Sources

Sources:

[1]

Afzal, Brenda, et al. “Children’s Environmental Health: Homes of Influence.” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 124, no. 12, Dec. 2016, pp. A209-A213. EBSCOhost, Web. 11 Apr. 2017. <http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?sid=89c518de-f9db-470a-aea6-cf4824310600%40sessionmgr4008&vid=0&hid=4002&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=120230899&db=8gh>.

[2]

American Lung Association. “State of the Air® 2016.” (n.d.): n. pag. American Lung Association, 2016. Web. 11 Apr. 2017. <http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/state-of-the-air/sota-2016-full.pdf>.

[3]

Lallanila, Marc. “What Is the Greenhouse Effect?” LiveScience. Purch, 12 Apr. 2016. Web. 23 Apr. 2017. <http://www.livescience.com/37743-greenhouse-effect.html>.

[4]

“Overview of Greenhouse Gases.” EPA. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 14 Apr. 2017. Web. 18 Apr. 2017. <https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases>.

[5]

“Ozone Basics.” EPA. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 05 Apr. 2017. Web. 28 Apr. 2017. <https://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/ozone-basics#effects>.

Source 1: This source focuses on environmental factors that affect the health of children. What I would use for my paper is the information this article has about ground-level ozone and its relationship to asthma in children. Ground-level ozone levels are related to the amounts of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, so it connects to the health of children. When you consider the 6.3 million children under 18 years old in the United States who are affected by asthma, it creates a strong argument as to why reducing levels of GHGs that lead to higher levels of ground-level ozone would be beneficial. This source also has many other sources in its works cited that have information concerning asthma statistics and relate asthma to environmental factors.  

Source 2: “The State of the Air 2016” is a 157 page pdf with all data gathered by the American Lung Association about the quality of air in the US in 2016. There are a few specific sections of the pdf that would benefit the paper, such as  “People at Risk,” “What Needs to Be Done,” and “What You Can Do.” People at Risk has some statistics that stand out, such as “More than half the people (more than 52.1%) in the United States live in counties that have unhealthful levels of either ozone or particle pollution” (8). With some standout statistics like this about how the air quality affects the health of such a large number of people in the country, it strengthens the argument that more needs to be done to clean our air.

Source 3: “What Is the Greenhouse Effect?” explains the science behind the greenhouse effect. This source benefits the paper because, while most people have heard of the greenhouse effect, there is still a large number of people who do not know the science behind it. It adds logos to the paper by explaining this concept and making sure the reader is aware of how gases in the atmosphere and thermal radiation relate to climate change.

Source 4: In this source, the EPA separates the main categories of greenhouse gases and briefly explains how these gases are released into the atmosphere, which is an important part of the paper. It is hard to argue how we can begin to reduce emissions without first explaining how the gases are released. This source also explains the three main factors of how each of the greenhouse gases impact climate change, which is helpful in deciding which gases the paper will spend more time focusing on.

Source 5: The last source listed has information about the effects of ozone on human health. While this source has links to other sources with additional facts about the health effects of ozone, but it does provide basic information about the health effects, such as worsening “bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma,” and it acknowledges that increased ozone can lead to a need for more medical attention. This source brought to my attention that there is an entire other audience the paper could mention that I originally hadn’t thought of — those with emphysema or bronchitis. Since many of the sources concerning asthma have to do with children, and thus the audience might target parents too much, this source is a good start for finding information that could sway adults who may not care too much about asthma, but who may care more about other breathing-related health concerns.

All together, the sources work to make the effects that greenhouse gases have on human health the primary concern of the paper. After source 3 is used to explain the science behind the greenhouse effect, the other sources can be used to move the paper toward explaining how the greenhouse effect impacts human health. Primarily, they allow the focus to be on respiratory health issues; however, there are other potential health issues that could be mentioned if supplementary sources are found, such as an increased number of heat-related incidents (i.e. heat stroke), sun poisoning, and skin cancer.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Sources

  1. I like how you have a good variation of sources. It makes sense to have a source that is more generic like your third one that informs the reader about the greenhouse effect’s impact on human health before you talk specifically about symptoms that people in certain age groups and people that have certain conditions have. I know you said that you might talk about other potential health issues, but I think since most your sources focus on breathing related issues it would make sense to keep your paper focused on that instead of diverging to a different topic. It might work if you use the other possible problems in a refutation paragraph to show that even if people do not find the breathing problems to be a pressing issue as a result of the greenhouse effect, they can still look at all the other problems that result from it, which they might care about. I like how your first source is more based on just kids as an important population that is affected. I think focusing on the different types of people and ways they are affected by respiratory problems. It sounds like you have a good mix of sources for the basis of your essay.

    Like

  2. I think you did a good job of finding sources that focus on how greenhouse gases can be connected to various health issues. I would suggest generally talking about how these gases are being unnaturally/naturally created and in general are harmful to humans – maybe with specific examples of particular greenhouse gases.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s