Mcneil, Donald. "First Outbreak Quashed, Ebola Reappears in Mali." The New York Times. The New York Times, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/health/mali-reports-a-second-larger-ebola-outbreak.html?rref=science&module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=N.Y. /
The article I read was how a second outbreak of Ebola happened in Mali. This outbreak, which was significantly larger than the first, happened when as it states in the article,” … a 70 year old religious figure, a grand imam, who fell ill in Guinea and traveled to
Mali for better treatment at a major private clinic in Bamako, Mali’s capital.” The doctor arrived at the clinic, but the doctors did not test him for Ebola, so no precautionary measures were taken causing him to infect a nurse and his family. Once doctors figured out he had Ebola, they quickly raced to quarantine anyone the man had contacted. Due to the fact that Mali is located so close to countries infected with Ebola, many have argued that Mali should shut down its borders with these countries. However, the Malian government has declined to do this, do to the fact that there is so much land to cover and may Malians have family in Guinea.
The outbreak of Ebola in Mali has a very significant effect society. This is because the outbreak in Mali is one of the first uncontrolled outbreak in any country beside the 3 heavily infected ones, Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. If Ebola keep spreading to different countries in Africa, it will become more and more hard to contain, and also much harder to help the victims. While Ebola isn’t airborne, it can be spread through bodily fluids, and because of its high death rate, if Ebola isn’t contained it could become a global epidemic.
There were several thing the author did that I both liked and disliked. One thing I liked was the author included quotes from people involved in the Ebola battle, like experts from the World Health Organization, so the article seemed to have a certain level of credibility it wouldn’t have been able to have without the quotes. Another thing I liked was how the author describe the travel Ebola, because it gave the reader an idea of how quickly Ebola spreads.
One thing I disliked about the article was how the author didn’t provide much background about Ebola and just expected the reader to know what it was. This could be improved just by adding in another short paragraph giving a quick summary on Ebola. Another thing the author could improve upon was making the idea that Ebola is very deadly clear. They could do this by simply including some survival statistics for Ebola or give an example of how the disease caused a person to suffer before they died.
I read Sean's review of the article, "First Outbreak Quashed, Ebola Reappears in Mali.". In his review Sean did a good job of critiquing the article. Sean provided ides for the author that made the critique effective. I also liked how Sean wrote a great paragraph on how the Ebola can effect the world. Sean used facts to say why this is a problem. A final pro of Sean's review was that he was concise. I liked that he did not coat the information with useless words. Sean provided a short review that gave good information about this issue.
ReplyDeleteSean could improve his review by making it flow better. I felt that Sean's review did not have any flow, he jumped from one though to another paragraph without warning. This made the review a bit confusing. Sean could also improve his summary. To improve the summary he could have added more information that the author left out of the article. Making a better Summary could make the review more understandable.
I learned that Ebola is spreading throughout Africa, and I was amazed to see that Mali is not taking better precautions to protect its people.
Mcneil, Donald. "First Outbreak Quashed, Ebola Reappears in Mali." The New York Times. The New York Times, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/health/mali-reports-a-second-larger-ebola-outbreak.html?rref=science&module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=N.Y. /
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/health/mali-reports-a-second-larger-ebola-outbreak.html?rref=science&module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=N.Y.%20%2F%20Region&action=keypress®ion=FixedLeft&pgtype=article
The article review I read was written by Sean Curren, about the spread of the Ebola disease to Mali. Sean does multiple things well in his review. The first being his well written summary. Sean wrote in a neutral perspective, and gave an omniscient view of the situation to the reader. His thoughts were well organized and the story was told in sequential order. The second thing Sean did well was his relevance paragraph. He connected the article to society and the world arround the situation, which gave the reader more insight. The third thing Sean did well were his suggestions in his critique paragraph to improve the article. Sean gave good advice, such as giving the reader a background paragraph to try and hook the reader on the Ebola threat. His suggestions would lead to improvement.
ReplyDeleteSean could improve in a few ways. The first would be by using evidence in the form of quotes. Sean bended the information slightly to make it seem more convincing, when a quote from the article about the same fact would have a greater impact. He constantly talked about the wealth of quotes in the article, and he forgot to use them himself. The next way Sean could improve is to slow down and proofread his work. The review seems a bit rushed, and the reader constantly has to stop and work through the missing letters and punctuation. Other than that, Sean wrote a good paragraph.
This article helped me to realize that ebola is a more dangerous threat than I ever imagined, and it will take everyone’s co-operation to stop it. I learned this after reading about how persistent people were refusing to change to a safer lifestyle because of tradition. For example, the imam’s family refuse to have an ebola safe burial out of respect for tradition. This article has changed how I perceive the real threat of ebola. Not only is it just a dangerous virus, it is a dangerous virus that separates people and makes them disagree. The article helped me realize that is our greatest weakness.
Sam Abukhadra 11/16/14
ReplyDeleteCurrent Event Comment Chemistry
Mcneil, Donald. "First Outbreak Quashed, Ebola Reappears in Mali." The New York Times. The New York Times, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/health/Mali-reports-a-second-larger-ebola-outbreak.html?rref=science&module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=N.Y. /
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/health/mali-reports-a-second-larger-ebola-outbreak.html?rref=science&module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=N.Y.%20%2F%20Region&action=keypress®ion=FixedLeft&pgtype=article
I read Sean’s review of "First Outbreak Quashed, Ebola Reappears in Mali.” Overall, I think he did a very good job. There were many areas that Sean presented his points very well, while there are some where there is room for improvement. One aspect of the review that I thought he did very well was how he gave the full story and background, as well as the timeline around the period of which he initially caught and was tested for Ebola. I really liked this because it allows us to fully understand the process which takes place. Another aspect of the review that I really liked was how Sean really stressed the severity of the situation. He made it clear that if action isn’t taken there will be severe consequences when he was referencing and making comparisons to the three most heavily effected countries, Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. The third aspect of Sean’s review that I thought was well presented was how he gave specific reasoning for his opinions on the article. He does this very well when giving his opinion on the way the doctor incorporated quotes into the article. I liked Sean’s specific reasoning because it made all of his points very clear and easy to follow.
Although there were many very good aspects of Sean’s review, there were also some parts that were not as well presented. One area which could use improvement is his grammar. There are so many very simple grammatical errors such as the incorrect use of Apostrophes and absence of s’s to make words plural. The grammatical errors really degrade the professionalism of the article and make the review seem less sophisticated. If these grammatical errors were correctly, the article would be very much improved. Another area in which I think there is room for improvement in Sean’s review is when he was criticizing the article. When he was recommending ways in which the article could be improved, he didn’t say why this would improve the article. He could easily fix this problem by writing as sentence about how this would improve the article. This fix would really take the review to a new level of depth.
Sean’s article had many very interesting and rewarding facts. Among them, the one that really struck me the most was the difficulty of containing Ebola and the severity and chance of it spreading to become a global epidemic. This stood out to me because it changed my whole perception on just how dangerous Ebola is and how serious the spread of Ebola could potentially become. Overall, Although there were many areas for improvement, I thought that Sean’s review was very well written, filled with very strong, interesting facts and ideas.