Our Previous Samples

Table of contents

1. Venom
2. Hemotoxin
3. Cytotoxic
4. Neurotoxins

Snakes are one of the most widely found species. They can be found on every continent except Antarctica and some smaller islands. They are very good at survival and live many months without food and water. Snakes fall under Reptilia class. Altogether more than 20 families of snakes are known, which consist of about 520 Genera and have about 3600 Species.

Talking about their physical attributes, snakes are recognized by their long and legless bodies although it is not a universal rule because some species of lizards can closely resemble these features. The shape and size of snakes can vary from about 10.5 cm long to 6.9 meters. They are carnivores and feed on small insects (Rats, Bugs etc) to big animals (Goats, Deer, etc) Anyhow not all species of known snakes are venomous. A mere 600 Species are known to be venomous. Most commonly known poisonous snakes belong to the members of Hydrophiidae, Elapidae and Atractaspididae. Solets find out what exactly venom is and how does it prove to be so lethal and effective.

Venom

Venom is a poisonous substance secreted by animals such as Snakes, Spiders, and scorpions and is typically injected into the prey by biting or stinging. Snakes have specialized venom glands in their skull and fangs to bite and inject their prey or aggressor with venom. Different species of snakes have different kinds of venoms which makes some snakes much more poisonous than others. Broadly the venom can be categorized into hemotoxins, cytotoxins and neurotoxins. These are the most commonly found venoms in snakes but sometimes snakes might carry a mixture of these which can be very hard to treat.

Hemotoxin

Hemotoxins destroy the red blood cells and often hinder the formation of blood clots. Moreover, they attack special tissues such as heart, lungs and kidneys causing organ failure and excessive bleeding. These toxins also aid the digestion of the prey. These are the slowest of all the venoms and can take hours to take effect. The effects of this on humans can be low blood pressure, nausea and profound bleeding. Most common examples snakes which have this venom are the King Cobras and Pit Vipers.

Cytotoxic

Cytotoxins basically work on the same principle of hemotoxins but these are capable of attacking and destroying all living cells in the body. Hence these act much faster and cause severe swelling, bleeding and pain. These also cause watery blisters and bleeding under the skin. The pain has been described by many as “Cold Fire” under the skin. Puff Adders, Western barred Spitting Cobra and Gaboon Adders are some species of snakes that carry this venom.

Neurotoxins

Neurotoxins, as the name suggests, are specialized in attacking the nerve tissues. These inhibit the communication across synapse i.e. the nerve endings. This causes severe damage to the central nervous system and can cause epilepsy and dementia. These act the fastest of all three and sometimes can even leave the prey paralyzed. Snakes which use this kind of venom often eat their prey while they are still alive and in a paralyzed state. Some examples of these snakes are Black Mamba and Snouted Cobra. Odds of You Dying by Snake Bite

Speaking about all this, most snakes aren’t interested in humans as a prey. Unless you provoke them they won’t hurt you at all. The chance of you dying by a snake bite is 1 in 50 million. The chances of you getting hit by a car are much better than that. So don’t be afraid to go out in wild and explore. A special message for all the harry potter fans out there- Don’t try to talk to snakes, they’ll think you are stupid.

Are the Humanities important in the field of Technology? Yes, If having the knowledge or basis on humanities helps us to understand the tastes and requirements of the client, therefore you can become the desired success for both the company and the customer. The central theme is based on the contribution that could be made by both authors who present their thoughts on the Degree of Humanities combined with some degree of STEM in the Technological area. The difference between one article and another is that Edward Conard presents us with a business and people's administrative staff who create and found high-innovation and technology companies that make an explosion in the economy unprecedented and successful.

While the article by Christian Madsbjerg and Mikkel B. Rasmussen 'We Need More Humanities' presents us with different types of successful people with Degrees in Humanities and/or combined with Degrees of Technology (STEM). These focus on having some relationship with customers and are successful, but unlike Edward Conard's article 'We Don't Need More Humanities' it encompasses other positions of the company that although it is aimed at the product in a certain way relates to the needs of the customer and are successful even if they have a STEM degree with combined humanities.

In my opinion, the authors of 'We Need More Degree in Humanities' present a more credible and convincing argument since it is not only concentrated in the administrative and technological area but presents a more complete and impartial argument in the sense that a whole process, in the end, who decides whether one is successful in both the administrative area or the product is the customer, to the person who will have my product. But if we do not understand their requirements and/or tastes we will never have the client satisfied, because the wait at the end of a career to understand the needs of the client when in a study area we can learn it. Customers will decide the future of the company and their products both may be right but they have to present all the most important areas of the company since it is as important that it manages as the one that makes the product or relates to the customer. The success of a company is everyone can't be just a person or department. That's called working as a team for a common good Succeeding in our company with our customers 'Companies with the most sophisticated such as Intel, Microsoft, and Johnson & Johnson leading the charge are starting to launch major initiatives with names like 'customer-centric marketing' and ‘deep customer understanding’.

The goal of these programs is to help companies better understand the people they are selling the product to, and the problem is that engineers and most designers generally create products for people whose tastes they are similar to yours, this is to understand the customer's behavior and tastes. This must be constantly being done because we must keep up to date to know the behavior and tastes of the client. This is because the client constantly changes his mind, he hopes that the final product is to his liking and taste. Each client is different from having different tastes, opinions, and visions while always asking for the best in different ways, even if they offer the same product.

Both articles were published on the same date and in the same year, July 30, 2013, but with different authors, given in the article Edward Conard, ' We Don't Need More Humanities.' It is limited and updated to one area and/or area only to large companies of high-tech while reporting the article by Christian Madsbjerg and Mikkel B. Rasmussen ' We Need More Humanities Majors' went a little further and is much more up-to-date and comprehensive in information and recommends both companies with educational institutions to have combined STEM and Humanities.

The credentials of the authors while Edward Cornard is a Harvard graduate with an M.B.A degree, author, and economist. In my opinion, he is an authority on the subject discussed. Madsbjerg and Rasmussen the authors of this article are the main partners of Red Associates company which advises Fortune 300 companies. I think that with this little information their credentials are quite credible since they are authorities in the field of business consulting.

In both articles, they appeared in the Washington Post on July 30, 2013. In Mr. Cornard's article, I understand that there is systematic error bias. Since all the information is directed in favor of the article and does not demonstrate anything about how we can remedy those who already have Humanities in the future, you simply have to study STEM to move on. There is no bias in the article by Madsbjerg and Rasmussen. If both authors refer to academics and research; in both articles, the sources are identified and have credibility. If in my opinion, the credibility of both is extremely strong and highly knowledgeable in the field of articles.

The purpose of both articles is to point out the importance of the Humanities in the field of technology, either negatively or positively. Yes, both articles try to persuade the reader that in the article Mr. Cornard there is a problem, but it is not necessary to have a degree in humanities only if you want to be up to date with high technology, which you can only solve by studying some degree in STEM. In the article by Madsbjerg and Rasmussen, the opposite is true, the authors refer to the fact that they need a degree in humanities to understand clients in their different tastes or understandings about technology, they refer to both cases in STEM and Humanities. So important to authors who advocate both business and university in the field of research and development that it should be kept in mind that STEM and the humanities are essential for success in the technology field without having to retrain staff to understand to the customer in their tastes and desires in technology.

Mr. Cornard's article is only informative, the Humanities conclusions are not essential in technology looking only at the technical aspect is true but it is only in the administrative area since it is the area referred to in the article and the conclusions would be reasonable in the high management area. In the article by Madsbjerg and Rasmussen, it is informative, their conclusions are based on points of view from different areas in technology. The authors allow us to have Humanities with Technology or Technology with Humanities to combine both degrees of knowledge in 1 alone regardless of where you are working in the company, from a top executive to a simple team programmer. They are reasonable in the short term and leave room for improvement in the long term with business and education in the area of ??research and development.

We have to remember that there are two different claims although it has common in the Degree of Humanities, discrepancy, and different claims. On the one hand the article 'We Don't Need More Humanities ' claims that the Degree in Humanities is not necessary for the administrative area in technology, and the article 'We Need More Humanities Majors' claims that the degree in Humanities is essential no matter what technological degree, one focuses on the degree of management but the other focuses on all areas of technical work, especially customer service that said previous no company is not successful if it did not have customers. Their arguments are based on statistics, comments, facts, and comments regarding technology and humanities. The arguments presented by both are valid from each other's points of view. The arguments and evidence presented with convincing the problem is the final approach or result to be able to sustain and maintain their respective claims are different.

The article 'We Need More Humanities Majors' plus we need more degrees in Humanities as it does not focus on the administrative area of the company, but takes into account other positions and takes into account that thinks customer regarding the product I am providing. For a company to be successful depends on having an optimal and excellent work team and above all what you consider as the customer can help me improve my service, product, and efficiency of the company is successful. Anyway, companies no matter the size, products, or service the end will always be the same, make profits. But to achieve this we need to have the knowledge to improve management, workers, products, and a good relationship with our customers no matter what knowledge we have we will always be evolving and improving our contours.

Work Cited

1. Conard Edward 'We Don't Need More Humanities Majors.' Current issues and enduring questions edited by Barnet, Sylvian; Bedau, Hugo; O'Hara John, St. Martins. 2017 pp. 469-470.
2. B. Rasmussen, MikkelCurrent; Madsbjerg Cristian 'We Need More Humanities Majors' Current issues and enduring questions edited by Barnet, Sylvian; Bedau, Hugo; O'Hara John, St. Martins. 2017 pp. 471-473.

Have you ever had the thought of how much everyone is depending on technology.Everything in this world depends on technology, you just have to think about it. The actions we do today that involve technological help are uncountable. According to a study by global tech protection an average person checks their phone every 12 minutes or at least 80 times a day. Most of the simplest task that need to be completed by humans are completed with the use/help ,or complete completion, of technology. In some cases technology could be a benefit to the humane society but in some scenarios it can be a lethal weapon or a harmful toy that we humans do not understand how to use. Are we too dependent on technology?

To begin talking about this problem you need to understand what technology means. Technology is the use of machinery or scientific knowledge in everyday tasks or impractical ways of completing a task.

If you think about AI, Artificial intelligence, AI could have a really big benefit on the world. AI could enhance efficiency and a recent example of tht is automobiles. It took years to develop regulation around the industry to make it safe. That said AI today is a huge benefit to society because it enhances our efficiency and throughput. On the other hand AI brings some cons to this world for example job loss. This is arguably the number one downside to AI consistently highlighted as a doom and gloom scenario were workers are laid off, unable to outperform machines.

Any technological advancements that this world has come to has had a benefit. First of all technology helps us to get to different places faster than usual, or with transportation. Transportation comes in different varieties, automobiles, scooters, motorcycles, planes and rockets. All of the transportation variations listed before help us to move from a place to another faster than walking by foot. Rockets would help us to explore the space with potential to find something living which will give this world an idea of what other life could be in different climates. At this point mostly scientists acquire the most advanced technology to help them advance in our world.

Research shown that an average human being checks their phone at least every 12 minutes. Most of those time would he for no reason. Just think of the times when you checked your phone just to look at it or make sure you still have it or just did not lose it. First thing we would do if we would lose our phone is loose our trust in everybody else. For example if you would lose your phone or some sort of device nearby your friends you would first ask everyone if anyone took it.

In conclusion, our society is very dependent on technology but in everything, there are pros and cons.  

Most modern children grow up listening to their mothers tell fairytales and other fictional stories, but what did they do before the time of Sleeping Beauty and Snow White? In earlier centuries, it was not uncommon for care of small children to be delegated to an aristocratic mother's servants and subordinates. As displayed in The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare, the actual mother in the tragedy provides minimal care to her daughter, Juliet. The Nurse, a prized servant in the Capulet household, was originally given the job of caring for Juliet as a baby, doing chores such as nursing her. But as Juliet grew older, the Nurse continued to care for Juliet like she would have cared for her own daughter. In Romeo and Juliet, Juliet’s mother was truly not a mother figure at all.

Taking the role of “mother” in the play is Juliet’s servant, known as the Nurse. When the Nurse first appears, she immediately gives off the feeling that she is an endearing character with a bright personality. The reader’s first meeting with her is during her telling of a comical story of Juliet as a young girl. “’Yea,’ quoth he, ‘dost thou fall upon thy face?/ Thou wilt fall backward when thou hast more wit;/ Wilt thou not, Jule?’ And, by my holidame,/ The pretty wretch left crying and said ‘Ay.’” (Act I, scene iii). The story refers to a time when Juliet was just learning to walk and toppled over. As the Nurse’s husband helped the child up, he made a relatively sexual comment referring to how she will one day lie on her back for a man. This is the first time the reader gets a taste of the Nurse’s comical character, which she carries with her throughout the story. Because the Nurse was in fact so humorous and easy-going, it was easu for Juliet to come and talk to her in her times of troubles, which is more than can be said about her actual mother, with whom she converses very little during the play.

Times of trouble came often for Juliet. Her secret marriage to Romeo created a barrier between her parents and her, which in turn drove her to discuss her issues with the Nurse. As Juliet said, “My only love, sprung from my only hate!” (Act I, scene v) referring to the enmity between Juliet and Romeo’s families. Juliet’s love for Romeo and her relatives' preconceived hatred of him place an even greater distance between Juliet and her mother. Along with the Friar, the Nurse was the “middleman” in Romeo and Juliet’s relationship. A quote by Juliet explains the Nurse’s role in connecting the two lovers: “My words would bandy her to my sweet love,/ And his to me,” (Act II, scene v). Despite the will of the rest of the household, the Nurse was always incredibly helpful and supportive of Romeo and Juliet’s love, until the day when yet another barrier arose.

To make the situation of secret marriage even worse, Lord and Lady Capulet set up an arranged marriage between Juliet and Paris, and being disowned was Juliet's only other option. After Juliet’s pleas to not marry him, the Nurse became an advocate for Juliet and stood up to Juliet's own father: “You are to blame, my lord, to rate her so,” (Act III, scene v). At that point in the story, the reader truly gets a sense of the extent of the bond between Juliet and the Nurse. After growing up with Juliet, the Nurse grew closer to her and began thinking of herself as less of a servant to Juliet and more of a mother.

But where was Juliet’s actual mother during all of her struggles? Juliet’s mother makes very few appearances in the course of the action, most of which are insignificant. There was a profound distance between her and her daughter, and it was a distance that, in the end, contributed to Juliet’s death. At a time when the Nurse stepped in for Juliet, Juliet's mother did just the opposite. During the dispute about marrying Paris, Juliet’s mother sided with her husband. She, too, joined with her husband in willingness to alienate Juliet: “Talk not to me, for I’ll not speak a word/ Do as thou wilt, for I am done with thee,” (Act III, scene v).

There in the hour of need, supportive of a sensitive young woman's actions, and available for comic relief, the Nurse is genuinely the image of a “mother figure” in The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet. Through Juliet’s childhood and adolescent years, the Nurse cared for Juliet like her own in more ways than one; as depicted onstage, the relationship between the Nurse and Juliet is certainly one of the most secure and humane bonds in the whole play. Possessing every quality a true mother should, the Nurse was indeed the closest person Juliet had to a mother.

What many people don’t know is that Oprah Winfrey came from nothing born in rural poverty and raised by a mother dependent on government welfare payments in a poor urban neighborhood but still came up to be really successful becoming a millionaire at the age of 32. Winfrey is an example that a person being surrounded by a negative environment, bad influences, poor parenting, and poverty does not determine someone’s individual success. In his book The Other Wes Moore author Wes Moore he talks about his life story and his struggles and how he overcame them becoming the person he is today. He also provides a view on someone who lived a similar life but experiencing a different outcome who was also named Wes Moore.

Due to this fact the author mostly portrays that intrinsic factors have a greater effect on a person’s individual success, specifically someone’s mindset and decisions, although extrinsic factors can have somewhat of an affect on success but intrinsic factors are more powerful overall. One of the biggest reasons why Moore shows more of intrinsic factors is because a person can make their own decisions such as not putting in the effort into their education or being involved in dangerous and negative things. In chapter 4 (76) the author was having a conversation with his mother about his education and his effort being put into his grades. Moore notes “What she didn’t know was that my problem in school was much more basic than a learning disability.

The problem was that I wasn't even showing up half of the time. It’s tough to do well in school as even an 11 year old boy when you’re picking what days to choose and go.” This text supports intrinsic factors because a person can choose to not make an effort to do something for example their education which can lead to a negative impact in a person’s future success. In addition to this Moore also portrays intrinsic factors highly have more of an affect someone’s success because they can choose to take part in dangerous and negative activity in chapter 7 (133) Wes’s gets caught for being suspicious by a police officer while selling his drugs he wrote “He quickly scanned his surroundings, checking to see if anyone had seen his drop.When he felt sure that he’d been undetected he moved toward the potential buyer it was a risk, and wes knew it but taking risks is at the heart of drug enterprise and scared money didn’t make money.”

This text presways Wes’s as being a risk taker because what he is doing is dangerous, challenging and can cause a lot of consequences this connects to intrinsic factors because he chooses to proceed to do it anyways knowing it makes him money. Another reason why Moore portrays more of intrinsic factors is because of someone’s mindset making negative or positive actions that will lead to a poor outcome to an individual's future success. In chapter 5 (100) Wes finds out he will become a father at an early age due to his lack of interest in using birth control and how he feels about it the text explains “He didn’t feel burdened by the thought that early parenthood would wreck his future plans because he didn’t really have any future plans and wasn’t overly stressed about the responsibilities of fatherhood.” Wes’s lack of interest in using birth control or protection is an example of an intrinsic factor because he chose to not use protection which lead him to having children at an early age having a huge impact on him later on in life.

Furthermore, the author also shows intrinsic factors by showing that someone can make positive decisions in chapter 7 (133) he talks about changing his life around and how he let military school have an influence on his character the text states “My next decision was clear. I wanted to stay at Valley Forge and attend it’s junior college, which would allow me to go to through the early commissioning process, receive my associates degree, and become a second litituent in the army. I wanted to soldiers.” Clearly Moore is showing that regardless of where he grew up surrounded by a lot of negative activities someone still can change their ways by making positive actions and decisions leading Moore to become the successful person he is today. On the other hand, others may argue that extrinsic factors have a greater impact on someone's individual success than intrinsic factors caused by someone's mindset and decisions. In chapter 6 (110) gives an update on the other Wes Moore’s life after he was released from juvenile detention center for having shot Ray. Wes tried to go to high school but was too far behind in all of his classes and his teachers were unable to work with Wes to get caught up enough to graduate. Moore notes “Not surprisingly, without a high school diploma or job training and with a criminal record wes found it impossible to find a job to support his growing family.”

This quote shows how Wes can’t support his family because of his background and life experiences although this is true people arguing against intrinsic factors fail to notice that Wes made the choice to physically hurt someone knowing it would have an impact on him later down the road and he also can’t get a decent paying job because of the choices he made to sum it up a person's decisions have a bigger impact on their future. Furthermore, others may argue that someone being surrounded by negative activity has a greater impact on determining someone’s indiuvals success such as their friends or people they are being influenced by and neighborhood environments. In chapter 4 (80) Moore notes “He looked at me a sly smirk you wanna tag i couldn’t say no. First off, Shea was one of the most respected young hustlers in the neighborhood. He was a worker, we all knew that-and while some of the kids were smart enough to be disgusted by what he did,other kids,even the ones who weren’t in the game,respected his position, Plus, I loved throwing my name up on a wall: it felt like splashing in the shallow end of the criminal pool.”

Even though Wes was influenced or surrounded by negative or bad energy he clearly had a choice or the right mindset to say no but proceeds to say yes his actions and decisions obviously have a higher chance in determining one's induvals success.

Every year, millions of animals are used to develop medical advancements, check the safety of products destined for human use, or explore effects of products or procedures. Using animals for these purposes constitutes abuse. Animals deserve the same rights that humans have and should not be used as test subjects in modern advancements. Animal dissections have been dated back to early 500 B.C. Aristotle, Herophilus and Erasistratus early Greek physicians have all used animals to perform experiments. They used these animals to discover functions of living organisms. Aristotle beloved that animals were not intelligent, therefore justice and injustice did not apply to them. Theophrastus however disagreed. He believed that animals could feel pain and causing pain to them was an affront to the Gods. Galen, a Greek physician from Rome was giant history of medicine. He engaged in public dissection which included dissecting an elephant.

This was a popular way of entertainment. He performed these experiments to better advance his understanding of anatomy, physiology, pathology, and pharmacology. Galen also believed that animal’s physiology was very similar to humans. Rene Descartes, a French philosopher thought that animals were “automata” who could not experience pain or suffer the way humans do. He then realized that animals could feel pain, but could not think. They were unable to consciously experience those feelings. Moorish Spain used animal testing as a method to practice surgical procedures before they were performed on humans. Laws were passed in several countries to make animal testing more “human”. Animals are inferior to humans, but are very different, so results from testing cannot be applied to humans. The 12th century is when drug testing on animals started to become important. In 1937, a pharmaceutical company in the United States made sulfanilamide using diethylene glycol (DEG) as a solvent. DEG was poisonous to humans and it eventually killed more than 100 people. There was not any animal testing done to make sure this product was safe. The public outcry from this event caused the passing of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act in 1938. This law requires drugs to be tested on animals before they could be sold.

Animal testing in the early 1800s and 1900s was not a big public objection until the 19th century when the increased of domestic pets fueled interest in an anti-vivisection movement mostly in England. This resulted in the founding of the society for the protection of animals liable to vivisection in 1875. Ivan Pavlov a Russian physiologist conditioned reflex by training dogs to salivate when hearing the sound of a bell. Minor operation took place to open the salivary duct from its natural place on the mucous membrane of the mouth to the skin outside. Next, a small glass funnel was placed to the salivary duct opening with a special cement. The “three Rs” were made to form the basis of many international animal welfare laws. The first R is for Replacement, replacing the use of animals with another alternative method. The second R is Reduction, reducing the use of animals whenever possible. The last R is Refinement, reducing the suffering of animals and improving their living conditions.

Animals were used by the United States space program in 1948 for testing space travel as effects of prolonged weightlessness. Several monkeys died when they were sent on a space flight in the 1940s. Yorick was the first monkey to survive a space flight. He later died from heart stress. The first living animal to reach Earth was a stray dog Laika. Laika died of overheating and panic. On April, 17, 1998, more than two thousands animals were sent to space for neurological testing. The United States military used animals for testing since the Vietnam War. The United States department of defense used 488,237 animals for research and combat trauma training. This included using goats and pigs for gunshot wounds, burns, and amputations for training military medics.

In 2001, a vet from Ohio was infecting cats with the AIDs virus to study why methamphetamine users deteriorated faster from symptoms of AIDs. The national research council of the national academy of sciences called for the reduction of animal testing and more of the use of in vitro methods using human cells in 2007. March of 2013, the European Union banned the sale and import of cosmetic products that contained ingredients that were tested on animals. China is the only major market that still requires testing on all cosmetics products. This will be waivered for shampoo and perfume. Most of the 310 chimpanzees that were used for testing in May of 2007 will be retired in June 2013 and over the next few years. The Texas Biomedical research claimed that fifty chimps were not enough to make better developments in preventions and cures for Hepatitis B and C. Hepatitis B and C kills millions of people each year. All the chimps were retired in 2015.

The only person to have experimented on chimps was Gabon (para. 28). Animal testing has been regulated by the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). This act was passed in 1966 and was amended in 1970, 1976, and 1985. The AWA defines “animal” as any live or dead dog, cat, monkey, guinea pig, hamster, rabbit, or other warm blooded animal. There are animals that are excluded from this act and this includes birds, rats, mice, cool-blooded, and farm animals used for food and other purposes. The acts also requires each research facility develop an internal Institutional Animal Committee to represent society’s concerns regarding the welfare off animal subjects. This has to be comprised of three members. One member has to be a veterinarian, and one member must be unaffiliated with the institution. The food, drug, and cosmetic act was passed in 1938. This act required companies to prove that their products were safe and effective before putting them on the market. Animal studies are funded by United States Public Health Service (PHS) agencies, which include the National Institutes of Health (NIH), are regulated by the Public Health Servce Policy on Humane Care and use of laboratory animals. All PHS funded institutions have to base their animal cares on the guide for the Care and use of laboratory animals and on the AWA.

The number of animals used for research each year are reported by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). In 2010, 1,134,693 animals were used. This number excludes the animals that are not covered by the AWA. The number of animals not counted range from 85% - 96% of the total of all animals used for testing. The USDA breaks down pain types into three categories. The first category is animals that experience pain, but are given drugs to reduce the pain. In 2010, 339,769 animals experienced this category. The second category is animals that experience pain, but are not given drugs to reduce the pain. 97,123 animals in 2010 were in this category. The last category is animals that do not experience pain and are not given drugs to reduce the pain. 697,801 animals were in this category. The United States first recognized animal rights in 1822, with the passage of the III-treatment of cattle act. The ASPCA (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) was founded to bring worldwide attention to the issue of animal rights in 1866. Animal rights are based on the belief that animals are equal, and have the same rights and interests that humans do. This means that animals could not be used for entertainment, food, clothing, and experiments. This gives animals the three basic rights: life, liberty, equality, security, and freedom from enslavement.

Peter Singer is one of the founders of the animal rights movement. The main difference between humans and animals seemed to be their consciousness. Animal testing is ant scientific experiment that an animal undergoes that cause suffering, pain, or lasting harm. 100 million animals in the United States suffer every year because of animal testing. Some of these tests include; chemical, food, drug, medical training, cosmetics, dissection, medical experiments at universities, and biology experiments. Some examples of animal testing is forcing mice and rats to inhale toxic fumes, force feeding dog’s pesticides, and dropping chemicals into the sensitive eyes of rabbits. Humans are different from animals that research often gets irrelevant results. Stress caused from the animals living conditions can develop neurotic behaviors such as; biting themselves, rocking back and forth, spinning in circles, and pulling out their fur. Almost all of these animals will be killed after that have endured a life full of loneliness and pain.

Nine hundred and four thousand, one hundred and forty-seven animals that are covered by the AWA were held in labs last year, and 767,622 of these animals were used in research. These numbers do not include animals that are not covered by the AWA which include: mice, rats, fish and birds. Some of the animals used for research include: guinea pigs, hamsters, rabbits, dogs, pigs, sheep, other farm animals, cats, birds, fish, mice, and rats. The animal that is used the most are hamsters. Vertebrate animals and some invertebrate animals need permission to be able to use for experiments. Animals like mice, amphibians, fish and birds need no legal permission to use for experiments.

A very large percentage of animal testing causes “moderate” or “severe” suffering to the animal. Almost all of these animals being used will be killed after the experiment is over. Some of the tests that animals have to suffer through are; skin sensitization, eye irritancy, neurotoxicity, and mutagenicity. Animals that are used in laboratories are deliberately harmed. Laboratories are indoor environments where animals are forced to live in cages. Animals living in labs are denied their freedom movement and of control over their lives. They are denied attention and are treated badly if they do not cooperate. Most labs put the animals in cages by themselves and without others. Human Society International stated that cosmetic animal testing is still legal in eighty percent of the world and 300,000 animals die from these cosmetic testing’s every year just in China.

India, Israel, and the European Union all banned the sale of any cosmetics or cosmetic products that include ingredients that have been tested on animals. This means that companies all around have to abandon animal testing on cosmetic products if they want to sell in these big markets. In the United States there is no ban on testing cosmetics on animals, so companies can choose if they want to test their products on animals. Some of these tests include; making animals breathe in poisonous fumes or having lethal chemicals poured into their eyes or rubbed into their skins. These tests causes enormous pain and no pain relief is given to these animals. Even though there are many non-animal tests out there, cosmetic animal testing still continues. Some of these alternative options are growing or purchasing human skin cultures to use for skin irritation testing. Another alternative is using cornea 3D tissue structures produced from human cells to drop chemicals into to measure the amount of time it takes for the chemical to burn the cornea instead of using rabbit’s eyes.

Millions of live animals are tortured in high school labs and university biology and psychology demonstrations every year. Some of the animals are alive for the dissection and some are not. Animals used for these dissections are taken from the wild, slaughterhouses, or purchased from “Class B dealers” which gets their animals from shelters and free to good home ads. Turtle’s shells are smashed, so that the heart can be viewed. The brains of frogs are destroyed with pins and their muscles are stimulated with electricity. Rabbits are drowned and fetal pigs are cut from their mothers bodies after the mother is killed. American Medical Association does not recommend the use of animals as part of curriculum for high schools. Using another method instead of using animals would help students develop a better understating of anatomy, cognitive and manual skills, and confidence using videos, books, activity sets and physical and virtual models. Students learn to respect living beings, and start to appreciate and understand the role of animals in nature.

Ninety-eight percent of medical schools do not use animals to teach their students. Medical emergency courses do use pigs, dogs, sheep, and goats for trauma training. Needles are stabbed into their hearts and holes are cut into their chest and throats. Animals are also used for military training drills, pediatric programs, and other courses to practice using surgical tools. Human diseases do not typically occur in animals, therefore scientists have to insert, delete, and alternate their genes to match those of humans.

Most people at all the stages of their education career are not comfortable using animals for education. More than half of these people oppose animal testing. Using animals can traumatize them, foster insensitivity towards animals, and prevent some people from pursuing careers in science or medicine. Non-animal methods allow the students to repeat the procedure as many times as they need to become confident with it. Physicians that are in training are now taught through didactic methods, human-patient simulators, interactive computer programs, safe human-based training methods, and clinical experience. There are many alternative methods that can be used for medical purposes like; in vitro testing, computer modeling, research with human volunteers, and human-patient simulators. These alternative methods can often be cheaper, faster and more relevant to humans.

Harvard’s Wyss created the In vitro testing. This testing method “organs-on-chips” contains human cells grown in a system, so that they have the same structure and function of human’s organs and organ systems. These chips can be used for disease research, toxicity testing, and drug testing. Using this method replicate drug responses and human physiology more accurately than using animals would.

Researchers have developed computer modeling to simulate human biology and the progression of diseases. These computer models can accurately predict the ways that new drugs will react in humans. Computer simulators are used to determine the safety of chemicals. A chemical program called Tox21 uses virtual models to re-create the effect a certain chemical would have on the body. Using human volunteers replaces the use of animals in seeing how drugs will react in a human body. The volunteers are given a small one-time drug dose and are monitored to see how the drug behaves.

The use of human-patient simulators that bleed, breathe, convulse, talk, and even die have been seen to teach students pharmacology and physiology better than using animals. Ninety-seven percent of medical schools around the world as replace animal laboratories with human-patient simulators. For emergency courses a system called TraumaMan is used. This model has layers of skin and tissue, ribs and organs.

Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.

Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.

There are many things that can be done to stop the use of animals for testing. Join PETA’s action team, donate to charities that do not experiment on animals, buy cosmetic products that are cruelty-free, pushing the government to stop funding experiments on animals, funding non-animal methods, and helping students and teachers end dissections.

The use of animals in research has been an unresolved battle that’s hovered around since the establishment of the scientific discipline of bioethics in the 1960s. Just as surely as there are two sides to a coin, there are definitely pros and cons to using animals in research. The main drawback being, the inevitable trauma animals undergo and the pros being the expeditious advancement of medicine and study of disease pathology. The use of animals in research enable scientists to gain a better understanding of a disease pathway, and the molecular and physiological changes taking place in a diseased organism's body. An acute understanding of a disease is required to devise an appropriate treatment. A newly discovered treatment cannot be directly introduced into human beings without first verifying its efficacy and safety. In order for a drug to achieve this standard, it needs to undergo a series of tests and trials. One of these trials are going to be indefinitely conducted on a living organism best suited for the conditions of the research. A drug that doesn't pass an animal trial is very rarely used in human trials.

A common misconception is that animals used in research don’t benefit mankind. This however, is far from true considering the fact that up to 70% of Nobel Prizes for medicine and physiology are contributions engaging animals in research. The incidence of tuberculosis (TB), the ninth leading cause of death, has shown an overall reduction in the UK and many other countries. This success is due to the effective control of TB using BCG vaccines. The incidence of TB is expected to reduce by 80% by the year 2030, according to the World Health Organisation. It is questionable whether this would have been possible if not for the development of the BCG vaccine by Calmette and Guérin, whose work involved tests on cattle and monkeys.

A vaccine for anthrax is now available for use, owing to the research of Louis Pasteur, who used cattle in his research. This was the world's first effective bacterial vaccine. This scientific contribution paved the way for many other medical advancements. There are three possible outcomes in a clinical drug trial involving animals; positive, negative or null. Regardless of the nature of the outcome, the research is never in vain. If positive, this could potentially be used as a drug for treatment, if negative this would save the trouble of dealing with the aftermath of potential side effects that would've occur in human trials. If neutral, the amount of resources, time and money that would have been pumped into the potential drug could be invested in another research. Therefore, it wouldn’t be inappropriate to state that animal trials do indeed benefit mankind. Although it appears as if though human beings are the only party benefitted at the cost of animals, it should be noted that animals are amongst the primary beneficiaries of it. According to the Animal Cancer Trust in UK, 1 in 4 dogs and 1 in 6 cats are at risk of developing cancer. The news of your pet being diagnosed with cancer is truly heart sinking to any pet owner.

Veterinarians have been able to treat animal cancers through research backed up treatment. A new drug was approved for the treatment of lymphoma for dogs by the U.S Food and Drug Administration in 2017. Progressions toward successful treatment not just for cancer but other animal diseases are underway. The more research conducted, the faster we will be at treatments that are more effective, safe and cheap for both humans and animals. The use of animals in research is followed by a protocol so as to reduce the trauma experienced by an animal to the minimum. Clinical laboratories are expected to function within the laws of animal welfare and the regulations of bioethical proceedings declared by the respective authorities. Failure to keep up with these standards is a punishable offence in most countries. In 2010, a laboratory in North Carolina was shut down due to abuse of animals. A biomedical lab in the U.S. was sued by the US Department of Agriculture in the year 2016. Needless to say, laws are in place to ensure the prevention of unnecessary and vain exploitation of animals.

The 'Three – R strategy' - which aims to reduce, refine and replace animal models in research has been implemented by the UK government and other research laboratories. This ensures that the research study design is optimised to reduce the number of animals used and reduce the trauma caused to an animal via appropriate usage of painkillers, and anaesthetics. Laboratories are expected to ensure that the animals receive proper nutrition, healthcare and treatment in support of the animal's physical and psychological well-being. Wherever possible animal models are expected to be replaced by alternative methods. Although alternative methods such as cell culture, computer models and alternative organisms are available, they can't replicate the actual, complex molecular mechanisms that occur within an organism when its diseased or introduced to a new treatment. However, it must be noted that most researches first use an alternative method, only if this is successful would they move into to animal trials. The practise of directly going into animal trials is denied permission by most bioethics law enforcement offices.

There is question of whether animal models are predictive of human models. The answer is no and yes. Yes, it is reasonable evidence that would suggest that human models would behave in a similar way. Unfortunately, it isn't entirely assured as the genetic differences amongst different species could result in varying outcomes. As spoken by Jay Greene,' If it matters, it produces controversy.' Undisputedly animals are a valuable research tool, the complete abandoning of using animals in research would cause a significant lag in the advancement of medicine but wouldn't mean the end of it. However, higher mortality rates due to new epidemics, shorter life spans and reduced life quality of the human race are possible outcomes.

There has always been a long going debate arguing if college is worth the cost and in this paper I will give my reasons to why it’s worth to attend college. Don’t get me wrong college tuition numbers can be pretty big, but it provides you with great opportunities and personal skills that will give you nothing but success. Over 48% of college students surveyed said paying off their college debt has been harder than other bills. Going along with that, 27% said debt had an impact on their career path chosen and 25% said it made it much harder to buy a house. Enrollment in colleges has reached record high levels in the past few years, but why do many young adults still do not attend? The financial struggle. Over 2/3 of people ages 18 to 34 said they don’t continue college because the need to support their family. Also 57% of those same people said they’d prefer to make money and work rather than attending more school, and 48% said they still could not afford it.

A high 97% of parents said they except their child to attend college. Co-founder of the booming PayPal, Peter Theil made his own fellowship asking young adults to not attend college for two years. Peter himself told the article, “I expect many people to turn it down.” Later stating, “I probably wouldn’t have applied for it either.” A strong 86% of people who graduated from any college have said it’s been a good investment. Only 75% of people said it was too expensive. The Hamilton Project bade from a group in Washington compared college with other investments. They noticed that in recent decades college tuition has brought a higher annual return over 15%. That is higher than historical return and stocks combined. Looking at the cost of college, it can be toned down a little. Once students consider financial aid to help net tuition for some is only 2,000, making it very affordable. Just under 50% of people said that the main reason for college is to teach work related skills and knowledge. While 39% say its purpose is to help students grow personally and develop high intellect.

The remaining 11% believe both sides are equally correct. A survey asking, what it takes to gain success in the world in the world the majority, only by 3% (61%) said, “good work ethic.” Just behind that was 57% who had said knowing how to get along with people will bring success. Then 42% said the same about college. Adults who have graduated from a four-year college have thought to make about 20,000 dollars more in one year than they would have without a college degree. These beliefs were found truthful by the U.S. Census Burea in 2010. People who worked full time and had their bachelor’s degree made on average 40% more money than people who did not attend college and that number has continued to grow to 83% over the past few years. So whether you go to a big four year university or a small town two year college; you’re bound to be provided with numerous opportunities and ethical skills. Making the transition to your career very easy and efficient. Therefore, that is why I think college is worth it.

Should college athletes be paid for playing? Although College sports is an integral part of learning of that level and important in the development of a student’s social capacity in society, it should be noted that impartation of knowledge is the major responsibility of any educational institution to all of its students and its priority is to ensure academic excellence in each and every one of them. The most significant relationship that a college needs to cultivate between them and the students is an in a class relationship, creating an on-field contact with student-athletes usually leads to an employer to employee relationship where the student gets used and minimally paid for his athletic prowess and ends up neglecting his academic growth. This is outright gross misconduct on the institutions part. Paying college athletes is biased and should not be encouraged or supported by the education authorities as it undermines the integrity of the Colleges as learning institutions.

In order to understand the genesis of this debate of college athletes getting paid or not, it is imperative to look at the history of how collegiate athletics started and grew into a revenue creating the industry. College Athletics in America has a rich history dating back to the mid-nineteenth century. According to the article History Of Athletics In U.S. Colleges And Universities, Collegiate sports began over 150 years ago. Before that, the only Physical activities that the college administrations allowed students were manual labors such as clearing boulders and farming. These manual labors did not live up to the craving of the students, and so they began organizing their form of ferocious football contests which the college administrations did not approve. These contests grew and with time became more elaborate as teams from different institutions engaged in refereed matches. As the growth of these well-organized contests increased, college administrations unwillingness and disapproval of these “distractions from serious scholarly work.” persisted, however by the 1890s College students had established well-funded athletics associations and many colleges and alumnus had joined these associations. At this point, the college administration had little power over these installed programs. By 1900 the sports enigma had spread to the all-girls schools, and in 1910 Theodore Roosevelt Founded the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) a body which regulates and organizes athletic programs for American colleges and universities. Over the 20thcentury, more and more organizations and partnering entities donated their support to the college sports fraternity to date.

Since the establishment of collegiate athletics, the primary issue has been how the financial revenue collected is being handled by the college authorities and how the college athletes who mostly raise these revenues are benefitting from the same. Those in support of student-athletes being paid argue that student-athletes are being exploited. Scholar Dalton Thacker in the article Amateurism vs. Capitalism: A Practical Approach to Paying College Athletes states that, “It is hypocritical for the NCAA to claim that its focus is on protecting the players when those same players do not receive a penny for their efforts and lack fundamental rights”. He continues to state that most of these athletes come from poor backgrounds and undergo a demanding schedule playing for the college and at the same time keeping up with their academic studies. In his opinion, these are all persuasive grounds for college athletes to be paid.

While it is plausible that their schedule is demanding and that some may be exploited, that does not justify them getting paid. Sport Journal Contributor Dennis Johnson argues that “On top of a full scholarship, student-athletes receive other benefits such as workout facilities, sports medicine care, specialized meals, best coaches and probably the most rewarding benefit is gaining a high-profile name recognition.” This by far is more beneficial to an up and coming athlete who has a vision for his career growth and future as compared to just being splashed with money and no value added to their development. Following Johnson’s persuasive argument, issues of exploitation of the student-athlete would be left in the past by student-athletes having access to these benefits they get everything that they need for their sports careers rather than getting paid and be involved in struggles with the authorities over their pays. With this option, they can comfortably attend to their sports obligations without worries and also comfortably cover their studies.

Furthermore, many student athletes are inexperienced in handling money due to their young age. From an article by Malcolm Lemmons, a former athlete turned author and entrepreneur, he agrees by stating, “Amateur players receiving compensation seems like a complete disaster. They don’t know how to manage their money, and there wouldn’t be anyone to guide their financial decisions.” From a former athlete himself, these words could not have been any more valid. Colleges will be exposing these students to early destruction instead of guiding them on a step by step basis until they are mature enough to handle finances. Having been an athlete himself, he continues to say that getting a person who has these student-athletes financial interest at heart to guide them will prove difficult as evident from many other famous athletes and entertainers who find themselves in financial ruin.

Besides, how will these institutions be able to control these students once they start earning and uphold their academic integrity? Author Reed Karaim asks such pertinent questions in his article, “A college education is a principal benefit that most scholarship athletes receive in return for their efforts on the field, but critics say many athletic programs do little to make sure their college football players receive a meaningful education.” Author Kareem puts this topic into its most crucial perspective by stating “Rather than paying college athletes as employees, some experts say universities and the NCAA should stiffen admission and academic standards to make sure athletes are competing in the classrooms and not just on the playing field.” These sentiments expressed are evidence enough that colleges have become more focused on these student-athletes’ abilities on the field and the revenues they contribute to the school rather than offering them a decent education. To add on to these statements by experts, many examples of athletes have come out and admitted to either paying tutors to do their term papers or being accepted in college despite their minimal performances.

In conclusion, trying to answer the question 'should college athletes be paid?', this essay without a doubt proves that paying college athletes is biased and wrong and should not be encouraged or supported by the education authorities as it undermines the integrity of the Colleges as learning institutions. It is evident College authorities have turned student-athletes into money, making employees and cash cows. Some college institutions no longer have their student-athletes’ academic interest at heart and go further in jeopardizing the institution’s integrity by admitting student-athletes not based on their academic performances but because of their field talents. In the end, they create an environment where other students who are not talented in sports feel inferior and find it difficult to compete with the favored student-athletes. Statistics also show the unfortunate truth that only a handful of college athletes make it to the professional stage. According to NCAA statistics, only one sport (baseball) had more than 2% of NCAA athletes go pro leaving a majority vulnerable and ambivalent about their futures plus without a strong academic background their chances of ending up unsuccessful increases.

Works Cited

1. Johnson, Dennis A., and John Acquaviva. 'Point/counterpoint: Paying college athletes.' The Sport Journal 15.1 (2012).
2. Karaim, Reed. 'Paying College Athletes.' CQ Researcher by CQ Press. CQ Press 11 (2014).
3. Lemmons, Malcolm. “College Athletes Getting Paid? Here Are Some Pros and Cons”. 2017.huffpost.com
4. Thacker, Dalton. 'Amateurism vs. Capitalism: A Practical Approach to Paying College Athletes.' Seattle J. Soc. Just. 16 (2017):188-191
5. Thelin, J. R., and J. R. Edwards. 'History of athletics in US colleges and universities.' (2015).

Education should be free for everyone (argumentative essay)

As Matshona Dhliwayo once said, “Money doesn’t grow on trees, but grows on intelligent minds.” The idea of whether college should be free has been a controversial and widely debated topic. Imagine living in an old, outdated, rented apartment, while working three jobs just to afford tuition fees and still managing to succeed in university classes. Enrolling in a post-secondary education is indeed exhausting and quite demanding. Therefore, an argumentative essay can be made that life would be easier if the pressure of paying the post-secondary tuition fee was off the students' shoulders. Firstly, the argument can be made that a free post-secondary education would encourage students to choose a major they enjoy. Next, the essay can argue that a postsecondary tuition that is free of charge could also improve the economy and society. Finally, the essay can claim that a free postsecondary education would help provide equality and accessibility for every student, thus making the case for the question, "should college be free?"

Canada is known to be a free country reserving equal rights and fairness towards its citizens, yet not everyone can obtain an education after secondary school. Thus, a postsecondary education should be free because of students majoring in a topic they genuinely love, helping the economy and society, and ensuring every student receives the equality they deserve as well as having access to the college itself. To begin, parents and students might feel more at ease about studying for the majors that they enjoy if a college education was free. If a student is engaged in what they are studying, then they are way more likely to fully engage with their college classes and receive the ultimate college experience. This could mean satisfactory grades and excellent relationships with others in that field, therefore increasing students’ chances of finding a job in the future. The college system is also leaving many students with significant amounts of debt, therefore many students choices of colleges and programs to major in are limited. Many students are deciding to major in something that they don’t enjoy because of a promised higher salary in the future.

Also, students might attend a college that isn’t good because it’s cheaper even though they possibly got accepted to many other better college programs. For example, in 2018, the total amount of student loan debt in Canada was estimated to be almost $1.5 trillion, which is over 30 percent higher than it was just four years earlier. Many students are also struggling with huge amounts of debt which could make it too difficult to start businesses, move to other cities in search of better job opportunities or simply just change their job, but if there is less student debt it could benefit students greatly in the future. Therefore, if a post-secondary education is free, more students would receive jobs in the future that they genuinely enjoy and will not have to worry about student debts. Next, a free post-secondary education could benefit the economy as well as our society. A free post-secondary education could help many individuals receive a higher paying salary than high school graduates. For example, according to estimates from 2018, “young adults in Canada earn 57 percent more if they have a bachelor's degree than if they only complete high school.” A free college education could assist in helping increase tax revenues, as well as also increasing the country’s GDP, which would help encourage a healthy and balanced economy. In addition, if more people can get more good jobs from the degrees that they obtained, it would reduce other forms of public assistance, thus there would be a more wealthy population and poverty rates would decrease. In addition, individuals who have attended universities and colleges tend to participate more in social events.

For instance, knowledgeable students are most likely to be engaged in voting, volunteering and donating to make the world a better place as a whole. Moreover, students who are education will make better decision making avoiding illegal actions and discriminatory issues such as racism and prejudice towards the LGBTQ community. There are many instances where prejudice and racism has resulted in many people serving jail time due to hate crimes committed by many uneducated people such as shootings and other violent gang activities, but if there were more students who enrolled in universities and colleges, then there would be less crimes committed. Also, education allows people to recognize what they really are capable of therefore the society would be more powerful and peaceful. Thus, when people are smarter and productive it results in people taking actions and making a positive difference in the world in both the society and economy of the country. Finally, a free college education could help provide everyone with the equality they deserve as well as also helping students have more access to their college. Any secondary school students graduate with excellent results and have great potential, but sadly they may not have the opportunity of attending universities or colleges. Many students are unable to show their talents in the universities or colleges simply because they could not afford it as many students have been raised in lower-income households.

Money is a huge issue that can discourage students from becoming successful in their life, which can in the future decrease their chances of getting married, having children, buying a house, etc. In Canada the amount of money a college or university can demand from a student annually can cost up to thousands of dollars depending on the program, citizenship and whether you are a student of an undergraduate or a postgraduate level but to pursue a higher quality of life it is required to obtain some type of postgraduate degree. For example, in 2017, Statistics Canada has stated that “tuition fees have risen to an average of 3.1 percent when it comes to undergraduate programs.” This increases the poverty rate amongst young adults, because if an individual does not have the proper basic education, they will less likely find a job. Also, addition, there are many people who don't have the time to be working extra shifts to afford school as well as there are single mothers working multiple jobs to maintain all payments and trying their best to stay off debts. Also, many people may not have the money to afford to move close by to the college, but if a college education was free, many individuals would only have to pay the rent of an apartment, thus they would have the worry of being unable to afford the education off their shoulders. This in turn will economically increase the country by providing experienced workers as well as lowering the poverty rate and allowing companies to expand further. Therefore, a free postsecondary education can help students with equality and also helps give students receive accessibility to the college.

Another reason why there should be no fee for education is because in time, it will create a better society. If more children, teenagers, and young adults who live in poverty had access to free education, it would give them opportunities they would never otherwise have. There are many smart young people out there whose talents, creativity, and ideas are being thrown away because they can’t afford school. They turn to selling drugs and committing crimes to pay the bills and survive instead. Free education would get a lot of these people off the streets and onto the right path and lower crime rates all over the country.

In conclusion, a college education should be free because of students majoring in a topic they enjoy, economic and social benefits, and equality every student deserves as well as accessibility to the college. If a college education is free then the number of students attending are going to increase. Canadians have free education until postsecondary even though we all pay taxes, and most of us value our education greatly, which isn’t fair at all. Firstly, any college student should choose a major they genuinely have a passion for to make sure to live a comfortable life. Moreover, attending college could also reduce crimes and poverty, while also making sure that graduates have an average paying salary. Lastly, every student deserves to be treated with respect and every student should be in proximity to the university for easy access. Free education is a right for everyone: no matter if you are rich or poor. Thus, a free postsecondary education will help better Canada and will help us grow.

Works Sited

1. Anderson, Ellen. 'The Pros and Cons of a Free College Tution.' N.p., Feb. 2019. Web. 19 Mar. 2019.
2. Markoff, Steven C. 'Is a college education worth it?' N.p., Jan. 2018. Web. 19 Mar. 2019.
3. Deborah, Kurfiss. 'Should college be free?' N.p., Mar. 2019. Web. 19 Mar. 2019.
4. Hicks, Matthew. “The Pros And Cons of a Tuition-Free College” N.p., October 2018. Web. 19 March 2019
5. Ayres, Crystal. “19 Should college be free pros and cons.” N.p., Aug 2018. Web. 19 Mar 2019.
6. Josephson, Amelia. “The pros and cons of free college.” N.p. May 2018. Web. 19 Mar 2019
7. Loveless, Becton. “Benefits of earning a college degree.” Sept 2017. Web. 19 Mar 2019