A Deadly Bacteria Has Been Infecting Children for More than 1,400 Years

 

Ariana Cutler

Mr. Ippolito

Chemistry 9

2/7/2022

 

Dance, Amber. “A Deadly Bacteria Has Been Infecting Children for More than 1,400 Years.” 

Science News, Society for Science & the Public, 2 Feb. 2022, www.sciencenews.org/article/deadly-bacteria-infection-medieval-child-haemophilus-influenzae-type-b.

 

I read and reviewed “A deadly bacteria has been infecting children for more than 1,400 years,” an article by Amber Dance. It begins with giving historical context on its topic, pathogen Haemophilus influenzae type b. (or Hib - a bacterial illness that can lead to possibly fatal brain infection in young children), and discusses what this bacteria causes, stating that “Hib can cause other serious illnesses such as pneumonia and meningitis” (Dance). This follows with how Hib can be fought against, saying that “a vaccine against Hib has largely sidelined the pathogen” (Dance) since the late 1980s. In order to elaborate on the causes and preventions, the article links other science websites such as ScienceNews. It then begins to talk about the main point, which is a 1,472-year-old corpse of a 6-year-old boy. DNA found in his tooth shows that “Hib was infecting people at the same time as the first historically documented pandemic due to plague, caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis” (Dance). Y. pestis, or Plague, was also found on the boy’s tooth, unsurprisingly. The final paragraph of the article discusses the significance of this research and how it can help open “a window into how pathogens evolve to start pandemics or die out over thousands to millions of years” (Dance).

 

Currently, society is in a pandemic. Covid-19 has taken millions of lives and it still hasn’t ended. However, as Dance said, with research like this, the world will know more about how historical pandemics began and how they ended. Knowing the answers to those questions can help solve the answers on how to end our current pandemic and how to prevent future ones. 

 

In this article, the author hooked the reader in by using pathos, saying “The tragic death of a 6-year-old boy” (Dance) while also using logos by immediately stating a scientific fact. With the use of these rhetorical appeals, I felt both obligated and interested in reading the article. The article was short and simple, making it an easy and straightforward read. However, I felt that the article may have been too short and somewhat unfinished. In order to improve this, rather than simply linking other websites for the reader to further inform themself, the author could have discussed what is written in those linked articles more in-depth. Despite its unfinished feel, I found the article to be interesting and effective in getting its information across.

What’s Going On With Vaccines for Kids Under 5?

 

Lux Burgin                                                                                                                                           2/10/22

Period C Even                                                                                                          Chemistry Current Event

 

In the article “What’s Going On With Vaccines for Kids Under 5?” from the New York Times, author Jessica Grose lists the benefits of vaccines for the age group, and explains remaining uncertainties on the topic which may turn parents off from getting their child vaccinated. This past Tuesday, New York Times’s Noah Weiland and Sharon LaFraniere reported that “children 2 to 4 years old who were given two shots were infected at a rate 57% lower than the children in the placebo group. Children 6 months to 2 years old who got shots were infected at a rate 50% lower than the placebo group” based on an unnamed source familiar with the Pfizer BioNTech data. That being said, the vaccine lowers the chances of COVID-19 infection drastically, allowing for a further sense of safety as to the pandemic. Dr. Sean O’Leary, a pediatric infectious disease specialist who researches vaccines, was asked about the risk of the possible side effect myocarditis -- an inflammation of the heart muscle -- for the age group. Parents have expressed significant concerns as to myocarditis beforehand, yet O’Leary’s study based on health data of around two million people found that COVID-19 is surprisingly more likely to cause myocarditis than the vaccine itself. The next issue Grose considers is rushing to release the vaccine now, or waiting a few weeks. Allowing access to vaccines for the under-five age group now means more of the population would be vaccinated sooner, yet rushing may also cause parents to lose trust in the scientific process – ultimately resulting in less children vaccinated by the fall. Grose’s guess is that once the vaccine is available for these children, it will be their personal pediatricians and other local associations, including schools, that will be most compelling in convincing parents to get the shots for their kids. Grose states that the Kaiser Family Foundation has found that when schools encouraged vaccines, parents were more likely to follow through with getting their children vaccinated. Kaiser also found that “pediatricians remain parents’ most trusted source of information on the Covid-19 vaccine for children”.

This article informs readers of the existing status of the COVID-19 vaccine in the under 5 age group. Parents of such children benefit from having such information, as it may answer some of their related questions and ease concerns. After reading the article, parents are likely more convinced about getting their child a vaccine, as the article provides factual statistics and a stronger argument for vaccination of this age group rather than not. As the pandemic unfortunately continues to carry on, it is vital for uncertain parents to look into the topic and gain knowledge.

Jessica Grose’s article was very informative and well-written, containing much important information for readers to digest. Grose’s article is an opinion piece, but it still provides the strengths of the other side of the argument, as well. Acknowledging the opposing argument is quite important in opinion pieces because it boosts credibility and respect. The author included many details I did not know of before, especially the side effect myocarditis being more likely with COVID-19 than as a side effect. I found that particularly interesting. However, I think Grose could have included more comparisons, showing percentages comparing the vaccinated and unvaccinated, in order to shed light on the positive effects of the vaccine even more.

Power at sea: Towards high-performance seawater batteries

 

Charlotte Black

Mr. Ippolito

Chemistry, C Even

2/9/22

 

National Korea Maritime and Ocean University. “Power at sea: Towards high-performance seawater batteries” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 31 January 2022. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/01/220131153302.htm.

 

The central idea of the article, “Power at sea: Towards high-performance seawater batteries”, by National Korea Maritime and Ocean University, is that Lithium-ion batteries are extremely useful, but are scarce and expensive, so to make up for this, scientists have begun looking into seawater batteries which are sodium-based. The seawater batteries alone aren’t perfect as making them high-quality isn’t cheap, and ultimately, carbon based batteries are better priced, but they need to be “co-doped”, or tuned, with other materials and this process is difficult and even threatening. A solution to this problem is a procedure made by a scientific panel from Korea Maritime and Ocean University led by Associate Professor Jun Kang, called ‘plasma in liquid’. In such a procedure, a combination of carbon, Nitrogen, and Sulfur and plasma is put into a solution. The result is an efficient source of energy that is inflammable, environmentally friendly, and cannot be damaged by seawater.

This discovery can improve society in multiple ways including providing more efficient and environmentally friendly energy options, as the battery is sodium based, as well as creating an energy source that can be used underwater. As the state of the environment worsens, seawater batteries offer a safe and environmentally friendly source of power that can be critical to helping the well being of our planet. Additionally, since it can be used underwater, it can supply power to nuclear power plants in the event of an emergency. It can also provide power to salvage equipment on passenger ships, essentially saving lives. 

            This article is overall well written and did a good job of going into the benefits of seawater batteries. For example, they made the benefit for using the battery at sea very clear although they could have gone more into the benefits that it has on the environment since it had mentioned that there were. The article also did a good job of describing why SWB’s are a better option opposed to Lithium-ion batteries. The article also cites a paper from a panel of scientists and mentions them in their article when talking about how the SWB’s were altered, which helps demonstrate the source's reliability. Although it was a well written article, some aspects of it could have been better. For example, I don’t feel as though they went through the process at which they made N/S co-doped carbon for the seawater battery very well. The article only explained what was done briefly without going that much into how it was done and why. The article at times was also a bit hard to understand and some aspects were left unexplained. I think that this article could have benefited from going a bit more in depth as to how the SWB’s were altered as well as adding more explanations to back up what they are saying.