Reader Response Draft 3

Iburch (2015) suggested in "Pharmaceutical Disposal" that to prevent contamination of water sources due to "common” pharmaceutical disposal which causes health problems to lives, legislation is helpful. Iburch claims flushing of medications is common and drugs are detected in the water resources. Studies support his idea by detecting drugs in 80% of water sources tested by an organisation called USGS. Iburch notes water treatment plants cannot filter out the medications. These medications affect aquatic life, especially the amphibians. He mentions studies showing spawning problem and drop of fertility in aquatic lives caused by the medications. Iburch believes that to prevent such contaminations, safe and convenient medication disposal is the key. Laws, such as Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act which promotes “drug take-back”, have been passed and ways are provided to dispose the drugs safely. However, the causes he listed for the problem are not comprehensive. Furthermore, his claim of effect of the medication on aquatic life lacks direct evidence to support the validity.

Ibruch’s argument is not comprehensive when he talks about the ways to solve the contamination of pharmaceuticals in water. The recommendation of not to flush the pharmaceuticals into the toilet and legislation are the possible ways. However, Ibruch does not discuss about the root causes of the problem. For instance, pharmaceuticals may not be used because people purchase them in large amounts unnecessarily. Just to talk about flushing and providing ways for safe disposal are not enough for this situation. Sealing the bags containing pharmaceutical wastes as suggested by scientists from Harvard Medical School (2011) also means that the bags that are not sealed may cause the same contamination problem even if the pharmaceuticals are not disposed into the water. Furthermore, pharmaceuticals for external application or in skincare products and perfumes (Harvard Medical School, 2011) may be used. These pharmaceuticals may be washed away from the skin, ending up as the contaminants in water. In addition, they are also secreted through human skins or with human waste into the water (Fallik, D., 2013). In these situations, not to flush the pharmaceuticals into the toilet or legislation for “drug take-back” is not constructive. Therefore, the lack of analysis of the root causes in such contamination problem fails to give the readers a complete picture of the problem. This makes the argument misleading.

In addition, the data used to show the negative consequences of the pharmaceutical contaminations to the aquatic life is not convincing enough. As suggested by  Eisenstadt L. (2005), the abnormality of the aquatic life can be affected by “weather changes, other chemicals present in the water, temperature fluctuations, and a host of other variables” in an environment without high control. Thus, without data that can show the direct relationship between pharmaceutical contamination and aquatic life, the argument of the author on the water contamination problem is weak.

In sum, despite using data to build the link on how pharmaceutical contaminants are caused and cause other problems, the author should demonstrate a more comprehensive analysis to show the root causes of the pharmaceutical contamination and try to show data demonstrating a more proportional and convincing relationship between the contamination and the environment. However, regardless of whether pharmaceutical disposal practice is a way for such water contamination, the contamination in the water sources is an existing and proven problem.

References

Fallik, D. (2013). This New study found more drugs in our drinking water than anybody knew and no one's doing anything about it. The New Republic. Retrieved October 1, 2015, from http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115883/drugs-drinking-water-new-epa-study-finds-more-we-knew


Harvard Medical School. (2011). Drugs in the water. Retrieved October 1, 2015, from http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/drugs-in-the-water


Eisenstadt L. (2005). Drugs in the water. Triplepoint. Retrieved October 1, 2015, from http://www.bu.edu/sjmag/scimag2005/features/drugsinwater.htm

Iburch. (2015). Pharmaceutical disposal. Citizens campaign for the Environment. Retrieved October 1, 2015, from http://www.citizenscampaign.org/campaigns/pharmaceutical-disposal.asp

Draft 2 great reader e-response

Lburch (2015) alleged in "Pharmaceutical Disposal" that legislation can help to prevent contamination of water sources by "common” pharmaceutical disposal which causes health problems to lives. Lburch claims Flushing of medications is common. Drugs are detected in the water resources. Studies support his idea by detecting drugs in 80% of water sources. Lburch notes water treatment plants cannot filter out the medications. These medications affect aquatic life, especially the amphibians. He mentions studies showing spawning problem and drop of fertility caused by the meditations. Lburch believes, to prevent such contaminations, safe and convenient medication disposal is the key. Laws, such as Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act, were passed and ways are provided and promoted dispose the drugs safely. However, the causes he listed for the problem is not adequately comprehensive. Furthermore, part of his claim lacks direct evidence to support the reliability.

Lbruch’s argument is not comprehensive when he talks about the ways to solve the contamination of pharmaceuticals in water. Not to flush the pharmaceuticals into the toilet and legislation are the possible ways. However, Lbruch does not discuss about the root cause of the problem. Pharmaceuticals may not be used because people purchase them in large amounts unnecessarily. Just talk about flushing here or providing ways for safe disposal are not enough for this situation. Sealing the bags containing pharmaceutical wastes as suggested by Harvard University (2015) also suggests that the bags that are not sealed may cause the same contamination problem even if the pharmaceuticals are not disposed into the water. Furthermore, pharmaceuticals, for external application or in skincare products and perfumes (Harvard University, 2015) , may be used, but they are secreted through human skins or with human waste into the water, too (D. Fallik, 2013). In these situations, not to flush the pharmaceuticals into the toilet or legislation is not practical. Therefore, the lack of analysis of the root causes in such contamination problem fails to give the readers a complete picture of the problem. This makes the argument misleading.

In addition, the data used to show the negative consequences of the pharmaceutical contaminations to the aquatic life is not convincing enough. As suggested by L. Eisenstadt (2005), the abnormality of the aquatic life can be affected by “weather changes, other chemicals present in the water, temperature fluctuations, and a host of other variables”, in an environment without high control. Thus, without data that can show the direct relationship between pharmaceutical contamination and aquatic life, it renders the impact of how people react to the consequence of the contaminations.

Summarily, despite using data to build the link on how pharmaceutical contaminations is caused and causes other problems, the author should show a more comprehensive analysis to show the root causes of the pharmaceutical contaminations and try to show data demonstrating a more proportional and convincing relationship between the contaminations and the environment. However, no matter pharmaceutical disposal practice is a way for such water contaminations, the contaminations in the water sources are a truly existing and proven problem for people to worry about.

References

Lburch (2015, March 4). PHARMACEUTICAL DISPOSAL

 . Retrieved from http://www.citizenscampaign.org/campaigns/pharmaceutical-disposal.asp

Harvard University (2015). Drugs in the water

 

 . Retrieved from http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/drugs-in-the-water

Lburch (2015, March 4). PHARMACEUTICAL DISPOSAL

 . Retrieved from http://www.citizenscampaign.org/campaigns/pharmaceutical-disposal.asp

D. Fallik (2013). This New Study Found More Drugs in Our Drinking Water Than Anybody Knew And no one's doing anything about it . Retrieved from http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115883/drugs-drinking-water-new-epa-study-finds-more-we-knew

Lay Jeon Hin's great article take 1!

Several years ago, my parents gave me the opportunity to study in Singapore. They are still waiting with hope that I can develop wider visions and better communication skills in an environment where English language skills are vital. However, I did not cherish the opportunity. In secondary school, I chose to speak to speak Mandarin rather than English to make my life easier and more comfortable. Of course, that also made my academic life a tough one, especially when preparing for O-level. Unfortunately, I still refused to pay attention to the problem, until the day I went for an interview of internship opportunity to Oxford University. Of the three candidates, I was the only deprived of the opportunity! The confusion shown by the interviewer from the university already suggested that he failed to understand my English before I left the interview room! Yes, with consideration of my silliness, I would never ever work inside the university again after losing this opportunity to others! I just lost to others on the skill of communication! I did not value English adequately in term of speaking. That is why my friend, who read English story books and watched SBC (Scottish Broadcast Channel) and MTV Asia everyday, received good results and ended up studying in National University of Singapore, oh my god! After the interview, I finally stepped up to salvage my English! I commenced to communicate in English with others, even during the time of talking claps. I switched my phone setting to English. I watched Channel 5 rather than channel 8.

Due to my effort, I have made the life of my lecturers easier since nowadays they save a lot of effort in understanding me! Perhaps what I need to do in the future is to make English story books interesting to me which is a challenging task!

Editted 16.9.2015

people are now thinking of a different line. they realise that they cant avoid the responsibility to create a way of substanable development.

張韶涵擠下Jolin 空降五大唱片榜首

angela劲吖~~~~~~~~~~~~~