Thursday, May 31, 2007
Last Week
I was one of the few apparently who didn't think the exam was terribly easy. I would have hoped there would have been more lecture notes or perhaps class descussion on all the computer geek stuff. Mind you, havin had dramas and moving house this week, on top of the usual didn' leave me with a lot of study time so maybe I was just a stressed underprepared mess and it was as easy as people tell me. I have learnt a lil about computers but no computer geek here. Did get a kick out of the idea that my essay toppic is now the latest controversal tv show
week 6 stuff
A very Australian Kangaroo-obviously
News:
JAPAN today failed in its bid to lift a moratorium on commercial whaling at the International Whaling Commission and warned it could pull out of the group.
The key to great communication is to understand the language it is written in
Wouldn't it be nice to be the celeb arriving to the casino in this style?
Keeping this moment with friends safe forever
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Writtin a letter
Is this stuff hard you ask? Well not entirely. I have studied Business management at Tafe and for a whole year had a subject on computers. Much of all that suff I had already done but for me it's a case of if I don't use it I loose it, so I'll admit I'm a bit rusty and not so good as tasks got a lil trickey. Although obviously these tasks are very useful and an asset to know.
The Internet’s Influence on ORGAN TRANSPLANT:
The internet has changed the world of communications forever; as a result, changing businesses and lives in more ways than some of us may realize. The capability to broadcast information, allows persons to interact on a global scale and enabling the medical field to evolve.
An increasing number of patients are dying as they wait for the organ donation that can save them (Robert, A 2002). Others choose not to wait and are instead turning towards the internet. It would seem that almost anything can be found or bought over the internet, including organs.
This latest development in organ donation opens up a foreground for much ethical and perhaps legal debate. Why should some individuals be considered of any greater importance that others? Is this any different to jumping the queue because your friend or relative is willing and able to assist you with an organ?
Every day, the internet is facilitating this new approach to organ transplant by bringing people together from all over the world. Now that these two all powerful technologies have joined forces, complete strangers are donating their organs, going under the knife for someone they have never met.
There are a number of web sites that assist these desperate patients. One such site is Matching Donors. Com which was created by Jeremiah Lowney, medical director of Canton in 2003, after the death of someone he knew who waiting on an organ. As a result, Lowney has successfully joined over thirty individuals together for life saving transplants.
Lowney himself has recognized that there has been some who have expressed their concerns regarding the ethics of this system however he freely defends it as a necessity with the waiting list jumped from 89 000 to a shocking 31 000 in 1993. He continues his heated argument to throw back the question of the ethics in allowing 17 people to die per day as they anxiously wait for a donation (Powell, A 2005).
It is not just the community or the family of those waiting dutifully for organs that protest against the ethics surrounding this latest development. Lowney’s biggest critics are medical professionals and (perhaps not surprisingly) the chair of the ethics committee at the American Society of transplant Surgeons. Whilst the critics claim to sympathies with the patients and their families, they are mindful of the fairness ( Powell, A 2005).
As a person’s body parts are their own, Powell’s article also looks at the argument that they are therefore entitled to do with it as they choose; making it a right for an individual person to make a personal donation. It is no different to one they would otherwise make where a family member or loved one would require it (deemed ethically acceptable). The hesitation still surrounds the sale of organs and a further need to guard against and monitor this ( Powell, A 2005).
It is also a concern that the internet has opened a door for organ donation; allowing/suggesting the sale of organs from live donors, which is illegal. There are a number of organs or parts of organs that can be donated without harming the individual making the donation. It is suggested that these laws have been put in place to protect patients. Further concerns are for those less fortunate families and individuals who may undergo painful and risky procedures for monetary gain. Where these still take place terms such as monetary gifts or donations are used; rather than payment or fee for organs (Bailey, R 2001).
Where monetary gain was once suspicious and one of the greatest concerns in the field of transplant, the internet has introduced additional ethical issues. The concerns revolving around patients jumping the que and where organs could be better used to save a different individual who may in more urgent need.
The argument for allowing payment for organ donation would be the assumed increase in donations therefore increasing the number of lives saved. Where this was facilitated, the quality of organs being used and the mental, physical and financial state of the donor would have to be considered. This pricing of organs may result in a shift (good or bad) on the black market (Eisenberg, 2007).
“The Journal of the American Medical Association published its "Consensus Statement on the Live Organ Donor" in its December 13, 2000, issue which offers this guidance for determining when living organ donations are appropriate:
"The person who gives consent to be a live organ donor should be competent, willing to donate, free from coercion, medically and psychosocially suitable, fully informed of the risks and benefits as a donor, and fully informed of the risks, benefits, and alternative treatment available to the recipient. The benefits to both donor and recipient must outweigh the risks associated with the donation and transplantation of the living donor organ."” (Bailey, R 2001).
In defense of the internet sites that exist so far, facilitating strangers to donate organs, they are not based on payment. They do heat the argument of jumping the que; but are also saving lives and giving organs that without the site may not have been saved.
The need for organ donation is painfully obvious with the reports of the Chinese army harvesting body parts. Tragically this involves organs being taken from unwilling live participants (Agence France Presse, 2007).
The Matching donors site includes feedback from those that have received organs, it explains the procedure and it also provides links to news reports and articles related to their service. This particular site does not promote the sale of organs; simply an avenue for persons who need them to plead their case to strangers in the hope a suitable donor will read it and feel compelled to assist them.
The internet is constantly changing; no one individual or body claims ownership of the internet, further complicating the regulation process. A news provider, a postal service, sales/advertising service and both radio and television stations are available via the internet. The diversity of this medium therefore blurs the lines of responsibility with regards to regulation. Ethical issues will continually be raised and debated regarding the manner in which the internet is utilized, however little can be done to change it. Sites like Matching Donors that are not illegal but pose ethical issues that are it would seem here to stay; for good or for bad.
References
Journals:
Arnold, R; Bartlett, S; Bernat, J; Colonna, J 2002, ‘Financial incentives for cadaver organ donation: an ethical reappraisal’
G:\New Communication Technologies\Ovid Arnold Transplantation, Volume 73(8)_April 27, 2002_1361-1367.htm
Rowell, M.R, Johnson, P.T, Fishman, E.K 2007 ‘Informatics in Radiology: Radiology Education in 2005: World Wide Web Practice Patterns, Perceptions, and Preferences of Radiologists’ 27: 563-571.
Sparcia, G, Cannizzaro, F, D’Alessandro, D.M2007, ‘Informatics in Radiology: Initial Experiences in Radiology e-Learning’ 27: 573-581
Internet:
Abc News Story: Retrieved on 04/05/2007 from
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=1272638
Basler, B, Hudnall, C 2006 ‘AARP Bulletin: Winning the waiting game’ Retrieved on 04/05/2007 from http://www.aarp.org/bulletin/yourhealth/waiting_game.html
Bailey, R 2001 ‘Reasononline: The Case of Selling Human organs’ Retrieved on 7/05/2007 fromhttp://www.reason.com/news/show/34799.html
HARVARD GAZETTE ARCHIVES, 2005 Retrieved on 04/05/2007 from
http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2005/05.19/09-organ.html
Einsberg, D, MD, 2007 ‘Society Today: Does Jewish law permit donating a Kidney? E:\New Communication Technologies\Live Organ Donation.htm
Leiner, B.M, Vinton G. Cerf, Clark, D.D Kahn, R.E, Kleinrock, E, Lynch, D.C Jon Postel, Roberts, L.G Wolf, S 1999 Brief History of the Internet Retrieved on 6/05/2007 from http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.NI/9901011
Matching Donars, 2007 Retrieved on 04/05/2007 from
G:\New Communication Technologies\Organ Donor, Organ Transplant, Organ Donor Services, Matching Donors.htm
Matching Donrs, 2007 Retrieved on 04/05/2007 from
http://www.matchingdonors.com/life/index.cfm
News.com.au: ‘Chinese Army Harvesting body parts’ 2007 Retrieved on 10/05/2007 from
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21152231-1702,00.html
An increasing number of patients are dying as they wait for the organ donation that can save them (Robert, A 2002). Others choose not to wait and are instead turning towards the internet. It would seem that almost anything can be found or bought over the internet, including organs.
This latest development in organ donation opens up a foreground for much ethical and perhaps legal debate. Why should some individuals be considered of any greater importance that others? Is this any different to jumping the queue because your friend or relative is willing and able to assist you with an organ?
Every day, the internet is facilitating this new approach to organ transplant by bringing people together from all over the world. Now that these two all powerful technologies have joined forces, complete strangers are donating their organs, going under the knife for someone they have never met.
There are a number of web sites that assist these desperate patients. One such site is Matching Donors. Com which was created by Jeremiah Lowney, medical director of Canton in 2003, after the death of someone he knew who waiting on an organ. As a result, Lowney has successfully joined over thirty individuals together for life saving transplants.
Lowney himself has recognized that there has been some who have expressed their concerns regarding the ethics of this system however he freely defends it as a necessity with the waiting list jumped from 89 000 to a shocking 31 000 in 1993. He continues his heated argument to throw back the question of the ethics in allowing 17 people to die per day as they anxiously wait for a donation (Powell, A 2005).
It is not just the community or the family of those waiting dutifully for organs that protest against the ethics surrounding this latest development. Lowney’s biggest critics are medical professionals and (perhaps not surprisingly) the chair of the ethics committee at the American Society of transplant Surgeons. Whilst the critics claim to sympathies with the patients and their families, they are mindful of the fairness ( Powell, A 2005).
As a person’s body parts are their own, Powell’s article also looks at the argument that they are therefore entitled to do with it as they choose; making it a right for an individual person to make a personal donation. It is no different to one they would otherwise make where a family member or loved one would require it (deemed ethically acceptable). The hesitation still surrounds the sale of organs and a further need to guard against and monitor this ( Powell, A 2005).
It is also a concern that the internet has opened a door for organ donation; allowing/suggesting the sale of organs from live donors, which is illegal. There are a number of organs or parts of organs that can be donated without harming the individual making the donation. It is suggested that these laws have been put in place to protect patients. Further concerns are for those less fortunate families and individuals who may undergo painful and risky procedures for monetary gain. Where these still take place terms such as monetary gifts or donations are used; rather than payment or fee for organs (Bailey, R 2001).
Where monetary gain was once suspicious and one of the greatest concerns in the field of transplant, the internet has introduced additional ethical issues. The concerns revolving around patients jumping the que and where organs could be better used to save a different individual who may in more urgent need.
The argument for allowing payment for organ donation would be the assumed increase in donations therefore increasing the number of lives saved. Where this was facilitated, the quality of organs being used and the mental, physical and financial state of the donor would have to be considered. This pricing of organs may result in a shift (good or bad) on the black market (Eisenberg, 2007).
“The Journal of the American Medical Association published its "Consensus Statement on the Live Organ Donor" in its December 13, 2000, issue which offers this guidance for determining when living organ donations are appropriate:
"The person who gives consent to be a live organ donor should be competent, willing to donate, free from coercion, medically and psychosocially suitable, fully informed of the risks and benefits as a donor, and fully informed of the risks, benefits, and alternative treatment available to the recipient. The benefits to both donor and recipient must outweigh the risks associated with the donation and transplantation of the living donor organ."” (Bailey, R 2001).
In defense of the internet sites that exist so far, facilitating strangers to donate organs, they are not based on payment. They do heat the argument of jumping the que; but are also saving lives and giving organs that without the site may not have been saved.
The need for organ donation is painfully obvious with the reports of the Chinese army harvesting body parts. Tragically this involves organs being taken from unwilling live participants (Agence France Presse, 2007).
The Matching donors site includes feedback from those that have received organs, it explains the procedure and it also provides links to news reports and articles related to their service. This particular site does not promote the sale of organs; simply an avenue for persons who need them to plead their case to strangers in the hope a suitable donor will read it and feel compelled to assist them.
The internet is constantly changing; no one individual or body claims ownership of the internet, further complicating the regulation process. A news provider, a postal service, sales/advertising service and both radio and television stations are available via the internet. The diversity of this medium therefore blurs the lines of responsibility with regards to regulation. Ethical issues will continually be raised and debated regarding the manner in which the internet is utilized, however little can be done to change it. Sites like Matching Donors that are not illegal but pose ethical issues that are it would seem here to stay; for good or for bad.
References
Journals:
Arnold, R; Bartlett, S; Bernat, J; Colonna, J 2002, ‘Financial incentives for cadaver organ donation: an ethical reappraisal’
G:\New Communication Technologies\Ovid Arnold Transplantation, Volume 73(8)_April 27, 2002_1361-1367.htm
Rowell, M.R, Johnson, P.T, Fishman, E.K 2007 ‘Informatics in Radiology: Radiology Education in 2005: World Wide Web Practice Patterns, Perceptions, and Preferences of Radiologists’ 27: 563-571.
Sparcia, G, Cannizzaro, F, D’Alessandro, D.M2007, ‘Informatics in Radiology: Initial Experiences in Radiology e-Learning’ 27: 573-581
Internet:
Abc News Story: Retrieved on 04/05/2007 from
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=1272638
Basler, B, Hudnall, C 2006 ‘AARP Bulletin: Winning the waiting game’ Retrieved on 04/05/2007 from http://www.aarp.org/bulletin/yourhealth/waiting_game.html
Bailey, R 2001 ‘Reasononline: The Case of Selling Human organs’ Retrieved on 7/05/2007 fromhttp://www.reason.com/news/show/34799.html
HARVARD GAZETTE ARCHIVES, 2005 Retrieved on 04/05/2007 from
http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2005/05.19/09-organ.html
Einsberg, D, MD, 2007 ‘Society Today: Does Jewish law permit donating a Kidney? E:\New Communication Technologies\Live Organ Donation.htm
Leiner, B.M, Vinton G. Cerf, Clark, D.D Kahn, R.E, Kleinrock, E, Lynch, D.C Jon Postel, Roberts, L.G Wolf, S 1999 Brief History of the Internet Retrieved on 6/05/2007 from http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.NI/9901011
Matching Donars, 2007 Retrieved on 04/05/2007 from
G:\New Communication Technologies\Organ Donor, Organ Transplant, Organ Donor Services, Matching Donors.htm
Matching Donrs, 2007 Retrieved on 04/05/2007 from
http://www.matchingdonors.com/life/index.cfm
News.com.au: ‘Chinese Army Harvesting body parts’ 2007 Retrieved on 10/05/2007 from
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21152231-1702,00.html
Thursday, April 26, 2007
3D Chat
I had a go of active wolrds an attempted a second but it was taking forever to find a name I could use- decided I wasn't so keen to find it anyway. Can't say that I am a big fan. I suspect that is because I am not a person that is into computer games and this was kind of merging of the two. I kept getting lost and thought it was more of a lame game than an interactive chat site. As I have mentioned, I have not experienced a lot of these type of sights but have not thus far found them to be to my liking. I found that with all the exploring and game playing there was little room for the interaction part. I personally would much prefer to engauge instantly on IM or to cominicate a bit deeper with blog type sites and myspace.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Week 5
Unconventional: Found this photo to be of somethink out of the ordinary shown in a unconventional styled photo.
Armor-clad Samurai freaks charge on foot during a reenactment of a battle scene in the old age of civil wars as a part of spring festival in Fuefuki, 200 km northwest of Tokyo, Sunday, April 15, 2007. The annual event drew over 900
Summer: What better depicts a hot summers day than a an image of someone cooling off-and I just loved this shot
News: Wow! Go China, check out the new high speed train service. It would appear that it is definitely built for speed.
High Tech: A ever so highly technical (and boring) Multi purpose dental laser. Must have dentists on the brain; went this week.
Friends: A few of the girls and I out for dinner, and descovered a timer on the cammera. Had lots of fun taking photos and no one had to be on the other side of the lense-bonus!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)