BLOG 12:

Summary of:

“The amounts of money gabled in the three areas were compared for the weekend of the odorization and for the weekends before and after. The amount of money gambled in the slot machines surrounding the first odorant during the experimental weekend was significant greater than the amount gambled in the same area during the weekends before and after the experiment, possibly true due olfactory recall. The increase appeared greater on Saturday, when the concentration of odorant was higher. The amounts of money gambled in the slot machines surrounding the second odorant and in the control area did not change significantly compared with the weekends before and after the odorization” (Hirsch 585-594).


In his experiment conducted in one of the casinos in Las Vegas, Hirsch proved that olfactory stimuli increases person’s attitude towards gambling (585-594).


Hirsch, A. R. (1995). Effects of ambient odors on slot-machine usage in a Las Vegas casino. Psychology and Marketing, 12(7), 585-594.

BLOG 11:

Paraphrase of:

“An illusion of control is defined as an expectancy of a personal success probability inappropriately higher than the objective probability would warrant” (Langer 316).


According to Langer, some people believe that outcomes of many life events and uncontrollable situations can be externally influenced by them. These individuals identify themselves as being capable to influence life events, such as achievement, happiness or health status without anyone’s approval. He calls this belief as an “illusion of control” (Langer 316).


Langer, Ellen J. “The illusion of control.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 32. 2 (1975): 311-328.

BLOG 10:

Response to:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2006/apr/18/highereducation.uk3

Government unveils plans for two-year degrees
Alexandra Smith

Students will be able to gain an honours degree in just two years under government plans to boost numbers at university and ease the worsening burden of student debt.

Traditional three-year degrees in a range of subjects will be compressed by a year from September when universities including Kent, Leeds Metropolitan, Derby, Staffordshire and University College Northampton begin trials of shorter courses in business, sport and biomedical sciences.

It is expected that students eager to start their careers earlier without the burden of large student debt will forego summer holidays and study for an extra term to complete their degrees in the shorter time.

A system of American-style credit accumulation will also allow students to take study breaks and take longer to complete degrees.

The government introduced two-year foundation degrees in September 2001 to attract more students into higher education. The foundation degrees have a vocational focus and students could then opt to take a third year to qualify for an honours award.
Under the trial, students could also study online while at work in a push to raise the number of adults with degree qualifications.

The higher education minister, Bill Rammell, said the changes would mark a revolution for higher education in the UK.

Mr Rammell told the Times: "For many young people the traditional three-year degree allowed for a range of experience of immense personal value.

"But just because a model fits some people well doesn't mean it fits all and increasingly we live in a world where people expect that service providers will have scope to offer flexibility, not uniformity. A model of full-time provision that dictates that an honours degree must last three years rather than a much more intensive but shorter period of time is, ultimately, supplier driven."

The National Union of Students (NUS) said the trial was an acknowledgement that debt could be deterring students from university. The NUS vice-president of education, Julian Nicholds, questioned the motives behind announcing the plans just months before top-up fees are introduced.

He said: "We know from recent reports that applications are set to drop this year, but attention may diverted from this by interest in shorter degrees. This would be very convenient for the government who are evidently concerned about meeting their pledge to widen access.

"Whilst these proposals may offer up more choice to some students, intensive studying over a two-year period might not be an option for those who have to supplement their income through part-time work. We also hold concerns about how the government will cram three to four years of study into a shorter timeframe without adversely affecting the quality of degrees."

The government has set an ambitious target for 50% of 18 to 30-year-olds in higher education by 2010.

However critics have warned that there is little chance of meeting the target in four years' time as the figure currently stands at about 43%.

The push for shorter degrees has, however, provoked fears that it could lead to the "dumbing down" of academic standards. Alan Smithers, of Buckingham University, told the Daily Mail that ministers would need to be careful they did not jeopardise standards.

Professor Smithers said: "The problem with much of government higher education policy is that it is driven by the 50% target which seems to have been plucked out of the air. The government is very concerned about making it work and seems less concerned with the quality of what is on offer than 'putting bums on seats'."

He said his university already offered intensive two-year degrees and the qualifications were successful because they were "validated and valued by employers."


Believing:

I believe that that the two-year-degree-program is advantageous for many people. First of all, studying one year less at the university means one year of sooner employment, allowing the students practically broaden their field of knowledge. It demonstrates how reduced study time at the university could be supplemented by beneficial experience in organisation. Secondly, the reduction of the three-year program to two increases the proportion of young people with higher education. Accordingly, more students will be attracted to receive a higher degree in a shorter space of time. Thirdly, reduced degree program allows students to ease their debt burden, so that the education will be cheaper, and the students don’t have to waste their time looking for jobs and earning money to cover their loan.


Doubting:

The major problem students face during two-year degree concerns their coursework. Because the students have to master certain amount of material equivalent to three-year degrees, their personal workload will be very intensive. Consequently, it can cause much stress and less time for relaxation. Furthermore, “short” two-year program also signals an end of long student holidays, so that the students can’t rejuvenate themselves for the new term or take a three-month internship during three-month break period. Finally, two-year degree leaves a little room for some essential aspects in students life such as more networking with their own friends at the university and getting involved with student clubs, academic societies, professors. As a result, the students lose an opportunity to establish lifelong professional contacts.

BLOG 9:

Response to:


http://www.biconews.com/?p=13491

Cutting Financial Aid Should Be Off the Table
By Dave Merrell

As the economic crisis deepens, Haverford has difficult budget decisions on the horizon. A shrinking endowment has Haverford facing cascading budget shortfalls in the coming years.

Financial aid, long a cornerstone of a Haverford education, could be facing cuts. Unfortunately, in the time when applicants need more aid, the school is not in a position to give it.

There have been no indications from the administration or the board of managers that financial aid will be changed, but there have not been any assurances that Haverford is still committed to it, either. Word from the powers that be will go a long way towards easing the minds of concerned students and parents.

Especially in this economic climate, financial aid should be the single untouchable budget item. Students who are academically qualified to attend Haverford should not be held back by their finances. Nothing is more important to the mission of the college than providing generous aid to the applicants who need it.

Every effort must also be made to ensure that current students can afford to continue their education, even if financial circumstances back home change. Few families are escaping from the crisis unscathed, and many will need to have their financial aid packages changed in order to stay at Haverford.

Again, there is no indication from the administration that financial aid packages won’t be increased for students who need them, but assurances would be nice.
If this means that other initiatives need to be scaled back, then so be it.

Haverford’s master plan is ambitious — and expensive. Expanding the facilities made sense when the College’s endowment was growing, but now maintaining the student body must take priority over maintaining the physical plant.

Likewise, Haverford’s expansive plan to add faculty (the Faculty Committee on Academic Enrichment) should take a back seat to keeping the school affordable. Searches already underway must be completed, but after that money should be targeted for student aid over faculty expansion.

If financial aid must be cut, then Haverford should first roll back its loan-free initiative. Going loan-free was a major coup for Haverford, earning the school praise from around the country, but it is meaningless if it could force us to offer less total aid to students.

The other aspect of Haverford’s financial aid — our status as a need-blind institution — should not even be on the table. Making sure every academically qualified student is granted admission is more than just a selling point; it gets to the core of the school’s identity.

Given the extent of the economic crisis, I realize that nothing in the budget is truly untouchable. I also do not pretend to know the specifics of Haverford’s budget. I do know, however, that Haverford’s financial aid policies are integral to its identity. In this time of need, the college should make every effort to preserve — or even increase — financial aid.


Believing:

I agree with the author that the college should make every effort to preserve financial aid because by this way, many people can get a chance to receive an education. There are people of lower income who cannot afford themselves to go to the university because of the high price of education. I think if the government makes investments in education of poor class, they will certainly pay their way in form of high qualified specialists who will make a contribution to the economy of the country later through investing their knowledge in it.


Doubting:

I think that financial aid should be cut off for those students who study longer and cannot fulfil the requirements of the program. If these students pay on their own, they will graduate on time. Moreover, their performance will increased since they are spending their own funds for education. This will raise the financial resources for higher education.

BLOG 8:

Response to:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/opedne_faisal_k_061205_universal_declaratio.htm

Universal Declaration of Human Rights: A Western Construct?
by Faisal Kutty

A Western Construct?

Fifty-eight years after the universal declaration of human rights was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, the debate continues as to whether the document is truly universal.

Upon its adoption on Dec. 10, 1948, former U.S. First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, chair of the commission on human rights, expressed her hope it would become "the Magna Carta of all mankind." Ironically, as was the fate with the "great charter" of 1215, the declaration has not fully lived up to its name.

The declaration was challenged from its very inception. The commission's first draft attracted 168 amendments from various countries. However, the final document was almost unchanged from the initial draft tabled by the commission. Forty-eight countries voted in favour, while eight countries -- Poland, Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, the Ukraine, Yugoslavia, South Africa, Saudi Arabia and the Soviet Union -- abstained and expressed reservations.


The conflicting views on the declaration have become more pronounced recently as human rights take a more central role in international and domestic forums. The critics of the current international human rights standards range from cultural relativists and Islamists to proponents of Asian values. They contend the existing international human rights regime is deeply influenced by the western experience. The spotlight on the individual, the focus on rights divorced from duties, the emphasis on legalism to secure these rights and the greater priority given to civil and political rights are all hallmarks of the western bias. In contrast, the Asian (including Buddhist, Taoist, Confucian, Hindu, etc.) and Islamic conceptions would emphasize community, duties to one another and society and some even place greater emphasis on economic, social and cultural rights.

The philosophical and ideological underpinnings defining human relationship with each other and society in many non-western societies are at variance with our fixation with individualism or what some would call radical individualism.

The focus on individual rights -- in some cases to the detriment of the family and community -- is not consistent with many non-western outlooks on human rights.

Confucian scholar Tu Weiming writes: "Confucian humanism offers an account of the reasons for supporting basic human rights that does not depend on a liberal conception of persons."

However, this in no way implies that such views are totally devoid of consideration for the individual. The substructures of human rights in some non-western conceptions attempt to establish equilibrium between individualism and collectivism in ways that are different from ours. Far from being a contradiction, as documented by collectivists theorists such as Harry Triandis, individualism and collectivism can coexist and in fact can thrive together.

From the Confucian perspective, for instance, Weiming notes: "Human rights are inseparable from human responsibilities."

Although in the Confucian tradition, duty-consciousness is more pronounced than rights-consciousness -- to the extent that the Confucian tradition underscores self-cultivation, family cohesiveness, economic well-being, social order, political justice and cultural flourishing -- it is a valuable spring of wisdom for an understanding of human rights broadly conceived."

The natural law origin of the declaration also conflicts with the religious view that rights are derived from divine authority. Brazil's suggestion the declaration ought to have referred to a transcendent entity was rejected outright during the debate leading to the declaration's adoption. One argument says the denial of divine authority is essential to make the philosophy underlying rights protection universal. How can something be universal when it rejects the view of a significant component of the world's population -- not only eastern religions but also adherents of Christianity and Judaism -- who believe in some form of divine authority? Why should the assumption of secular elite be imposed on everyone?

The extensive list of fundamental human rights is subject to certain general limitations, set out in articles 29 and 30 of the declaration. Article 29 (2), for instance, provides for "limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society." The different philosophies and views undoubtedly will produce equally valid interpretations of such restrictive articles and human rights standards in general.

A strong argument can be made that the current formulation of international human rights constitutes a cultural structure in which western society finds itself easily at home. This has led some western human-rights scholars to arrogantly conclude that most non-western societies lack not only the practice of human rights but also the very concept. This clearly overlooks the fact that we can only claim to be better than others because we use our own values and standards to measure them.

Dominance cannot be equated with the truth, though it is easy to get caught up in the old confusion between might and right.

It is important to acknowledge and appreciate that other societies may have equally valid alternative conceptions of human rights. Exiled Tunisian Islamist leader Rachid Ghannouchi once told a reporter: "I think a universal concept of human rights must come from the philosophical vision of all peoples."

The call for a more inclusive conception is laudable, particularly given that even proponents of the other views acknowledge that there are certain universal values. For instance, the jailed former deputy prime minister of Malaysia, Anwar Ibrahim, a proponent of both Asian values and Islam, writes in his book, The Asian Renaissance, "To say that freedom is western . . . is to offend our own traditions as well as our forefathers, who gave their lives in the struggle against tyranny and injustice."

Claims of universality do not ensure universal acceptance. Accommodating the various conceptions within the international framework may or may not be plausible. The difficulty of the task should not prevent us from grappling with this issue. At least from this exercise we may in fact learn that there are indeed certain truly universal ideals and principles shared by us all.

Indeed, the belief that the current international human rights regime is derived exclusively from the ideological framework of the west is a major obstacle in its acceptance as a truly universal vision. As suggested by a number of human rights scholars, the United Nations must initiate a project to rethink and reformulate the conception of human rights, taking into account the different philosophies that share this planet.

The only way to ensure universal acceptance of and compliance with international human rights law is by removing the crutch used for so long by human rights violators -- that human rights as we know it today is a western construct.


Believing:

I do not think that all the western values can be applied to non-western societies because there are clear and often sharp differences between the values and traditions of both societies. While Westerners value the individual’s rights and personal freedom, Easterners appreciate responsibilities to the community. This includes respect for the elderly and authority, obedience, commitment to family, clan, community, country that distinguishes significantly non-western culture and its way of living from that of western. In my opinion, individual rights are preceded by group rights in eastern societies where decisions are made through group consensus which older people influence more than the individual to whom a particular problem concerns.


Doubting:

I believe that some of the Human Rights standards can be and should be applied for the East. It is abusive that many authoritarian regimes exercise their power through covering up their actions with cultural arguments because it suits them to do so. To my mind, if there is some coercion in some society, rights are violated. Any human violations should be condemned. Nobody has the right to punish other individual violently. I think that no other culture, no other religion says that it is fair to whip, beat or torture human beings. It should be prevented. To my mind, the eastern states should be open to others because they signed the agreement about human rights and are obliged to consider the opinion of other members.

BLOG 7:

Response to:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/08/13/b2s.elearning/

Online schools clicking with students
Flexibility, technology key to e-learning
By Greg Botelho
CNN

(CNN) -- With your pajamas snug, your feet clad in bunny slippers, and a tub of ice cream on the desk, your computer glows in front of you. The clock reads 2 a.m.
In other words, time for class.

This isn't a dream, but a reality for hundreds of thousands of students. Although brick-and-mortar institutions still dominate the educational landscape, a new form of schooling -- called online or e-learning -- has skyrocketed in popularity in recent years.

The Peak Group, an education technology research and consulting firm, expects that more than 1 million students will take advantage of "virtual schools" this school year. Another research firm, Eduventures, predicted the online distance learning market will grow more than 38 percent in 2004, taking in $5.1 billion in revenue.

"In the last five years, the acceleration has been amazing," said Billie Wahlstrom, a vice provost on technology issues at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. "If you look at these things longitudinally, the curve is moving to the vertical."

The movement has taken hold particularly in higher education, where 90 percent of four-year public schools and more than half of four-year private schools offer some form of online education, according to the United States Distance Learning Association.

"The question that you have to ask is not who is offering distance learning, but who isn't," said USDLA Executive Director John G. Flores.

Learning anytime, anywhere

For Janet Farmer, class runs from 11 p.m. to 1 a.m., or whenever else she finds time away from working her full-time job at Hewlett-Packard and raising her three children.

"There's absolutely no way that I'd sacrifice my children's emotional and mental well-being to participate in a traditional educational setting," said Farmer, who is eight courses shy of earning a bachelor's degree in business/management at the University of Phoenix, which bills itself as the nation's largest private university.

"It's not for everyone. You have to be determined to do it; you have to do it because it's important to you."

Farmer studies with international and elderly students, troops, even fishermen logging on from offshore. A statistical analysis of the school's approximately 110,000 online students -- just more than half its total student body -- shows a profile much like her: working, married women in their 30s or 40s, who are reimbursed by employers and looking to boost their career prospects.

"If it doesn't lead to a particular position or help them do a current job, it's not necessarily worthy of the time," said University of Phoenix President Laura Palmer Noone. "The major issue is not money, it's time. The biggest difficulties are when life gets in the way."

Prospective students have endless opportunities to learn online, whether it is for career or personal reasons. The Web abounds with credentialed degree programs featuring courses on a wide variety of subjects, such as criminal justice, psychology, nursing and education.

Many such programs have both brick-and-mortar and virtual campuses. The University of Phoenix, with 151 learning centers in 31 states, heads a list of "for-profit" schools focused on e-learning.

"The for-profits that are increasing their market share are market-driven and not caught up in the bureaucracy you see at many nonprofit universities," Flores said. "They have the means and wherewithal to be a very formidable alternative ... As a result, they raise the bar."

"Historically, higher education has taken a one-size-fits-all mentality: That if you want to get a degree, you must leave town, stop working, live in a dorm," Noone said. "But we are way past that. We have to be engaged in lifelong learning, especially if our society is to compete globally."

Embracing the medium

Online instructors say they embrace technology not just to reach those who otherwise may not be able to take classes, but also to engage students.
That sentiment and an appreciation for reality shows like MTV's "The Real World" spurred University of Massachusetts Professor Jim Theroux to experiment with his business classes for undergraduate and MBA students.

After years teaching "case studies" -- real and embellished examples of business problems -- he planted a writer inside a company to sift through reports, interview employees and set up chats and videoconferences as students tackled a new, real-time problem each week.

"Most distance learning classes are just regular classes put on the Web," said Theroux, referring to professors who post syllabi, discussion questions, images and more online. "But this could not have been done before the Web."

The approach gave students an inside look at a company in a way no other class did, said Keith Richardson, who attended one such class and later assisted Theroux in another.

"Students appreciated the connectivity of getting to know the players," he said. "We began to feel as if we were a part of the company, and the solution to their problems."

Administrators say they must juggle the desire to embrace new technology with the need to keep costs down, especially given the precarious nature of state and federal aid.

"We have to really stay alert as to what's available, but we can't make premature decisions," Wahlstrom said. "We're not after getting what's cool, although it's a nice bonus."

K-12 options

Graduate and college students aren't the only ones using online learning.
Nationwide, about 25 percent of K-12 public schools offer some form of e-learning for students and teachers, according to Education Week. And Eduventures says the market for such curriculum materials should grow 10 percent this year.

Although some programs allow students to earn a high school diploma entirely online, in most cases students take cyber classes to supplement or complement their education.

"Students come to us to fill gaps [and] meet needs not met in their own schools, because the school doesn't have the course they need, there's a scheduling conflict or they need to make up a credit," said Florida Virtual School CEO Julie Young, noting that more than 97 percent of her cyber school's students take one or two classes.

The Bush administration has endorsed such virtual schools as a legitimate way for school districts to satisfy one key aspect of the No Child Left Behind Act, which requires giving students options if their school is deemed underperforming.

E-learning supporters laud the method as an opportunity for people of all races, ethnicities, ages and nationalities to attend quality classes. Minorities make up 30 percent of Florida Virtual School's enrollment, for instance, and 39 percent of the University of Phoenix's students are "nonwhite," according to data provided by both schools.

"That's the best part: Age and those other things don't matter," said University of Minnesota e-student Patricia Welde, who noted that 11 of her 12 online classes involved group projects. "You work with all types of people, [and] you're all there to learn."

"You are not bounded by time or geography," Noone said. "People aren't going to judge you by anything but the quality of your ideas. It's highly democratic."

Room for everyone

Some educators criticize virtual schools, especially "for-profits," saying they drain resources and students from schools embedded in their communities.

"You'll see the nonprofits raising their eyebrows -- it's them versus us -- but I think there is room for everyone to be successful," Flores said. "Students will want to go away to college and have that experience no matter what."

And it isn't easy for virtual programs, either, Noone said. Many schools "rushed in," hoping e-learning programs would reap revenues without the expenses of maintaining a brick-and-mortar institution.

"But to build infrastructure and support students is expensive," she said.
Students also invest time and efforts in online classes, which may be harder than traditional ones, said Jane Hancock of the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities' continuing education program.

"The student has the advantage of flexibility, but that's not necessarily easier than coming to a classroom," said Hancock, program director for distance learning. "You must be more responsible for your own studies, and disciplined."

With high school, and likely university, enrollments expected to rise in the coming years, Noone predicted "huge growth potential across the entire higher education spectrum."

"It's important for students to realize that lots of options are available," she said. "And it's the quality of the academic experience that will make a program successful. The students we deal with are far too sophisticated to be simply buying a piece of paper for a degree."


Believing:

I agree with the author that online education offers a lot of opportunities for students. Online classes make it possible for many people all around the world to access high-quality and accredited education than ever before. Moreover, people are not tied to a class schedule which is another advantage of online education. Along with its flexibility, students do not have to worry how long it is going to take in order to get to the campus, or if they can afford childcare during classes.

Doubting:

I think online education can be disadvantageous because students have to work on their own without any guidance. Nobody will be checking student’s progress on a regular basis which means people will be putting the work off when they do not have time and motivation. Furthermore, most of the communication in online education is set via email: students will miss the sound of an instructor or peer’s voice to fulfil course requirements.

BLOG 6:

Response to:

http://corporate.airfrance.com/no_cache/en/news/and-also/etaussi-detail/index.html?tx_ttnews[tt_news]=1921

Air France and OnAir launch World's First In-Flight Mobile Phone Service on Board International Flights


Send and receive emails, sms and mms messages at
10,000 m!

Air France has become the first airline in the world to offer an in-flight mobile phone service on international flights.


Using to the Mobile OnAir system, passengers travelling on board one of the Airbus A318 aircraft operating European routes can now:

• Send and receive sms and mms messages
• Send and receive emails via all phones with Internet access

During the second half of the trial, passengers will be able to make and receive phone calls, with the service being regulated to maintain passengers’ comfort and well-being.

Customers on board this Airbus A318, with seating for 123 passengers, can find out more about this service in an information leaflet in seat pockets. Information will also be included in the cabin crew announcement. Air France welcomes feedback on this service from its passengers, who can fill in a twenty-question survey.

At the end of the six-month trial, Air France will examine the feedback and comments made by customers to determine whether to launch this service on all its flights.

“We are seizing every opportunity to offer customers the latest technological innovations, while continuing to make their travel comfort and well-being our main priority”, stated Patrick Roux, Executive Vice President Marketing Air France.

Benoit Debains, CEO of OnAir, said “We are delighted that Air France is the first airline to use the Mobile OnAir onboard mobile telephony system on international flights. This marks an important phase in the implementation of a new generation of in-flight services and we are confident that this trial will define the future standards in terms of in-flight passenger communication”.

The Mobile OnAir onboard mobile telephony system, certified by EASA (European Aviation Safety Authority) does not interfere with the radio-navigation instruments on this Airbus A318 and may only be used at cruising altitude once the new illuminated sign “Switch off your phone” is turned off. The system is activated at 3,000 metres (10,000 feet).

OnAir has roaming agreements with mobile network operators, including the three major operators in France: Orange, Bouygues Telecom and SFR.

How does it work?

• Mobile phones connect to a miniature cellular network installed inside this aircraft. A modem transmits data and calls to a satellite that routes them to a ground station. Data and calls are then routed to the passenger’s usual telephone network. This network is located inside the aircraft. Passengers’ mobile phones only emit at minimum power, which does not risk harming interference with aircraft avionics or ground telecoms network.

• Phones are used just like on the ground. To make a call on board the aircraft, passengers simply dial the international prefix (+) or 00 + country code + full number (without the 0).

• The cost of data exchanges are invoiced by the customers’ telephone operator and are comparable to those used for normal international mobile phone calls.



Believing:

I think that the introduction of the cell phones on board should be celebrated. It would be a huge jump towards mobile environment by using technology and allowing passengers more flexibility. Moreover, when travelling by plane, it is a bore to sit for hours in a closed space. It would allow using the time on board more efficiently and connecting passengers with people on ground.


Doubting:

I believe that cell phones on the plane should be banned because nothing can be more annoying than hearing other people talking loudly next to people on board who are not interested in personal things more than both of talking partners. On board, passengers are not separated by walls: they are sitting next to, in front of, behind each other. Somebody is trying to sleep, another one to relax and the others maybe to work. It would be wrong not to consider these people -- not to respect their privacy. Irritated people are not able to escape from the board just because somebody has interrupted their rest. In our everyday situations, we were already disturbed by another person in a bus who was talking loudly all the thirty minutes and the whole bus had to hear what was going on in his life. The same situation is on a fully loaded plane, but the difference is that we are travelling by plane four, five or more hours.

BLOG 5:

Response to:

http://sportsanddrugs.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?questionID=1200

Should performance enhancing drugs (such as steroids) be accepted in sports?

Jasmin Guénette, MA, Academic Programs Director of the Institute for Humane Studies at George Mason University, wrote the following in his June 18, 2006 article titled "In Defence of Steroids," published in the webszine Le Québécois Libre:


"Now, should baseball-or any other professional league-ban performance-enhancing drugs? The answer is yes, if they want to...

Private companies and associations should be able to define what rules will govern them without any intervention from politicians. A private association has no obligation to accept me if I don't agree to their rules, just as I should not be forced to join any associations I don't think are fit for me. This logic should also prevail when it comes to the sale and use of steroids. If a group of people, let's say Bodybuilders and Co., think performance-enhancing drugs are OK, they should be left alone if they don't force anybody to follow their path. Sadly, this is not how things are done. Today, the debate about steroid use is widely dominated by morally superior do-gooders who believe it's not right for an athlete to use products that help him or her perform better...

I am not suggesting that people should take steroids or use other drugs. But just as I don't want other people choosing what's right for me, I don't want to choose what's right for others. This is what respect is all about; not forcing other people to think like you, to act like you and to obey laws simply because vote-seeking politicians and their allies think some products should be illegal."


Believing:

I agree with the above-mentioned statement – athletes have to buy steroids on the black market because of illegality of performance enhancing drugs. This is certainly harmful to their health since such drugs are not controlled, and their dosage is not monitored. The performance enhancing drugs should be allowed in order help the athletes not to overdose and not to cause damage to themselves.


Doubting:

I disagree with the statement because people should have some limits for their needs which are destroying their own health. If everybody would be allowed to do everything they wish, then, what would be the use of rules and restrictions? Drugs break and damage person’s health so badly that it no longer works. The government should intervene in this in order to prevent chaos in society. If there would be no punishments, how could the government guarantee the healthy generation? If drugs would be legalized in sports, this would cause the chain reaction: the illegal substances like cocaine or heroine used for pleasure would not be the barrier for people anymore because governmental permission of drugs for the sportsmen to hold the organism active and “healthy” would mean that every kind of drugs could be consumed by people.

BLOG 4:

Response to:

Kilbourne, Jean. “Targets of Cigarette Advertising.” Health 20-20 Web. Retrieved 20 Apr. 2009 < http://www.health20-20.org/article.php?id=140>.


Targets of Cigarette Advertising
Jean Kilbourne, PhD

Cigarettes are the only product advertised which are lethal when used as intended. Indeed they are a product about which nothing good can honestly be said. They are highly addictive. The damage they do to health has been documented by more than 50,000 research studies. Smoking is the single largest preventable cause of death in America. Over 1,000 people die every day because of cigarette-related diseases. In the twentieth century, more people have been killed by tobacco than by war.

Nowhere is the distorted perspective of advertising a perspective that manages to screen out almost all unpleasant reality except the strictly personal (e.g., bad breath, facial hair) more obvious than it is in cigarette ads. Contradictions abound in the world of tobacco advertising. Youthful, healthy people frolic and play with no apparent worries whatsoever. "Alive with pleasure," proclaims the ads for Newports, as if to obliterate the haunting subtext, "Dead with cancer." Macho men owe their freedom and independence, indeed their very masculinity, to their Camels and Marlboros, although the evidence indicates that cigarettes are linked with impotence, lower testosterone count, and sterility.

Most advertising is essentially myth-making. The point of almost all national advertising is not to give information but rather to establish an image for a product. Advertising does this by linking a product with a quality or attribute. These jeans will make you sexy, this detergent will save your marriage, this car will give you confidence. The links are generally false and arbitrary, but we are so surrounded by them that we come to accept them without any further thought, to believe that they are unquestionably logical and natural.

Such myth-making is always deceptive and often harmful to the consumer. In the case of cigarette advertising, however, it can be truly dangerous. It further convinces cigarette smokers, young people, and the entire society that this drug is benevolent and essential to one's happiness and success. It creates in our society a climate of denial.

Most important of all, tobacco advertising spuriously links the use of tobacco with precisely those attributes and qualities in life such things as happiness, wealth, prestige, sophistication, success, maturity, athletic ability, virility, creativity, sexual satisfaction, and others that the habitual use of drugs usually diminishes and destroys.

Cigarettes remain among the most heavily advertised products in the nation. The tobacco industry spends over two and a half billion tax-deductible dollars a year in the US alone on advertising and promotion of its products. At the same time, the industry ironically attempts to deny that this advertising has any effect on consumers. They insist that they do not target nonsmokers or young people and that the whole point of all that advertising is simply to get smokers to switch brands.

In fact, only 10 percent of the nation's 55 million smokers switch brands in a given year. It is obvious that the tobacco industry needs to recruit aggressively new smokers to replace those who die or quit. A recent study published in Health Education Quarterly found that proportionally more cigarette ads were placed in women's and youth-oriented magazines than in magazines targeting other segments in the population. This suggests that the tobacco industry is responding to overall decreases in the number of smokers in this country with an increased attempt to recruit new smokers from other groups, especially young people and women.

Young people have always been an important target of the tobacco industry because marketers know that at least 75 percent of smokers are hooked before the age of 21. Many of the cigarette advertising campaigns appeal more specifically to young people by equating smoking with sexiness, glamour, and sophistication. In addition, some campaigns seem expressly designed to catch the attention of children. The current Camel campaign, for example, uses cartoon characters. Often this campaign has made light of well-established health risks with the copy "75 years and still smokin'." Although this refers superficially to the brand's 75th birthday, it certainly implies to the casual observer that one can smoke and still live to a ripe old age.

Social learning theory suggests that repeated exposure to modeled behavior can result in behavioral change in lifestyle. It is no casual coincidence that cigarette ads feature only very healthy, attractive, and youthful-looking people. Those who argue that peer pressure is the major influence on the lives of young people strangely overlook how the entire peer group as a whole is socialized. Few seem to realize that advertising is a powerful educational force, one that promotes attitudes and values as well as products.

One of the major functions of advertising in general is to induce in its consumers these early and unspoken expectancies in life. Advertising attempts to affect attitudes. According to an editorial published in a recent issue of Advertising Age, "Quite clearly, the company that has not bothered to create a favorable attitude toward its product before the potential customer goes shopping hasn't much of a chance of snaring the bulk of potential buyers."1

No wonder ads feature characters who will have special appeal to children. The current campaign for Parliament Lights, for example, uses the slogan, "The Perfect Recess." Surely recess is a word with a much more positive meaning for children than it has for adults. And the pictures in these advertisements such as of a young couple on bicycles generally support this interpretation. Other Kent ads appeal especially to young people by suggesting that cigarettes will provide "the experience you seek."

Image advertising has been especially effective on young people, who are much more likely than adults to be insecure about their images among their peers. Some of the themes developed in cigarette ads are particularly seductive, such as the linking of tobacco with maturity, sophistication, sex, and athletic ability.

Another common theme in ads aimed at young people is that cigarette smoking is a daring, gutsy thing for them to do. Many cigarette ads feature very risky activities. "Be a daredevil. Be a rebel," the ads tantalize. Research indicates that smokers are more likely than the general population to be risk-taking, extroverted, defiant, and impulsive. It is no coincidence that cigarette companies are the leading sponsors of events that appeal to risk-taking teenagers: rodeos, ballooning, and motorcycle, dirt-bike, and hot rod-racing.

The cigarette is also frequently offered as an emblem of one's independence and nonconformity. The smoker is portrayed as the man or woman who dares to defy public opinion, to stand on his or her own. "No compromise" declared one series for Winston.

Teenage girls are especially vulnerable to this kind of advertising pitch. An American Cancer Society report found that cigarette smoking among teenage girls was highly identified with an anti-authority, rebellious syndrome in relationship to the adult world. For instance, one Lucky Strike ad depicts a young, very defiant-looking woman along with the caption, "Light my Lucky."

Virginia Slims cleverly plays on this attitude as well in many of their ads. In one ad, an older, rather Victorian-looking woman is complaining about young women: "Shocking, absolutely shocking, the way young women cavort about these days," and another says, "Tsk. Tsk. Proper, decent women shouldn't have fun in the sun. In fact, they shouldn't have any fun at all." A young woman replies, "Well, shame on me, 'cause I really like to have fun." Certainly these older women are meant to represent mothers, teachers, and other adults who might advise young women, among other things, not to smoke. A rebellious adolescent thus might mistakenly interpret valid advice against smoking as an edict against having fun.

The tobacco industry is attempting to get even more mileage from this image by portraying public-health advocates as anti-smoking fanatics who want to tell everybody else what to do. It seems to be setting health officials and agencies against what it would characterize as the courageous, independent, free-thinking smoker. Thus its extraordinary public-relations campaign attempts to equate smoking with democratic freedom and the criticism of smoking with totalitarianism.

The long-running Virginia Slims campaign (and others similar to it) attempt to make an amazingly ironic equation between liberation and addiction, between freedom of choice and enslavement to tobacco. This equation is particularly self-contradictory, given that nicotine is the most addictive drug known to science, and that at least 85 percent of smokers wish they could quit their addiction. The only equality that smoking has brought to women is that they are now contracting lung cancer at the same rate as men are. One can consider cigarette smoking liberating only if one considers death the ultimate form of freedom.

In addition to the above techniques, ads aimed at women and girls also frequently suggest that cigarettes are a form of weight control. In this way the advertisers are cashing in on the national obsession with excessive thinness for women. A primary reason that many women start and do not quit smoking is their terror of gaining weight. Ads have been playing upon this fear of obesity for a long time. In 1928 the Lucky Strike ads said, "To keep a slender figure, no one can deny . . . Reach for a Lucky instead of a sweet."

With a much more well-informed public, the advertisers probably couldn't get away with such an overt and outrageous message today. They can, however, use extremely thin models and copy that includes such words as slim and slender. Virginia Slims' new superslims cigarette promises smokers "more than just a sleek shape." A recent campaign for Capri cigarettes features an attractive young woman and the headline, "The slimmest slim in town." This pitch is one major reason that cigarette smoking is on the increase among teenage girls, a group especially susceptible to the obsession with weight.

Unfortunately, these tactics seem to be working too well. The only societal group in which cigarette smoking is increasing is that of young women, and the largest new group of smokers is girls under the age of eleven. Twenty percent of young women graduating from high school smoke, versus 10 percent of the men. A Weekly Reader survey found that, although other drug use among teenagers has declined, the rate of adolescent cigarette smoking has remained essentially the same for the past five years.2

The most effective incentives against smoking for young people involve emphases on the importance of physical well-being and the need to be an independent thinker. It is also extremely important to fight the off-balanced obsession with excessive thinness for women in our society. A recent national survey of fourth-grade girls found that 80 percent of them were already on diets. This obsession with weight in itself should be regarded as a major public-health problem. In addition, we must continue to fight the sexism that makes young men desperate to appear macho and young women willing to settle for counterfeit emblems of progress rather than the real thing.

The tobacco industry has insidiously positioned itself on the side of autonomy and freedom. This is a classic example of doublespeak. Ads for tobacco often stress freedom, independence, control, and power although, ironically, it is precisely these things that addiction takes away from its users. Critics of tobacco need to expose the truth that cigarette smoking is nothing more than a dangerous addiction deliberately promoted by a callous industry devoted only to profit. We also need to do everything we can to help people, especially the young, realize that by smoking they are actually giving in to conformity rather than expressing their individuality. They are allowing themselves to be personally manipulated by a very powerful industry.

We need to educate our children and students very specifically about the risks that they take by using tobacco. Vague slogans about the effects of tobacco do more harm than good. We need to be as specific about the dangers of smoking as we have become about heart disease in recent years.

We need to begin this education as early in the lives of our children as possible. Some people feel that teaching about alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs actually encourages drug use, just as some people feel that sex education leads to promiscuity. However, in both cases, the evidence suggests just the opposite.

We know that in most cases our children won't have licenses to drive until they are 16, but we certainly wouldn't want to wait until then to teach them about automobile safety (e.g., using seat belts and obeying the law) and, more important, about the values and attitudes that make people safe and courteous drivers. Imagine the chaos that would result if we simply tossed them the keys and said, "Drive responsibly" and let them go without another word.

We need to model low-risk behavior for our young people. We also need to help them find healthful ways to be euphoric and joyful, to find positive ways to achieve the things that drugs promise (and sometimes even deliver for a short time and then take away). Our drug problem is deeply related to other problems in our culture poverty, racism, sexism, glorification of violence, greed, alienation, and damage to the environment. We need to empower our young people, to help them believe they can and should make a difference in solving these problems. We need to touch the part of them that wants to be well, to be all they can be, and to be of use.

Our society needs to make a major comprehensive effort to prevent drug problems in our midst. Such an effort must include education, mass media campaigns, increased availability of treatment programs, and more effective deterrence policies. It must also include public policy changes that take into account that individuals act within social, economic, and cultural environments that profoundly influence their attitudes and choices. Such changes would include raising excise taxes on tobacco and regulating its advertising. Research has documented that the single most effective way to reduce consumption of tobacco by young people is to raise excise taxes.

In 1986 the American Medical Association decided that the evidence was sufficient to warrant the call for a total ban on cigarette advertising. Even if such a ban did not lead to an immediate decrease in actual consumption, it would clear the way for the media to report on the dangers of smoking with an honesty it has never before employed. The media's self-censorship on behalf of cigarette and alcohol advertisers is a national disgrace. The public education that is essential in solving our major drug problems is probably not possible until the media no longer depend upon the economic goodwill of the tobacco and alcohol industries.

The war that we are waging on drugs is meaningless if it does not focus also on our legalized drugs our advertised drugs since they are still not legal for young people, who are under the continuous influence of very sophisticated advertising approaches. We cannot win this war until we stop supporting the denial that is at the heart of the problem, both in individuals and in society as a whole the denial that tobacco advertising depends upon and perpetuates.

Author, lecturer, and media analyst Jean Kilbourne, PhD, is the creator of two slide presentations and two award-winning films focusing on alcohol awareness, wellness, sexuality, and women's issues.

References
1. Bernstein, S., "Advertising Still Presells," Advertising Age, January 27, 1986, p. 17.
2. Jones, L., "U.S. Teen Drug Use Dropped in 1989, Survey Finds," American Medical News, February 23, 1990, p. 5.




Believing:

I believe that advertising for cigarettes directly manipulates our behaviour to smoke more. Ads attach images of heroism, athleticism and sexual appeal to the cigarettes they promote. It is known that cigarettes like any other drug causes enormous damages to health, and what is surprising this drug is advertised everywhere like any other soap, cosmetics or food. People try to be like the heroes who hold cigarettes in the ads: to be powerful, prestigious, glamorous, and successful. Therefore, they buy cigarettes being advertised and believe that they can perform themselves like models on TV if they smoke those drugs. Moreover, many studies examined the effect of cigarette advertising and came to conclusion that smoking has tremendously increased after the rise of tobacco ads.

Doubting:

I don’t think that cigarette ads influence people’s attitude towards buying more cigarettes. We do not buy more toothpaste or more food if we daily watch ads on different kinds of these products. Such ads help us only select or try new brand instead of the product we usually use. Like any other product, cigarette ads only switch new brands for people who already smoke. The advertising for cigarettes does not differ from any other industry’s techniques to promote its products. We do not consume more cheese or bathe more often if we regularly watch ads on various kinds of cheese or soap.

BLOG 3:

Response to:

Lee Myers, Steven. “Pervasive Corruption in Russia Is ‘Just Called Business’.” New York Times. 13 Aug. 2005. Retrieved 7 April 2009


Pervasive Corruption in Russia Is 'Just Called Business' By Steven Lee Myers

August 13, 2005, New York Times

MOSCOW, Aug. 12 - A businessman here recently formed a company to supply equipment used in new office and apartment buildings. Despite the country's construction boom, it nearly foundered. That is, until this summer, when two "intermediaries" arranged to fix the bidding for contracts from a regional government.

He has since received four new contracts, he said, and expects more. Success has its cost, though. He had paid bribes, he said, amounting to 5 to 10 percent of each contract. The largest, so far, totaled $90,000.

The amount of each bribe was punched out on a desktop calculator to avoid any paper trail. He expressed disgust but said the bribes were an unavoidable cost of doing business in Russia today.

"If you want to be competitive you have to play the game," he said, agreeing to speak in a lengthy interview only if he, his company and the regional government were not identified. He said he feared legal difficulties and being harmed or even killed.

"It used to be called bribery," he added. "Now it is just called business."

Bribery is certainly not new to Russia, but according to several recent surveys and interviews with dozens of Russians, it has surged in scale and scope in recent years under the presidency of Vladimir V. Putin, so that today it touches just about every aspect of life.

With greater urgency than ever, anticorruption campaigners and even some government officials warn that the government has become so ensnared by corruption that it threatens to undo Russia's progress since the dismantling of the Soviet Union 14 years ago.

The Indem Foundation, a research group in Moscow that has conducted the most extensive efforts to measure bribery here, estimated last month that Russians paid more than $3 billion in bribes annually and that businesses paid $316 billion - nearly 10 times the estimate of its first survey just four years ago.

The total is more than two and a half times what the government collects in budget revenues, the survey found. That means that vast amounts of Russia's wealth flow in a shadowy netherworld of corrupted officials - unreported as income, untaxed by the government and unavailable for social or economic investments.

"The weakness, inefficiency and corruption of all branches of government are the most important obstacles to further progress in reforming Russia," the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, or O.E.C.D., said in June in a report commissioned by the Russian government.

Other surveys also rank Russia among the world's most corrupt nations, placing the former superpower on a par with developing countries. Transparency International, the worldwide corruption watchdog, said in its latest report that Russia was now following the path of countries like Nigeria, Azerbaijan and Libya - rich in oil but soaked by graft.

Grigory A. Satarov, the president of Indem, said in an interview that the new growth of bribery fed off the inefficiencies of Russia's still sclerotic state structures, inherited from the Communist past.

But he also blamed Putin policies that have weakened the rule of law. Fighting corruption, he argued, requires three conditions: free news media, a vibrant political opposition and a truly independent judiciary. Under Mr. Putin, he said, the Kremlin has undercut all three.

"The main thing," Mr. Satarov said, "is that all this time, Putin has not done anything to change the situation."

For businesses especially, bribery is ballooning, along with the amounts solicited, which Indem estimated to average $135,000 - a 13-fold jump from 2001. Mr. Satarov said the increasing pressure on businesses reflected the expanding role of the state in the economy during Mr. Putin's presidency.

For Mr. Satarov and others, high-profile cases like the legal assault on the Yukos oil company highlighted less the government's determination to root out corruption than its desire to assert its control over valuable economic assets.

In fact, the conviction of Yukos's former chairman, Mikhail B. Khodorkovsky, on tax evasion charges that he and his supporters called politically motivated may have had an opposite effect.

According to a very wealthy and prominent Moscow businessman, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of prosecution or political retaliation, as well as others interviewed, bribes have increasingly become a necessity, either to win contracts or to keep inspectors and prosecutors at bay.

The magnitude and scope of this kind corruption make Russia different today from even the recent past, the Moscow businessman said. In the early years of Russia's post-Soviet transition, lingering fear of Soviet control and a romantic optimism for a normal democracy limited corruption to some extent.

"There are no romantics now," he said, "and the old fear is not there anymore."

A recent survey by the World Bank reported that 78 percent of businesses in Russia reported having to pay bribes. Another survey, by the Foreign Investment Advisory Council, created in 1994 by the Russian government and prominent foreign corporations, found that 71 percent considered corruption the biggest barrier to foreign investment.

Mr. Satarov said one major businessman had told him of having to pay monthly bribes to five federal ministries. Fully half of the businessman's profits went to bribes, Mr. Satarov recounted. "He said, 'When it reaches 70 percent I'm going to close the business.' "

A business consultant who until recently worked with the European Union on economic development projects in Kaliningrad and Moscow said he had endured repeated encounters with bribe-seeking officials, who demanded cash, gifts or the hiring of unqualified relatives.

In an interview, the consultant, who agreed to discuss the issue only if not identified because of fears of retribution, said it was necessary to understand bribery in the context of the Russian government.

"Corruption is not a virus infecting the system," he explained, saying that was how bribery was viewed in Europe or the United States: as an aberration that must be isolated and cut out. "It is the system itself that is corrupt."

Indeed, Russia has evolved from its Soviet past in such a way that for many, paying "a little something" is not even considered bribery anymore. Rather, bribes are seen more as a fee for resolving seemingly intractable problems or overcoming bureaucratic delays, one that supplements the meager incomes of otherwise honest civil servants.

"It's not their fault, but the government's inability to provide a decent living," Yaroslav D. Lissovolik, the chief economist at United Financial Group, said. He last paid a bribe - "a couple of dollars," he said - to receive the results of lab tests at a state clinic, where state health care is free only in theory.

The O.E.C.D. report concluded that government officials actually complicated legislation or regulations deliberately to increase opportunities for bribery. Or as the businessman in construction put it: "The law is like the Bible. They interpret it any way they like."

An American businessman married to a Russian woman recounted his own example. He said he had to pay nearly $1,000 in bribes to resolve a Catch-22 involving his infant daughter. She could not receive a Russian passport unless she was registered with the local police. She could not be registered, though, unless she had a passport.

"That perfect problem was solved with a larger sum than I want to remember," he said, agreeing to tell the story only if not identified, because of American laws against bribery.

As a result of its necessity, bribery has become accepted practice.

Bribes have become almost obligatory, for instance, for admission to Russia's universities, even those supposedly available at no cost to those who qualify. The Indem study estimated that $583 million was spent annually in bribes to deans, professors and others involved in securing admission. The foundation, along with the Moscow Higher School of Economics, estimated that students paid bribes as high as $30,000 to $40,000 to enter the most prestigious universities.

Young men of draft age also routinely pay to receive a deferment, either on medical or other grounds, to avoid service in a military roiled by the war in Chechnya and a particularly gruesome form of hazing for new recruits.

One young man in Yekaterinburg said in an interview that the going rate in central Russia was $1,500, and that he and several peers had paid it gladly. In Moscow it is said to be $5,000. According to the Defense Ministry, fewer than 10 percent of eligible men are drafted.

The police have the reputation of being the most notoriously corrupt. Sergei S., a lawyer with a prominent law firm, recalled the time recently when his girlfriend was at the wheel in Moscow and, without question, absolutely drunk when an officer waved the car over. She avoided arrest after Sergei went to an automatic bank machine, escorted by the officer, and withdrew $300.

"The most horrible thing," he said, agreeing to discuss the experience only if neither his last name nor his law firm was identified, "is it is absolutely normal."

Indem's survey uncovered one positive trend: the number of Russians willing to pay bribes has fallen since 2001, suggesting a growing popular frustration with the solicitations. Still, 53 percent of those surveyed said they would pay a bribe.

Mr. Putin's critics and even some supporters charge that the government has done little to combat corruption seriously because it extends to the upper tiers of government, something the president himself has acknowledged, sometimes bluntly.

"The state as a whole and the law enforcement bodies, unfortunately, are still afflicted with corruption and inefficiency," Mr. Putin said in an interview on state television last year. The corruption, he added, reaches to the "highest level, where we are talking about hundreds, tens of thousands, perhaps millions" of dollars.

Aleksandr Y. Lebedev, a wealthy financier and a member of the lower house of Parliament in the pro-Putin party, United Russia, said in an interview that corruption would flourish until drastic measures were taken, like the seizure of assets at home and abroad. "You find deputy ministers who have houses and yachts," he said. "I know ministers who are millionaires."

At the same time, Mr. Putin's government has not completely ignored the problem. It has announced a series of modest anticorruption measures, increasing salaries for law enforcement and other security officials and toughening penalties for seemingly petty crimes, like issuing a false passport.

The latter was a consequence of the deadly wave of terrorist attacks in August and September of last year. Two passenger airliners exploded in flight on Aug. 24, killing 90 people, after a bribe of roughly $34 enabled at least one of two suicide bombers to board at a Moscow airport.

"The people on those planes were not only the victims of terrorism," Yelena A. Panfilova, director of the Moscow branch of Transparency International, said. "They were victims of corruption." Yet as shocking as it was at the time, she said, the disclosure hardly surprised her.

When Transparency International applied to register its branch in 2000, an official in the Justice Ministry solicited a $300 "fee" to correct supposed problems in the application that Ms. Panfilova said did not exist.

"I said, 'Do you know who we are?' " she recalled.




Believing:

The New York Times is a reliable source of information proven by experts, and one could believe that the situation in Russia described in the news is true. Moreover, Russia was a “communist bloc”, and we know about “Soviets propaganda” where the government officials are corrupt making bigger and bigger fortunes for themselves from the workers’ efforts. During the Communist years, it is stated that Communist Party existed above the law and that they were criminals who were buying their way into legal community with bribes during election campaign and document tampering. I think this trend still exists, and, therefore, we can assume Russia as a corrupt country.


Doubting:

Media is so engaged in depicting Russia as a dangerous enemy and in occasional sensational events to support this idea that it seems to have lost interest in the contemporary developments in the policy there. Although the above-mentioned article in The New York Times talks about a businessman who had to pay bribes to the government, it lacks his name and the name of the company. Furthermore, the businessman had to pay $90,000 to the officials which I think is not a small amount. If he had to, why did he pay this amount of money instead of going to another country with no corrupt government where he could have invested these funds to a new production? This sensational news hits the headlines, but lacks the evidence and logic interrelationship between the events. The economic boom in oil and gas sector experienced in Russia today and its new increasing partnerships with Western companies who are prospering in Russia do not appear to make a lot of headlines of the US newspapers.

BLOG 2:

Response to:

Moore, Tristana. “Guide to Europe's pension woes: Germany.” BBC News Web. 17 Aug. 2007. Retrieved 3 Apr. 2009 .

GERMANY - TRISTANA MOORE

Germany has one of the lowest birth rates in Europe, and at the same time, people are living longer. Recently, the pensions debate has become a political hot potato.
In March, the German parliament voted to raise the retirement age from 65 to 67 as part of a reform programme aimed at tackling rapid population ageing and spiralling pension costs.
The government is hoping that by keeping people in jobs longer, it will reduce the burden on the state pension fund.
But the decision has been heavily criticised by trade unions and groups representing Germany's 20 million pensioners.
Such was the level of public anger that many demonstrations were staged against the government's plans in Berlin and other German cities.
The head of the DGB trade union federation, Michael Sommer, said the new law was tantamount to lowering retirement benefits.
Opposition politicians argued that the changes would lead to higher unemployment and increased pensioner poverty.
Germany currently has one of the highest levels of public spending on pensions in the 30 countries of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).
The system provides a high level of cover, but it is widely believed to be unaffordable in the long term.
Most Germans stop working on average at the age of 63. Critics say it is still too easy for workers to take early retirement and they claim that many companies encourage early retirement schemes.
Given growing concerns over the demographic time-bomb, some pensioner groups have argued that those people retiring now are receiving state pension benefits which are around 10% less than they were in the past.
According to some surveys, one in three pensioners from 2030 will not be able to make ends meet if they rely on their normal pension scheme.



Believing:

I believe that the extending of the retirement age is a good solution to the problem of ageing in Europe. It is well-known that pensions partly originate from the taxes taken out of the salaries of employed. This is a sort of deposit young employed people make in order to secure themselves in older age. The current deposits are used for current pension payments, while the next ones – for future pensions. Since there are no younger people anymore, and the number of the elderly is increasing, there is a danger for the pension systems in the country because the government does not own enough funds to support older people. By the extending of the retirement age, the government could reduce the number of retired and pay out the pension. Moreover, for the retiring people, working in their old age could be seen as a small recompense for their physical and mental exhaustion. Extended working could be an opportunity for older people to stay active and integrated in a rewarding social environment.

Doubting:

However, this causes problems for those people who do not remain physically fit to meet the requirements of the workplace. This could be reflected on the quality of their performance. Furthermore, this reform raises issues for those companies who wish to stay competitive in today’s global business because older people are seen as less productive and more expensive. It is known that older people are not able to keep up with the continuously changing standards since they tend to be less mobile and less flexible than younger ones. Another problem can arise for young people who wish to enter the workforce. They will be limited in joining the working lives because there are enough employees over the age of 65. There will be no vacant places for young dynamic people which will limit the number of their applications and motivation because the older staff is still working.

BLOG 1:

Response to:

Belien, Paul. "Health Care Cuts in Europe." Brussels Journal. 23 Nov. 2005. Retrieved 3 Apr. 2009.

Health Care Cuts in Europe

From the desk of Paul Belien on Wed, 2005-11-23 00:08

When conversations turn to health care, I am always reminded of my grandfather. He was 91 when he died. He had never been ill. He had never needed medical treatment in his whole life. Upon reaching his nineties, however, he required prostate surgery.

Like all Belgians, my grandfather had paid wage-related contributions to cover health insurance throughout his entire professional life. The Belgian health care system is a so-called pay-as-you-go system. Today’s young and healthy do not set money aside for their own future needs, but are compelled to pay for today’s sick and elderly. As my grandfather had never needed much health care, he had been a net contributor to the system. Now was the first time he was going to claim something back.

He had his operation in May. In November he was dead. The prostate operation had gone fine, but afterwards the hospital had given him an antibiotic drug that caused complete deafness. Though there were other, but costlier, drugs available, the hospital gave the old man the cheapest one. They knew about the side-effects, but it did not strike them as an unreasonable and unjust thing to do. Why should it? A man who has already had 90 healthy years of life surely has no right to complain about deafness when some people get more seriously ill or die at a far younger age. When my grandfather left the hospital he was completely deaf. He lost his will to live. Six months later, he was dead.

In many Western European countries, health care is the fastest growing segment of government spending. Over the past forty years there has been a significant increase in health-care spending. According to the latest OECD figures (2003), Western European countries spend between 7.3 and 11.5% of their gross domestic product on health care. Ten years ago it was between 6.9 and 9.9%. In 1960 it was only around 4%.

Source: OECD

Much of the rise in Europe’s health-care costs is caused by factors beyond government control, such as demographic evolution. Another important cause of rising expenditure, however, is the advancement of better and newer – but more expensive – medical technology.

There are only two ways to keep the present government-run European health-care systems going. One can either drastically increase the financial burden on those at the paying end of the system – the young and healthy of today – or one can drastically limit the quality and the availability of health care for those at the receiving end – the sick and the elderly.

For decades governments increased the financial burden on the working population. When this burden became intolerable, they shifted their policies towards cutting back quality. In Europe there are medical treatments, operations or drugs which are not available to persons above a certain age, or to persons who are considered too sick, or to anyone at all. Political authorities, claiming to be the guardians of solidarity in society, decide who is allowed to get what kind of treatment, operation or drug. Soon euthanasia might be the price the solidarity principle of the welfare state imposes on those people whose health care is costing society the most. Politicians in Belgium and the Netherlands have already granted their citizens a “right to die” by means of a lethal (and cheap) euthanasia injection. Is this a new “freedom” that the state, which is constantly restricting every other aspect of our lives, generously bestows on us? Or does it boil down to “economic euthanasia,” which enables governments to save money by eliminating those that cost the welfare state too much?

Other ways in which many governments in Europe have tried to control health-care spending has been by drawing up “negative lists” of drugs which doctors are not allowed to prescribe. Drugs are put on the “negative” list not because they are harmful, but because they are high-quality goods that are deemed too expensive.

For almost a decade now, governments have been stifling medical innovation in Europe. Last month the American drug company Pfizer decided not to build a new plant in Belgium because the Belgian government has been constantly raising taxation on pharmaceuticals. The government wants to reduce pharmaceutical expenditure by limiting drugs. They reckon that by limiting supply, demand will go down. In the same way, European governments discourage young people from becoming doctors, dentists or nurses. Many countries allow only a limited number of people to study for a medical profession, despite the fact that, due to the demographic development and the growing number of elderly, more doctors and nurses will be needed in the future.

Last week young physiotherapists demonstrated in the streets of Brussels. In Belgium physiotherapists, like doctors and dentists, need a licence to be allowed to set up a practice. Without a licence, the services provided by these medical professions are not reimbursed by the sickness fund – and without such reimbursement it is impossible to get any patients. The government has just limited the annual number of physiotherapy licences to 270. As 410 young people completed their (4-year) physiotherapy studies this year, it means that 140 of them will not be able to use their degree, unless they leave Belgium. The minister of Education says this is the fault of the universities: they are required to make the exams more difficult so that only the government prescribed number of 270 students can pass.

As is often the case, many of continental Europe’s policies are of German origin. In the early 1990s the German government, in a move designed to cut health-care costs, limited – and in some cases completely blocked – access to new drugs and medical technology. Since 1993 the German government has set separate budgets for each segment of the health-care market, with provisions of heavy sanctions if these budgets are exceeded. The 1993 pharmaceutical budget was set at $15 billion – a 9.1% cut from 1992. The government ruled that money spent over the budget would be taken out of doctors’ incomes. This caused a 25% drop in spending on medicine. Similarly, the sale of the seven largest research-intensive drug manufacturers fell by 16.5%, while the sales of generics (copycat drugs which are cheap because they were developped at least 15 years ago and hence no longer protected by patents) rose by 36%.

While these measures were successful in the field of cost control, they had devastating consequences for the pharmaceutical industry. The German pharmaceutical companies, no longer keen on developing new drugs, saw their world-wide share of drug patents drop to 8% from 16%. Doctors, afraid that they would have to pay the pharmaceutical bills out of their own pockets, started to refer their patients to specialists and hospitals. Patients with minor illnesses, requiring common and cheaper medicines were helped, but the doctors would “dump” their more serious cases instead of treating them in more costly ways. As a result, in 1993 Germany saw an increase of 10% in hospital patients and 9% in referrals to specialists.

The next year a similar phenomenon occurred at the level of the hospitals. They, too, were assigned budgets that they were not allowed to exceed. Consequently German hospitals, faced with patients who might cost too much, referred them to university clinics, which by law are not allowed to refuse patients. “Patients are being turned away, acutely ill patients are wandering from clinic to clinic, and expensive drugs are being withheld from cancer sufferers,” the German weekly Der Spiegel wrote in 1994 (April 11). “Money is being saved – even if it costs lives to do so. Whenever possible many hospitals are turning away expensive patients covered by the sickness funds. The only good patient is a cheap patient.”

Unfortunately, the German system has become the European model. Politicians in neighbouring welfare states, noticing the drop in German health expenditure, started to follow the German example. The only thing that mattered in their eyes was cost control. Many adopted the policy of adding drug volume control to price control and finally to prescription control. France introduced so-called negative recommendations, telling doctors what they are allowed to prescribe and what not. These recommendations have been made compulsory and doctors risk heavy financial penalties if they go against them.

At the root of these decisions is the understandable desire of governments to control health-care costs. But rationing is clearly not the answer. What many governments in Western Europe have overlooked is that there is nothing wrong with a society devoting more of its resources to health care. This even appears to be an indication of prosperity. The higher and the more developed a society becomes, the more its citizens are willing to spend on keeping healthy. Modern technology makes everything cheaper except the highest quality of medical care, which is constantly improving. To try to limit access to this technology in the name of “cost-control” is irresponsible.

Meanwhile, the larger and more fundamental problem of how to finance the health-care systems is not adressed. Instead of funding the provisions of today’s sick with taxes from today’s healthy and young, people should be building up reserves for their own future liabilities. What Europe needs is to replace its pay-as-you-go systems by privatized and capitalized health-care systems. This, however, would imply that the governments relinquish control over the system, which is the very last thing they are willing to do.

Believing:

I agree with the article that older people should be able to get appropriate treatment from the state even if the costs for medicines are too high. Nowadays, European governments are showing more concern for cost than effective medicine. The goal of the health-care policy is to help individuals to get healthy and to provide qualitative care for every individual. The current reform transforms health care into a consumer good because it depends on the salary of the person: people who earn enough are able to rely on the appropriate help from the state according to their high level of income. This creates division among the population. Health care should not let someone suffer or die only because the person is poor.

Doubting:

On the other hand, one has to accept the health-care reform on cutting back quality and paying only cheaper medicaments for older people whose illnesses require more expensive treatment. Europeans are getting older, and such a demographic shift also places a significant burden on a health-care system which challenges its sustainability. Heart disease, dementia, and arthritis are diseases common to the elderly. Since older people frequently face the risk of having these conditions, they require a lot of engagement from the doctors and health care, and their growth will also demand more health-care expenditures from the state to support them. European governments are no longer able to pay expensive drugs for the growing older population. As a result, they only pay the cheaper ones. It is the only way to cope with an ageing population which imposes tremendous financial pressures on the state that is no longer to support the huge numbers of the elderly.