have been observing this for possibly years now, and science has proven to be right A LOT of times. Although we may not see it now, but, in the future, when more ice caps or glaciers have melted, the oceans will have risen, and we will get flooded slowly. Slowly, slowly. Of course, a way we can try to slow down this process is by reducing the number of fossil fuels we use. Instead of driving to work every day, if it is close by, try biking or walking instead. For lamps, turn them off and use sunlight. Electric cars, lights, solar lights, and more. Reduce the number of fossil fuels used, and ask whether it is really necessary to use them.
Anyway, I know that was short, but I think taht pretty much sums up my opinion. I don’t have a lot of thoughts on this subject, but, I definitely do believe in global warming. I think there is another part of this subject, as I have more facts on each candidates’ thoughts on this, or, I’ll have a new topic. BYE!
One question. What is global warming? What, really is global farming? These, my readers, are the questions, I have been asked about by my dad. We had a sort of discussion about this, and he was saying that global warming is fake and I don’t know what recycling means and why we should do it. He also said to write about each candidate and that. So, yeah. Let’s just get into this.
Global warming is, *ahem*, the unusually fast increase of Earth’s average surface temperature. This is due to the greenhouse gases- water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone. What are these gases? Well, they are from Earth’s atmosphere and trap heat. They let sunlight pass through the atmosphere but prevent the heat that the sunlight brings from leaving the atmosphere. Anyway, Global Warming has been caused by greenhouse gases released by people burning fossil fuels.
Global Warming has caused the melting of glaciers and ice sheets which causes sea levels to rise. Another possible effect includes large-scale changes in ocean circulation.
Now, my facts/ what I am writing about talks about the candidate’s opinions on CLIMATE CHANGE. I couldn’t find global warming, but, climate change does include temperature rising and sort of is related to global warming. Anyway, here we go!
Presidnet Trump “tweeted” that China created the concept of Global warming, and just for them, only to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive. He also said that the weather has been really cold- by the way these are probably old tweets- and “Global warming Hoaxsters” were forced to call it climate change to ” keep $ flow”. Now, these are tweets. Let’s talk about what he’s said in person or on an interview. Still continuing form that same link, President Trump says that climate change is “mythical” or “nonexistent” or an “expensive hoax”. So, teh quote aid about the Chinese creating climate change was said in 2012 and was later claimed to be a joke. So, he does believe that it is fake, but not that it was created to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.
What does Mr. Biden think about climate change? Well, I don’t have a clear answer, but I do have this. Joe Biden likes to say that he was among the first to introduce a climate change bill. Fact-checkers are agreeing to this. This was the Global Climate Protection Act of 1986. This bill, “directs teh president to establish a Task Force on the Global Climate to research,. develop, and implement a coordinated national strategy on the global climate.” Well, if he did try to do this, then he surely might believe in climate change and global warming. “In 2007 he supported higher fuel efficiency standards for motor vehicles, which passed, and in 2003 modest caps on greenhouse gases, which did not.” What did the second vote in 2003 do? Well, according to this helpful link, it was to reduce U.S emissions of greenhouse gases to, “2,000 levels by 2010.” The vote turned outa s 43 votes for yes, 55 for against, and 2 for not voting.
Anyway, that was a review of global warming and on what both candidates think about it. I do realize, now, that I didn’t talk a lot about Presidnet Trump’s side, so I am going to write more on Global warming greenhouse gases, and such tomorrow and include more on each candidate’s side. Bye!
