Recently in Erin Keitel Category

For my paper I was having a very hard time finding good statistics and studies that supported my argument that outdoor lighting increases crime.  Recently I found a book, Human Factors in Lighting, it has information not proving that crime increases but proving that crime does not increase with more light.  Then I want to say that lighting doesn't help reduce crime at certain levels but now we use so much light that it is increasing crime rates. Now I just need to find proof of this claim.  I think will be able to take these new facts and make a stronger argument.

Annotated Bibliography: Light pollution

Topic Description

The sky in most major, bustling cities today looks like a starless orange haze. The bright city lights fade out the stars and lighten the sky, a popular concern with astronomers or people who want to make the city more aesthetically pleasing.  However, few people know bright city lights have a great effect on human health and are damaging the environment.  Birds, sea turtles, and insects are examples of species affected by light pollution. Experiments have also been conducted linking excessive exposure to artificial light to increased risk of breast cancer.  Other misconceptions many people have about light pollution are that light at night prevents crime and more light improves visibility.  Dark skies need to be treated as a scarce natural resource.  For my research paper, I am targeting city planners and city residents in order to spread education on the topic. I am planning to research my topic in the library's indexes and databases.  I think the "Science and Technology" and "Popular Sources" indexes, which include databases such as LexisNexis Environmental, will be very helpful. I want to look at sources explaining experiments that test how artificial light is related to breast cancer and how artificial light affects peoples' internal clocks.  I would like to interview a person knowledgeable on my topic and I may try to contact one of the authors of the articles I read.

Possible Thesis: Light pollution is serious problem that needs to be addressed as it is threatening human health and the environment.

Sources:

1. Longcore, Travis, and Catherine Rich. "Ecological Light Pollution." Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. Vol. 2 , no. 4 2004, 191-98.  26 Oct. 2008.

<http://www.urbanwildlands.org/Resources/LongcoreRich2004.pdf>.

This article will help explain the specific ways light pollution affects ecosystems.  The name "light pollution" alone has the connotation of mainly human's declining ability to see the sky. However, there needs to be more recognition of the different types of light pollution besides astronomical such as ecological light pollution.  It affects important parts of numerous species' behavior including foraging, reproduction, migration, and communication.  Light pollution disrupts ecosystems and affects the competition and predation.  The article also discusses steps that should be taken in the future to protect ecosystems such as the environment monitoring protocol needs to include measurements of light disturbance. 

 

2. Stevens, Richard. "Artificial Lighting in the Industrialized World: Circadian Disruption and Breast Cancer." Cancer Causes and Control (May 2006), 501-07. <http://data.nextrionet.com/site/idsa/breastcancerstevens.pdf>.

This article gives a detailed explanation of how extended exposure to artificial light during the night is increasing the chance of women getting breast cancer.  The main reason behind the risk of breast cancer is thought to be that melatonin is reduced  and estrogen increased.  The article explains that the artificial light theory first came about when scientists investigated the question of why there are so many more cases of breast cancer in developed countries than in developing.  The article not only provides an explanation of why not spending enough time in a dark environment increases the risk for breast cancer in women, it also gives examples of experiments that scientists have conducted to test the hypothesis. 

 

3. Guynup, Sharon. "Light Pollution Taking Toll on Wildlife, Eco-Groups Say." National Geographic News. 17 Apr. 2003. National Geographic. 26 Oct. 2008.

<http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/04/0417_030417_tvlightpollution.html>.

This article makes an interesting point that dark skies should be considered a natural resource; dark skies should be protected just as rivers and forests are protected. This point could be a major part of my argument and help explain how people's views need to drastically change towards light pollution. There is not enough concern for the topic. The article also focuses on the harmful effects light pollution has on different animal species.  Birds, sea turtles, frogs and salamanders are examples of animals at risk. An experiment on frogs and the effects of lights showed that light exposure even affects aspects of physical development such as hormone production.  The hormones is frogs regulate things such as how much fat frogs store in the winter and when they produce eggs.

 

4. Klinkenborg, Verlyn. "Our Vanishing Night." National Geographic. Nov 2008. 26 Oct. 2008.

<http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/geopedia/Light_Pollution>.

This article is helpful because it gives an overview of the problem of light pollution. It is not extremely detailed, but addresses some of the important issues related to light pollution. We are constantly extending the day and shortening the night and as a result people's internal clocks are out of rhythm.  Light pollution harms the environment because it affects many animal species.  Small nocturnal animals such as bats and rodents are more visible and prone to predators because they feed off insects, which are attracted to bright lights.  Birds' normal behaviors change including age of maturity, migration schedules, and sense of direction.  Sea turtles can't find dark beaches for their eggs and baby sea turtles can't find the direction of the ocean when they hatch on brightly lit beaches. 

5. "Melatonin." Making Treatment Decisions. 20 July 2007. American Cancer Society.

26 Oct. 2008.

<http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Melatonin.asp>.

This article is about different aspects of melatonin including what it is, why the body produces it, and how it affects the body. The information about melatonin in this article will be helpful in explaining the effects of light pollution on humans.  Melatonin is a hormone produced by the pineal gland in response to darkness; it is important for sleeping and waking. While there is still a great deal of research to do on melatonin, some scientists believe it is a powerful antioxidant that block free radicals from destroying cells and stop the spread of certain cancers.  Other relevant information the article includes covers research conducted on the effects of melatonin and cancer and how melatonin supplements would affect the body.

 

6. "Building Community." Nightscape: 18 pgs. 26 Oct. 2008. <http://data.nextrionet.com/site/idsa/nl73-74.pdf >.

A section in this article discusses how overly lit areas can actually be more dangerous than darkness.   One possible solution to decrease light pollution is to dim city lights or remove some streetlights. I will be able to use this article to dispel a counter-argument people could have against this solution that less light is more dangerous. Bright light limits the eye's ability to see in darkness and uneven light makes it difficult to see details. Reducing criminal activity will also be an incentive for city planners to focus on lowering light pollution.  Well lit cities will improve the environment, lower energy use, and improve the charm of the city.

Originally I was looking for a topic related to medicine and I was mostly looking at prescription drugs. I was finding interesting topics, but I had a very hard time finding a debatable topic. The other day I read an article in National Geographic and decided to take my paper in a new direction.  My new topic is: bright city lights are damaging to our environment and human health.  Ecosystems are out of balance because many animal species such as birds and sea turtles are threatened. Excessive exposure to artificial light has been linked to increasing the risk of diseases like breast cancer. While it is widely known that bright city lights make it hard to see the stars, few people know of the other serious effects caused by the lights.  

For my paper, I want to focus on how prescription drugs are excessively used. I think many times patients are misdiagnosed and the patients and doctors are both to blame. People are always looking for the quickest, easiest way to solve their problems. Patients will sometimes see a drug commercial and then list off the symptoms given on television to a doctor, practically writing their own prescription. Doctors are also influenced by drug companies to prescribe certain drugs more often.  While prescription drugs are needed by some patients, I think there are many cases when the roots of the problem are not fully investigated and the patient is misdiagnosed. 

I found an example I could use to make my paper more specific of the increase in the use of Ritalin with children. Some quick facts I found:

- In most schools today, about 1/3 of the students are using Ritalin. 

-Recent studies are showing that many children diagnosed with ADHD and prescribed Ritalin either don't need the drug or may have a learning disability. 

-Schools received budget cuts and class sizes increased. At the same time the use of Ritalin increased. One site i read said,"drugs like Ritalin are being used as a social control."    

I think the example of Ritalin and children sounds interesting and I hadn't heard much about it before; it seems like a more recent argument. Any thoughts?

In Marx's article, he writes about how American attitudes toward technology have changed from believing science and technology are means to be unconfined politically and socially to believing in a more technocratic view that innovation alone is progress. While some people hold this technocratic view, it takes more than just the invention of a new technology for it to earn the label, "progress."

For my research paper, my topic is prescription drugs. Doctors give out prescription drugs and patients accept prescription drugs all too easily to improve their health.  In our highly developed world patients are constantly searching for the newest medicine and don't consider the possible roots of the problem as often, such as stress or lack of sleep. Marx would think my topic makes a valid argument. In the end of the article Marx writes, "Only by questioning the assumption that innovation necessarily represents progress can we begin to judge its worth"(77).  Science and technology mean progress when we are able to find the right purpose and answer the question, "Progress towards what?" (77). The innovations themselves are not progress; the new, usually more efficient ideas and reasons why innovations are invented are progress. My example supports Marx's statement because it shows how there is not progress toward anything except drug companies making more money.  The drug may solve one health issue while creating another causing the patient to buy more prescriptions, or the patient may not need the drug at all and therefore it is not effective.  Marx would argue that drug companies need to prove their drug actually helps patients and doctors need to be more careful when diagnosing.  Both doctors and drug companies need to shift their focus from making the most profit to finding the best way to cure patients.