Lewis, Tanya.
"Sun's Rays May Trim Lifespans." LiveScience. TechMedia
Network, 06 Jan. 2015. Web. 06 Jan. 2015.
<http://www.livescience.com/49345-uv-exposure-babies-lifespan.html>.
This article talks about the
consequences of major sun exposure to infants. Researchers from Norway have
theorized that people born during peaks of solar activity lived 5.2 years less
on average than people born during lower levels of solar activity. These
researchers are not exactly sure how the solar activity level during birth
affects the person’s lifespan. But they have noticed that UV radiation from the
sun degrades folic acid, which is a very important component for the infant’s
growth during pregnancy. In a new study, Gine Roll Skjærvø, a biologist at the Norwegian University
of Science and Technology in Trondheim, Norway, and co-author of this study has
examined the solar activity from data dating back to 1676 and 1878. She says
there is a solar activity cycle that lasts about 11 years. Within this 11-year
time period, there are usually 8 years of low solar activity and 3 years of
high solar activity.
This article was extremely
fascinating and potentially helpful for people wanting to get have children in
the future. The scientists and researchers in this article state that the best
time for conception would be during a time of lower solar activity. So, if
couples are very interested in maximizing the lifespan of their children, then
they could use research like this to plan accordingly. At the end of the
article, the author lists recent years of solar maximums, and the year 2000 was
one of the years. Many of my classmates, although not me, were born in 2000, so
they could potentially have a lifespan of about 5.2 years less than me.
Overall, the author did a great job
of writing this article. She listed many different sources and quotes from the
research and scientists themselves. Even though the author was not part of the
research, I was able to understand the research very well. Also, the author did
a great job of keeping the article interesting by adding different parts of the
research, such as the sun activity cycle. On the other hand, there were a
couple of words that she could have elaborated on. For example, she keeps
mentioning folic acid, but never explains what that is.
Bronxville high school Core Chemistry Honors
ReplyDeleteCurrent event 11 Olivia Scotti
Hannah Weirens review on the article “Sun's Rays May Trim Lifespan” by Tanya Lewis had some good and bad aspects. One thing that was good about this review is how she incorporated a quote because you could see the researches opinion on this. Another aspect of the article that was done well was her explanation on the effect it has because she put both the way it affects her and the world. The last thing that was done well was her summary because you really understood the main points of this article. One thing that could have been better is her critique. She could have made it better by adding more flaws of the article. Also she forgot to put the quote in quotation, which is critical when you are using a quote. One thing that amazes me is that babies exposed to lots of sunrays dies younger.
Lewis, Tanya. "Sun's Rays May Trim Lifespans." LiveScience. TechMedia
ReplyDeleteNetwork, 06 Jan. 2015. Web. 06 Jan. 2015. .
Hannah’s review of, Sun’s Rays May Trim Lifespans, was captivating and very interesting to read. First of all, I liked how she put in many details in her review on how and why this phenomenon happens. This allowed me to understand more about the article that she was reviewing. Furthermore, the fact that Hannah stated the name of a researcher that is in direct contact with this effect was very helpful. Finally, Hannah did a very good job explaining what this article meant for the world. By stating that parents could look at this research to help there soon to be child gain 5.2 years of life, was good point.
Although this review was interesting, when Hannah said that, “The author listed many different sources and quotes from the research and scientists themselves…” I thought that she was going to put some of those quotes in her review, so I was a bit disappointed that she didn’t. So if she had put some of those quotes, the review would have been a bit more interesting to read. In addition, in her last paragraph she could have expanded a bit more on her critique of the article, making it feel less rushed.
In conclusion, this review was well written and captivating to read. The major thing I learned from this review was that children born in 2000 could potentially live 5.2 years less than other children. I was amazed by this and also concerned as I was born in 2000! Overall, this changed my view because if we now have the ability to learn about this, we have the ability to learn about many other important things.