Media Interpretation on Health Promotion Research

Media Interpretation on Health Promotion Research Dwayne Potenteau A Critique of Marilynn Marchione (February 12, 2014) The Associated Press. Study ties weather to stroke rates: risk may rise with high humidity, cold, temperature swings Summary The purpose of the new article was to report on findings from a study claiming that extreme variances in seasonal weather patterns correlate to higher stroke rates. The focus on the information presented was from a study done by Judith H Lichtman and others at the Yale school of Public Health in New Haven Connecticut. In the article, the journalist Marilynn Marchione from the Associated Press, reports that through data analysis of two national databases the researchers, using a non experimental design, have found correlation between large changes in daily temperature and the risk of suffering a stroke. Elements that Influence Believability The article effectively states the main objective of the article stating the correlation between extreme variances in weather, humidity, and risk of a stroke. The next sentence incorporates data from the research to reinforce the article’s main claim stating â€Å"As it got warmer, risk fell – 3 percent for every 5 degrees, the study found†(Marchione, 2014, p.1). To further the credibility of the article, the author names and quotes Judy Lichtman, who is one of the study’s lead researchers. Marchione also adds numerous quotes throughout her article. By quoting the responses of physicians, Maricione does not infer, but relays the opinions of medical professional. Another factor that adds to the plausibility is what physiologically happens to the body during extreme warm and cold variances. The author incorporates explanations from different physicians on the effect weather has on the body. She adds the comments from several physicians, such as Dr Larry Gold stein who was part of the study, along with other physicians not associated with the research. Having multiple viewpoints from medical personnel who explain causation of stroke due to weather conditions strengthens her article and gives the reader further confidence in what she is saying. In addition to the explanations are some specific limitations of the study. Marchione notes limitations such as the omission participants due to a stroke caused by bleeding or aneurysm, and threshold values for temperatures.(Marchione, 2014, p.1). In commenting on the key omissions of the study, Marchione helps define the relationships of the study to the participants. Limitations in Generalizability and Hypothesis Loiselle, Profetto-McGrath, Polit, and Beck(2011, p.37) define generalizability as â€Å"the criterion used in a quantitative study to assess the extent to which study findings can be applied to other groups and settings†. The author’s first line in the article emphasizes a generality that is not found in any of the research findings. â€Å"There may be a link between weather and the risk of suffering a stroke, say researchers who analyzed climate trends and hospital records on millions of Americans† (Marchione, 2014, p.1). The opening sentence is an example of what philosophers define as a hasty generalization. The lack of relevant and specific information has the author rushing to a conclusion prior to obtaining and evaluating all the gathered data (Weber, Brizee, 2013). Contrary to the title, the objective of the research was to determine if there was an association between temperature, and Ischemic stroke hospitalization rates and in hospital mortality in a r epresentative sample. In addition, the hypothesis of the study was not clearly stated in the article. Loiselle defines the hypothesis as the predicted answer to expectations about relationships between study variables (Loiselle et al, p. 46). Coughlan, Cronin, and Ryan furthers the idea by stating that objectives, questions, and any hypothesis should be clearly stated in order to connect the purpose and any processes (Coughlan, Cronin, Ryan, 2007, p.660). By incorporating the hypothesis into the article, the author would have informed readers of what the researches methods were and help understand the results of their study. Limitations in Sample Size and Sample Plan Loiselle defines sample as a subset of the population under study (Loiselle et al, p. 47). The sample size is not mentioned in the article. Instead of millions, the sample size used was 157 130(Marchione, 2014, p.1). While a larger sample size better represents a target population, the misrepresentation of the sample size may give the reader a false account of the participants in the study. In addition to giving a false sample size, the article also does not mention that models were adjusted to match patient demographics. Age, sex, and race, along with seasonal changes, and comorbidity conditions were modified to fit with the target population. As a reader, the omission on selective criteria for the study participants can create uncertainty in understanding what population is susceptible. Another factor that was omitted from the article were specifics of the sampling plans. Loiselle defines sample plans as the specifics on how the sample will be selected and how many participants there will be† (Loiselle et all, p. 47). Nowhere in the article is there information that defines the mean average age of the target population mentioned was selected. In fact, the mean age was 71.6 years, and the article alludes to no age specific target. By omitting variables key to the research, the author inadvertently may lead to assumptions made by the reader on the age of population. Additional information was missing on how the sample plan specifically selected participants. The author claims that the research obtained from a national database, is the most detailed research on the issue but does not elaborate on any specifics. The researchers qualitative data was extracted from Nationwide Inpatient Sample database with a stratified sample of 20% . The article also provides no me ntion of data and the relationship to the results in the article. The researcher’s primary outcome was for discharged patients with ischemic stroke (ICN-9-CM 433, 434, 436), and death during the index hospitalization(Lichtman Wang, Leifheit-Limson Goldstein, p. 1). This missing information can misplace the context of the stud for the reader. Limitations in Validity/Reliability Loiselle defines validity as the ability to accurately assess the observations, and reliability refers to the ability to measure with different participants with consistency (Loiselle et all, p. 34). While information on the number of stroke patients, and quotes from the accredited individuals does add some credibility, the author fails to add any data on how or what processes were used. There is no mention of the desired outcome which was to determine if there were associations between temperature and ischemic stroke hospitalization rates and in hospital mortality within a U.S. population (Lichtman et al, p. 1). In addition, the reliability of data collection and was missing from the article. The information was collected from cohort and data sources (Litchman, et al, p. 1). The author provides only 2 sentences of statistical data to inform the reader. The lack of primary information which is favored over secondary or anecdotal data was another missing factor. Secondary data may lead to opinion, and have less credibility. While most information was presented in an interview type process, the overall empirical meaningful data was omitted. Limitations in Non Experimental Study Loiselle defines non experimental study as the way which researchers collect data without making changes or introducing treatments†(Loiselle et al, p. 44). Loiselle further contends that experimental studies are explicitly designed to test causal relationships (Loiselle et al, p. 44). The author did not mention the non experimental approach used by Judith Lichtman and her colleagues. Cohort studies were implemented using a retrospective study to select a specific population. Stamler and Yu confirm this by stating that cohort studies look at individual histories of people with a specific disease to identify commonalities and differences (Stamler Yu, p.150). The study is retrospective because the data was collected between 2010 – 2011. Stamler and Yu state that â€Å"These studies focus on individual s exposed to a particular health problem or potential stressor over time†(Stamler, Yu, 2012, p.150). While the article does comment on the data set extracted from 2010 to 2011, the author omitted the reasons for choosing the test population and did not add any clarity or expansion of the operational definitions. In omitting the basic defining characteristics of the quantitative study, the author did not inform the reader on give insight into the causal relationships between stroke, and varying climate. Since the Most of the information given in the article comes in the form of quotes from researchers. In the article, the author claims that â€Å"It is the largest and most detailed research on this issue†, but does not list the specifics of the target population(Marchione, p.1). The author over generalized the study, when in fact a specific population and target group had been selected. She is quoted as saying â€Å"The new study looked at stroke hospitalization, not just deaths, in a wider population using a federal database†(Marchione, 2014, p.1). The results in fact could not be generalized outside of the 157 130 patients that were age 71.6 or older, half being women, and 66.6% were of Caucasian ethnicity. Freiberger confirms the need for accuracy by stating that clarity not only on how the research was conducted, but who and how participants involved in the study must be present(Freiberger, p.1). Defining characteristics were also omitted in the article. Common cha racteristics of the test population included hypertension, diabetes, prior stroke, and cardiovascular disease. This lack of information in the article lends itself to reduced representativeness of the population and may lead a reader to not know the actual studied population. Discussion/Conclusion While the article does add information, the information presented, does not provide enough detailed elements of the study to clearly identify objectives, and any predictive hypothesis. First of all the objectives and hypothesis are never accurately stated in the article. Secondly the author does not include detailed sample plans or specify the correct sample size. Third, the validity and reliability specifics on where and how the data was obtained. Finally the author failed to expand on the non experimental study specifics. If these elements had been address to any breadth or depth within the article, the audience would have been better informed. General Public Paragraph Overall the study failed to give an accurate description of what the study’s research was trying to achieve. The author has over generalized to the point where most of the information in the article can be taken out of context. The amount of people in the study, the age group of people in the study, the ways in which the study was performed, and along with the overall results were omitted from the article. Therefore the reader is left up to their own phenomenology to decipher and interpret what the author was trying to get across. A person reading this article may be lead to conclusions that variances in temperature may lead an average person to develop a stroke. This type of incorrect representation of the study can be misleading as the author does not give false information but omits so much that errors in interpretation are inevitable. References Coughlan, M, Cronin, P, Ryan, F.(2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: quantitative research. British Journal of Nursing 16(11):658-663 Devane, D, Begley, C, Clarke, M. (2004). How many do I need? Basic principles of sample size estimation. Journal of Advanced Nursing 47(3), 297 – 302 Freiberger, M. (2010). Medical research plagued by bad reporting. .Plus magazine, Retrieved from http://plus.maths.org/content/os/latestnews/jan-apr10/reporting/index Litchman, J, Wang, Y, Leifheit-Limson, E, Goldstein, L. (2014). Association of average temperature and dew point with stroke hospitalization and mortality. Manuscript submitted for publication. Loiselle, C, Profetto-McGrath, J, Polit, D, Beck, C.(2011) Canadian essentials of nursing research (3rd Canadian ed.).Philadelphia,PA:Lippincott,Williams Wilkins. Marchione, M. (2014, February 12). Study ties weather to stroke rates; risk may rise with high humidity, cold, temperature swings. The associated press, Retrieved from http://ca.news.yahoo.com/study-ties-weather-stroke-rates-risk-may-rise-155625598.html Stamler, L, Yu, L. (2012). Community health nursing; A canadian perspective (3rd ed). Toronto. On: Pearson Weber, R. Brizee, A. (2013).Logical fallacies. The Owl at Purdue University. Retrieved from https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/659/03/

Plato, Love and Philosophy Essay

Love, in its narrowest and widest meaning and discussion became the most central element of one of the most discussed and merited dialogue of Plato, the Symposium. In the said dialogue, the characters including Phaedrus, Aristhopanes, Agathon, Eryximachus, Alicibiades and Aristodemus together with Socrates had expressed their judgment, analysis and opinions on the nature of love. As the usual trend on all Plato’s dialogue, the earlier speakers had expressed their own speech about the subject (i. e. Love or the nature of love). Later on, they shall be examined by Socrates himself using his own method (i. e. Socratic Dialectic) which will later debunk or prove the inconsistency of their arguments. This classic flow of the dialogue is seen in the Symposium as the last speech delivered by Socrates had proved that the earlier speeches of the said guests were proved inconclusive, untrue or ill-founded. If we can name one single thing that the Symposium had taught us, it is our redefinition and reconsideration on how we understand love and its nature. As said, earlier, Plato, through Socrates had managed to widen our conception of love from a simple romantic affair to one of the most celebrated activity of humanity. In short, the Symposium had provided us a better and more definite understanding of love and its nature. In this paper, we are going to state the significance of these ideas provided by Plato through Socrates and shall later relate its importance to other fields of knowledge that are significant in the Greek community. Prior to the reading and understanding Symposium, there is a great chance that a common man will see love as a mere affair between a man and a woman. Love can be regarded as the mere bond between lovers or couples. However, with the help of the speech of the said speakers such as Agathon, Aristopahnes, Alicibiades etc. , our perspective on how we see love had widen. It almost seems with our two eyes alone, we are not able to see the real nature of the world around us. However, as we read the insights, theories and opinions of these speakers, it now seems that a new order was introduced to us. Rather than seeing love as a mere affair between two lovers and couple, love become a renewed entity that is or is becoming the central element wherein almost all things revolves. How is this possible? How does a very common element or topic such as love managed to renew its definition from a mere humanly affair toward a divine concept. Well, Socrates is the one we must consult. According to Socrates (through Diotima), love is neither a god nor mortal. Arguing so, will backfire against the love’s inclination towards happiness and beauty. As argued, love is a spirit who bridges the gap between the realm of the gods and realm of the humans. This can be seen on how humans communicate to gods and how gods communicate to human. As a spirit, love is the messenger between the two. As stated, â€Å"Gods do not mix with men; they mingle and converse with us through spirits [love] instead, whether we are awake or asleep. † (Plato 203a) Prayers and rituals are made possible through the love of the humans on gods. Blessings and gifts are made possible through the love of the gods on humans. In this respect, Plato had provided us a new perspective on how we can see love. We learned here that love is neither a god nor godly affair, neither an exclusive affair of the mortal. Instead, love is an instrument that can be used the mortal or by the human to communicate with gods. At the same time, love is also the instrument of the gods to communicate with humans. This discussion will be important if we contextualize the Platonic idea that concerns the world of forms. The idea of Plato, of the people who he regarded as the lovers of wisdom corresponds to this concept. Being a lover, humans are drawn towards the pursuit of wisdom. As can be seen in Plato’s’ numerous dialogues (i. e. The Republic, Phaedrus and Symposium), the real wisdom cannot be found and revealed in the realm of the humans. In short the real wisdom lies on the realm that is beyond this world. In many respects, wisdom is attributed to gods and the world of forms which is a place wherein the real knowledge and the real wisdom can be learned. In this respect, being a lover or possessing love bridges humans and gods. Being a lover gives the human a chance to have a glimpse of the world beyond theirs (i. e. world of forms) and at the same time, gods are given the chance to attract humans towards them. Gods are also able to share the wisdom and knowledge they possess to humans through the help of love. Again, this proved the significant role played by love between gods and humans. Another significant move done by Socrates is his extension of love from mere sexual and romantic affairs towards a more intellectual pursuit. Reproduction or giving birth is made possible through the love between couples. However, on Socrates speech, love does not only produce another human being. Love produces ideas that are immortal and lasts despite the death of its parent. As stated, â€Å". . . would look up to Homer, Hesiod, and the other good poets with envy and admiration for the offspring they have left behind – offspring which because they are immortal themselves, provide their parents with immortal glory and remembrance. † (Plato 209d) Human beings are capable of immortality. The first is his or her bearing of an offspring and the other one is bearing of ideas, worthy of surviving for ages. From these concepts of Plato, through Socrates, they had provided us new lenses on how we can see and define love. Love had expanded from its usual definition that is concerned in mere romantic and sexual affairs. Love is now a tool of gods and humans to communicate. Lastly, love is a powerful force that can widen and heighten the awareness of humans to reach a higher goal in the world beyond this earth. In this sense, the highest form of lovers is the lovers who are engaged in the love and pursuit of wisdom. These new conception of love and later on, philosophy as a whole (since the highest form of lover are the lovers of wisdom) had a big implication on how we will see other fields of knowledge prominent in the Greek era. Philosophy, now being the highest form of activity of man outmatches any field of knowledge. Rhetoric, sciences, education and poetry are merely disciplines of field of knowledge that are just concerned to the material world. All of them are just trying to mirror images. In short, they are providing us an image of another image. Almost seems a picture that took another picture. For Plato’s standards, this is not that an honorable act. It is important to note that for him, we should be engage in the affairs that will give us a glimpse of the world beyond us, simply the world of forms. Fields like rhetoric, sciences, education and poetry are just affairs of the world and do not directly orient us towards the pursuit of knowledge that is heavenly. This explanation places philosophy among these disciplines. This is because philosophy or the love of wisdom itself pushes us to love the things that are beyond the earth. Philosophy obliges its followers to move pass what the eyes can see. Philosophy urges its student to discover what is really there and not what only manifest in the world. The earthly characteristics of these fields of knowledge are very clear. Rhetoric for example is concerned with the persuasion of its audience through words and arguments that are not necessarily true. As long as it rings good to its listeners and able to persuade them, rhetoric is acceptable. Sciences have an edge to rhetoric. Sciences try to answer question, removing biases as much as possible. However, we must still take note that the method of science are merely exclusive on what is observable. In short, sciences are for this earth alone. Education falls on the same pitfall. Education is concerned with the things that concerned our earthly existence, unable to tackle what is the world beyond us. Poetry suffers the same fate. Much of poetry is based on the feelings and emotions of the poet that are worldly. It is subject to the opinions of its creator and not influenced on the wisdom that philosophy offers us. Summing it up, Plato, through Socrates had provided us new standards in assessing disciplines of knowledge. This standard had given a very important influence on how we see love. The conception of love had expanded from a mere human affair towards heavenly affairs. This new standard had put philosophy on the foreground since philosophers are the lovers of wisdom. This provided as a new light, a new goal and a new end that we must all pursue. Plato had taught us that we must take a flight away from the earth that we live in and take a quest that is aimed for the discovery of the world of forms, which are beyond what our eyes can see. Works Cited Plato. Symposium. Michael Joyce (trans). 1961. Princeton University Press. NJ. Print. Accessed 21 May 2010.

My First Trip to Disney World

My first trip to Disney World My first trip to Disney World was really great. Disney World is in Orlando, Florida which is over 900 miles away from Columbia. We drove 15 hours to get there but we broke the trip up into two days. Although my grandfather and grandmother were tired when we got there, my sister Jazzy and my cousin Mychael were ready to go to Disneyworld. My grandfather took us straight to the resort and checked us in. Our suite was really nice. It was big with a big TV in the living room and a TV in each bedroom. My grandmother liked it because it had a washer and dryer by the kitchen.She washes clothes all the time. Then, my grandmother told us we would not be going to Disney World until tomorrow. They were tired from all of that driving but I was not tired at all. We went out to get groceries and some things my grandmother needed because we were staying for a week. While we were shopping, we ate dinner at a Perkins restaurant near our resort. My grandparents had been t o Orlando and Disney World a lot so they knew just where to go shopping. The next morning, our cousin Virgil came over and we all went to Disney World. We call our cousin Virgil â€Å"Veasey†.Veasey works at Disney World so we did not have to pay to get in. Veasey took us to Epcot Center where I saw this huge silver ball. Veasey left us to go to work and we went into the ball. It was a ride that taught us about the history of technology. They had robots that looked like people and animals dressed up like people from the time each scene was talking about. We rode in cars like the kind on a roller coaster and a man told us about each scene when we got there. It was a great ride but it smelled like a cave and was smoky some of the time.After we left the ball, we went into a nice building where they had games and a really cool place that had sodas from all over the world. Some of the sodas were good but some were awful so I threw the awful ones away. It was hot outside so I did n ot want to leave the soda place but my grandparents wanted to walk around the â€Å"Showcase of Nations† which goes around a big lake. We walked around the lake and had lunch at the American building. It looks like Independence Hall in Philadelphia but it looked bigger to me. We ate hamburgers, fries and soda.At least this soda tasted better than the ones we sampled. After we ate lunch, we rode the monorail and a ferry to the Magic Kingdom. There we rode a lot of rides and walked around. I liked the â€Å"Small World† ride and ET. That evening, we saw fireworks at Cinderella’s castle. The fireworks show started with Tinkerbell flew across the sky on a rope. That was so great. After the fireworks, we went back to the resort. I was tired but excited for tomorrow. We were going to Universal Studios. But my fist time at Disney World was even better than I expected.

Should You Apply to Graduate School With a Low GPA

GPA questions are tough. Theres no guarantee when it comes to graduate school admissions. While some graduate programs apply cutoff GPA scores in order to weed out applicants, this is not always the case. We can make predictions, but there are many factors at play — even factors that have nothing to do with you can influence the availability of slots in a given program and your chances of getting in. Now, remember that graduate programs look at your overall application. Grade point average (GPA) is one part of that application. Several other factors, outlined below, are also important components of the graduate application. Graduate Record Exam (GRE) Grade point average tells the committee what you did in college. Scores on the Graduate Record Exam (GRE) are important because the GRE measures an applicants aptitude for graduate study. Academic performance in college often does not predict academic achievement in grad school, so admissions committees look to GRE scores as a primary indicator of applicants capacities for graduate study. Admissions Essays Admissions essays are another important part of the package that can make up for a low GPA. If you address the topic and express yourself well it can allay concerns that arise because of your GPA. Your essay may also offer you the opportunity to provide context for your GPA. For example, if extenuating circumstances harmed your academic performance during one semester. Beware of griping about your GPA or attempting to explain four years of poor performance. Keep all explanations concise and dont draw attention away from the central point of your essay. Recommendation Letters Recommendation letters are critical to your admissions package. These letters demonstrate that faculty are behind you — that they view you as grad school material and support your academic plans. Stellar letters can trump a less-than-stellar GPA. Take the time to nurture relationships with faculty; do research with them. Seek their input on your academic plans. GPA Composition Not all 4.0 GPAs are equal. The value placed on GPA depends on what courses youve taken. If you take challenging courses, then a lower GPA can be tolerated; a high GPA based on easy courses is worth less than a good GPA based on challenging courses. In addition, some admissions committees compute a GPA for major coursework to assess a candidates performance in the courses that are deemed essential to the field. All in all, if you have a solid application package — good GRE scores, an excellent admissions essay, and informative and supportive letters -- you can offset the effects of a less-than-stellar GPA. That said, be cautious. Carefully select schools to which to apply. Also, choose safety schools. Consider delaying your application to work hard to increase your GPA (especially if you dont gain admission this time around). If youre looking at doctoral programs also consider applying to masters programs (with the intention of possibly transferring to a doctoral program).