Based on what you have learned and the article “The 50 Greatest Breakthroughs Since the Wheel” that you read earlier, answer the following question:

What importance does the topic of your news story and the question that you developed in Project 2 have to you and to society as a whole? https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/11/innovations-list/309536/#list

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZgJUJ-c1Z0

PROJECT 2

1. Why did you select this news story? What about the story makes it interesting to you both personally and scientifically?

I chose to focus on this story because my mom’s friend had HIV couple years ago and I was at very young age and didn’t fully understand the concept of the illness, however I have spent some time around him while he took his medications and the trouble he had getting around the house because he was to weak to walk or eat. This article caught my attention because it provided some insight on how HIV-1 treatments have advanced the overall treatment of AIDS by slowing down the virus and it’s effects in the body.

1. What did you already know about the topic before selecting the news story? What opinions and assumptions had you made about it?

I have been knowing that ARVs help to slow down the progression of the virus in the patient’s body but I did not know ARVS really were. I did not know that ARVS were a combination of HIV-1 medicines. I had always assumed that HIV was generally an incurable disease. I am also just getting to learn HIV-1 characteristics can be used to determine how efficient treatment turns out to be based on individual patients.

3. What concepts covered in the course relate to your news story? How?

Theme 1 of our course touched on the basics of the nature of science and how it is woven into our day-to-day lives. In reading this article, I was able to gain perspective on how scientific research was conducted to provide sufficient evidence that HIV-1 envelope sequence motifs were proven to predict treatment efficacy with a particular type of antibody treatment. Theme 2 focused on describing and evaluating evidence. Research that is meant to be relied upon for further studies and determine the wellness of consumers should be valid and reliable. Concrete evidence should be easily understandable as well as credible in terms of the sources of the information used as well as the methods used to collect the said information. For example, the information obtained from this article was originally published on the official Boston Medical Center website.

4. What questions do you have about the topic in the news story? Select one question that interests you based on your topic exploration graphic organizer and previous responses.

From a natural scientist’s point of view, my question would be “how is it possible to predict the effectiveness of antibody-based therapy based on knowing the envelope sequence alone”.

5. Why would this question be important to a natural scientist?

Finding an answer to this question would prove to be useful, especially in the advancement in the creation of treatment plans for patients who suffer from HIV-1 . It would not only ease the delivery of care for such patients but also prove to be advantageous in terms of saving on time and money spent in finding the right treatments for this illness.

PowerPoint-

How does understanding the science behind the topic and research you have chosen benefit you? What is the advantage to you, and potentially those around you, of understanding the science behind the issue?

How might finding the answer to the specific question you posed in the question development worksheet in Project 2 affect others around you?

PART 3

Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government. —Thomas Jefferson

A hot-button issue in the American/International Political climate is climate change. This has also been heavily influenced by media interpretation and coverage. The scientific evidence supports the perspective that global climate change is the result of the impact of our species on the environment. However, some hold the perspective that it is just part of the earth’s natural cycle. In the meantime, billions of dollars are being invested in projects and initiatives related to climate change. This has become a very divisive issue, with strong opinions about the topic. It also raises the question of who should be trusted when it comes to issues such as these—the people running our governments, scientists, or the media.

After reviewing this week’s material, in your initial response, consider each perspective. In America, what “side” of the climate change issue do you hear about most from politicians or the media? Do you think this could have an influence on the direction in which climate change research is headed? Why or why not?

Consider what you have learned about the relationship between modern-day issues and the inherent value of the natural sciences.

https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2014/06/10/320634230/a-problem-like-no-other-science-and-politics

• Grid View

		Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Main Posting		45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.   Supported by at least three current, credible sources.   Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.   At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.   Supported by at least three credible sources.   Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s).   One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.   Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.   Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.   Post is cited with two credible sources.   Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.   Contains some APA formatting errors.	0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.   Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.   Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.   Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.   Contains only one or no credible sources.   Not written clearly or concisely.   Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.   Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness		10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Posts main post by day 3.	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3.
First Response		17 (17%) – 18 (18%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.   Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.   Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.   Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.   Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.   Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.   Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	15 (15%) – 16 (16%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.   Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.   Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.   Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.   Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	13 (13%) – 14 (14%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.   Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.   Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.   Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 12 (12%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.   Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.   Responses to faculty questions are missing.   No credible sources are cited.
Second Response		16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.   Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.   Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.   Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.   Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.   Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.   Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.   Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.   Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.   Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.   Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.   Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.   Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.   Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 11 (11%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.   Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.   Responses to faculty questions are missing.   No credible sources are cited.
Participation		5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100