#academicarticle

After lots of research, I found an article called “Animal Testing is Still then Best way to Find New Treatment for Patients.” It was written in 2017, and it is volume 39 of the European Journal of Internal Medicine. In this article, the authors, Silvio Garattini and Giuliano Grignaschi, discuss the main points about why animal testing should still be used rather than finding alternative ways to animal testing. I chose this article because it is a different perspective than what I normally have with saying how animal testing is bad. 

The article starts off by explaining what experimental research is and how animals are used in some cases for drug research. One of the biggest reasons brought up was that animals have very similar organ structure and functions compared to human organs. Reading this article made me realize that there are still good reasons for animal testing and research. The audience for this article is, I think, people that are studying the topic of animal testing, or any college students or older that are just interested in the topic itself and want more information. 

The article within the main one I was reading was called “Translation of Research Evidence From Animals to Humans.” This article, by Daniel Hackman and Donald Redelmeier, goes into detail about individual studies that has happened about animal testing. This article captures the idea of exactly what happens when animal testing occurs. The authors use statistics to prove that it is better for drugs to be tested on animals first rather than them being just tested one people right away. 

I found this article by searching through the first article’s sources that the authors used. After that, I was able to find the article through a database from the Rohrbach Library. These two articles relate to each other because they both dscuss how drugs are tested on animals first before selling them.  These articles compare to my research question because it shows that there is a reason why it is ethical to test drugs on animals. These articles really opened up my point of view that I previously had. 

Love, Hate, And Culture Wars by  AREWA, OLUFUNMILAYO B is an academic article that discusses how use of cultural elements, including hairstyles, costumes, fashion, cuisine, and music, leads to accusations of cultural appropriation. It mentions borrowing and cultural mixture are concerned with language, religion, agriculture, folklore and food. It mentions appropriations of African American culture by Miley Cyrus, Iggy Azalea and Justin Bieber. The targeted audience is the subculture that experiences cultural appropriation, and also informational for  those who don’t identify with the concept in sociology. 

I believe this article further expresses my point that distinguishing borrowing, diffusion, and collaboration from cultural appropriation is challenging. Cultural borrowing often occurs in broader contexts shaped by asymmetries of power. Power differences mean that the powerful may, at times, borrow from the powerless in ways those without power have little ability to control or question. When does a borrowing become an unacceptable appropriation that should not be undertaken without consent? The lines between these are shifting and may at times be unclear.

The article exaggerates that cultural appropriation is often a byproduct of colonialism and oppression. The oppressing or ruling culture often adopts something from the culture it oppresses that it finds cool or interesting and exotic, without understanding the importance or significance of it for the oppressed group. This cool and exotic thing might be of religious and spiritual significance to the culture. Hence, to the oppressing group it feels that their oppressor are taking an important part of their culture and making a mockery out of it. It comes across as disrespectful and ignorant, and it acts only to alienate the other culture.