Abba Kovner and Resistance in the Vilna Ghetto

Abba Kovner and Resistance in the Vilna Ghetto In the Vilna Ghetto and in the Rudninkai Forest (both in Lithuania), Abba Kovner, only 25 years old, led resistance fighters against the murderous Nazi enemy during the  Holocaust. Who Was Abba Kovner? Abba Kovner was born in 1918 in Sevastopol, Russia, but later moved to Vilna (now in Lithuania), where he attended a Hebrew secondary school. During these early years, Kovner became an active member in the Zionist youth movement, Ha-Shomer ha-Tsair. In September 1939, World War II began. Only two weeks later, on September 19, the Red Army entered Vilna and soon incorporated it into the Soviet Union. Kovner became active during this time, 1940 to 1941, with the underground. But life changed drastically for Kovner once the Germans invaded. The Germans Invade Vilna On June 24, 1941, two days after Germany launched its surprise attack against the Soviet Union (Operation Barbarossa), the Germans occupied Vilna. As the Germans were sweeping east toward Moscow, they instigated their ruthless oppression and murderous Aktionen in the communities they occupied. Vilna, with a Jewish population of approximately 55,000, was known as the Jerusalem of Lithuania for its flourishing Jewish culture and history. The Nazis soon changed that. As Kovner and 16 other members of the Ha-Shomer ha-Tsair hid in a convent of Dominican nuns a few miles outside of Vilna, the Nazis began to rid Vilna of its Jewish problem. The Killing Begins at Ponary Less than a month after the Germans occupied Vilna, they conducted their first Aktionen. Einsatzkommando 9 rounded up 5,000 Jewish men of Vilna and took them to Ponary (a location approximately six miles from Vilna that had pre-dug large pits, which the Nazis used as a mass extermination area for Jews from the Vilna area). The Nazis made the pretense that the men were to be sent to labor camps when they were really sent to Ponary and shot. The next major Aktion took place from August 31 to September 3. This Aktion was in pretense a retaliation for an attack against the Germans. Kovner, watching through a window, saw a woman dragged by the hair by two soldiers, a woman who was holding something in her arms. One of them directed a beam of light into her face, the other one dragged her by her hair and threw her on the pavement. Then the infant fell out of her arms. One of the two, the one with the flashlight, I believe, took the infant, raised him into the air, grabbed him by the leg. The woman crawled on the earth, took hold of his boot and pleaded for mercy. But the soldier took the boy and hit him with his head against the wall, once, twice, smashed him against the wall.1 Such scenes occurred frequently during this four-day Aktion - ending with 8,000 men and women taken to Ponary and shot. Life did not get better for the Jews of Vilna. From September 3 to 5, immediately following the last Aktion, the remaining Jews were forced into a small area of the city and fenced in. Kovner remembers, And when the troops herded the whole suffering, tortured, weeping mass of people into the narrow streets of the ghetto, into those seven narrow stinking streets, and locked the walls that had been built, behind them, everyone suddenly sighed with relief. They left behind them days of fear and horror; and ahead of them were deprivation, hunger and suffering - but now they felt more secure, less afraid. Almost no one believed that it would be possible to kill off all of them, all those thousands and tens of thousands, the Jews of Vilna, Kovno, Bialystok, and Warsaw - the millions, with their women and children.2 Though they had experienced terror and destruction, the Jews of Vilna were still not ready to believe the truth about Ponary. Even when a survivor of Ponary, a woman named Sonia, came back to Vilna and told of her experiences, no one wanted to believe. Well, a few did. And these few decided to resist. The Call to Resist In December 1941, there were several meetings between the activists in the ghetto. Once the activists had decided to resist, they needed to decide, and agree, on the best way to resist. One of the most urgent problems was whether they should stay in the ghetto, go to Bialystok or Warsaw (some thought there would be a better chance at successful resistance in these ghettos), or move to the forests. Coming to an agreement on this issue was not easy. Kovner, known by his nom de guerre of Uri, offered some of the main arguments for staying in Vilna and fighting. In the end, most decided to stay, but a few decided to leave. These activists wanted to instil a passion for fighting within the ghetto. To do this, the activists wanted to have a mass meeting with many different youth groups in attendance. But the Nazis were always watching, especially noticeable would be a large group. So, in order to disguise their mass meeting, they arranged it on December 31, New Years Eve, a day of many, many social gatherings. Kovner was responsible for writing a call to revolt. In front of the 150 attendees gathered together at 2 Straszuna Street in a public soup kitchen, Kovner read aloud: Jewish youth!Do not trust those who are trying to deceive you. Out of the eighty thousand Jews in the Jerusalem of Lithuania only twenty thousand are left. . . . Ponar [Ponary] is not a concentration camp. They have all been shot there. Hitler plans to destroy all the Jews of Europe, and the Jews of Lithuania have been chosen as the first in line.We will not be led like sheep to the slaughter!True, we are weak and defenseless, but the only reply to the murderer is revolt!Brothers! Better to fall as free fighters than to live by the mercy of the murderers.Arise! Arise with your last breath!3 At first, there was silence. Then the group broke out in spirited song.4 The Creation of the F.P.O. Now that the youth in the ghetto were enthused, the next problem was how to organize the resistance. A meeting was scheduled for three weeks later, January 21, 1942. At the home of Joseph Glazman, representatives from the major youth groups met together: Abba Kovner of Ha-Shomer ha-ZairJoseph Glazman of BetarYitzhak Wittenberg of the CommunistsChyena Borowska of the CommunistsNissan Reznik of Ha-Noar ha-Ziyyoni At this meeting something important happened - these groups agreed to work together. In other ghettos, this was a major stumbling block for many would-be resisters. Yitzhak Arad, in Ghetto in Flames, attributes the parleys by Kovner to the ability to hold a meeting with representatives of the four youth movements.5 It was at this meeting that these representatives decided to form a united fighting group called the Fareinikte Partisaner Organizatzie - F.P.O. (United Partisans Organization). The organization was formed to unite all the groups in the ghetto, prepare for mass armed resistance, perform acts of sabotage, fight with partisans, and try to get other ghettos to also fight. It was agreed at this meeting that the F.P.O. would be lead by a staff command made up of Kovner, Glazman, and Wittenberg with the chief commander being Wittenberg. Later, two more members were added to staff command - Abraham Chwojnik of the Bund and Nissan Reznik of the Ha-Noar ha-Ziyyoni - expanding the leadership to five. Now that they were organized it was time to prepare for the fight. The Preparation Having the idea to fight is one thing, but being prepared to fight is quite another. Shovels and hammers are no match to machine guns. Weapons needed to be found. Weapons were an extremely hard item to attain in the ghetto. Even harder to acquire was ammunition. There were two main sources from which the ghetto inhabitants could obtain guns and ammunition - partisans and the Germans. Neither wanted the Jews to be armed. Slowly collecting by buying or stealing, risking their lives every day for carrying or hiding, the members of the F.P.O. were able to collect a small stash of weapons. They were hidden all over the ghetto - in walls, underground, even under a false bottom of a water bucket. The resistance fighters were preparing to fight during the final liquidation of the Vilna Ghetto. No one knew when that was going to happen - it could be days, weeks, perhaps even months. So every day, the members of the F.P.O. practiced. One knock on a door - then two - then another single knock. That was the F.P.O.s secret password.6  They would take out the hidden weapons and learn how to hold it, how to shoot it, and how not to waste the precious ammunition. Everyone was to fight - no one was to head for the forest until all was lost. Preparation was ongoing. The ghetto had been peaceful - no Aktionen  since December 1941. But then, in July 1943, disaster struck the F.P.O. Resistance! At a meeting with the head of Vilnas Jewish council, Jacob Gens, on the night of July 15, 1943, Wittenberg was arrested. As he was taken out of the meeting, other F.P.O. members were alerted, attacked the policemen, and freed Wittenberg. Wittenberg then went into hiding. By the next morning, it was announced that if Wittenberg were not apprehended, the Germans would liquidate the entire ghetto - consisting of approximately 20,000 people. The ghetto residents were angry and began attacking F.P.O. members with stones. Wittenberg, knowing he was going to sure torture and death, turned himself in. Before he left, he appointed Kovner  as his successor. A month and a half later, the Germans decided to liquidate the ghetto. The F.P.O. tried to persuade the ghetto residents not to go for the deportation because they were being sent to their deaths. Jews! Defend yourselves with arms! The German and Lithuanian hangmen have arrived at the gates of the ghetto. They have come to murder us! . . . But we shall not go! We shall not stretch our necks like sheep for the slaughter! Jews! Defend yourself with arms!7 But the ghetto residents did not believe this, they believed they were being sent to work camps - and in this case, they were right. Most of these transports were being sent to labor camps in Estonia. On September 1, the first clash broke out between the F.P.O. and the Germans. As the F.P.O. fighters shot at the Germans, the Germans blew up their buildings. The Germans retreated at nightfall and let the Jewish police round up the remaining ghetto residents for the transports, at the insistence of Gens. The F.P.O. came to the realization that they would be alone in this fight. The ghetto population was not willing to rise up; instead, they were willing to try their chances at a labor camp rather than certain death in revolt. Thus, the F.P.O. decided to escape to the forests and become partisans. The Forest Since the Germans had the ghetto surrounded, the only way out was through the sewers. Once in the forests, the fighters created a partisan division and performed many acts of sabotage. They destroyed the power and water infrastructures, freed groups of prisoners from the Kalais labor camp, and even blew up some German military trains. I remember the first time I blew up a train. I went out with a small group, with Rachel Markevitch as our guest. It was New Years Eve; we were bringing the Germans a festival gift. The train appeared on the raised railway; a line of large, heavy-laden trucks rolled on toward Vilna. My heart suddenly stopped beating for joy and fear. I pulled the string with all my strength, and in that moment, before the thunder of the explosion echoed through the air, and twenty-one trucks full of troops hurtled down into the abyss, I heard Rachel cry: For Ponar! [Ponary]8 The End of the War Kovner survived to the end of the war. Though he had been instrumental in establishing a resistance group in Vilna and led a partisan group in the forests, Kovner did not stop his activities at the wars end. Kovner was one of the founders of the underground organization to smuggle Jews out of Europe called Beriha. Kovner was caught by the British near the end of 1945 and was jailed for a short time. Upon his release, he joined Kibbutz Ein ha-Horesh in Israel, with his wife, Vitka Kempner, who had also been a fighter in the F.P.O. Kovner kept his fighting spirit and was active in Israels War for Independence. After his fighting days, Kovner wrote two volumes of poetry for which he won the 1970 Israel Prize in Literature. Kovner died at age 69 in September 1987. Notes 1. Abba Kovner as quoted in Martin Gilbert, The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe During the Second World War (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1985) 192.2. Abba Kovner, The Mission of the Survivors, The Catastrophe of European Jewry, Ed. Yisrael Gutman (New York: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1977) 675.3. Proclamation of the F.P.O as quoted in Michael Berenbaum, Witness to the Holocaust (New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc., 1997) 154.4. Abba Kovner, A First Attempt to Tell, The Holocaust as Historical Experience: Essays and a Discussion, Ed. Yehuda Bauer (New York: Holmes Meier Publishers, Inc., 1981) 81-82.5. Yitzhak Arad, Ghetto in Flames: The Struggle and Destruction of the Jews in Vilna in the Holocaust (Jerusalem: Ahva Cooperative Printing Press, 1980) 236.6. Kovner, First Attempt 84.7. F.P.O. Manifesto as quoted in Arad, Ghetto 411-412.8. Kovner, First Attempt 90. Bibliography Arad, Yitzhak. Ghetto in Flames: The Struggle and Destruction of the Jews in Vilna in the Holocaust. Jerusalem: Ahva Cooperative Printing Press, 1980. Berenbaum, Michael, ed. Witness to the Holocaust. New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc., 1997. Gilbert, Martin. The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe During the Second World War. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1985. Gutman, Israel, ed. Encyclopedia of the Holocaust. New York: Macmillan Library Reference U.S.A., 1990. Kovner, Abba. A First Attempt to Tell. The Holocaust as Historical Experience: Essays and a Discussion. Ed. Yehuda Bauer. New York: Holmes Meier Publishers, Inc., 1981. Kovner, Abba. The Mission of the Survivors. The Catastrophe of European Jewry. Ed. Yisrael Gutman. New York: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1977.

British Naval Fleet essays

British Naval Fleet essays The Up and Coming against the Established Britain had the greatest naval fleet in the world. Even when challenged by the best Spain had to offer, she was able to uphold her reputation. Now this was a lot to say since, Spain in the sixteenth century was at the height of her power.(Marx 11) Philip II was on a conquering massacre and Britain was the next to fall victim. Now with Elizabeth I trying to hold her unstable, internally conflicting country together, Spain thought it would be simple. Well, that is what they thought. Britain was having major problems within herself. Elizabeth I, being a female, did not have complete support from her country. Scotland, Wales and Ireland were in constantly in Elizabeths face with a threat of revolt. On top of that the small country had no wealth with the taxes being brought in late or being never brought in at all. Now to get an idea of how poor Britain actually was, British land owners were forced to sell their land and personal belongings to buy food when the small amount of taxes were not in on time. The Protestant Elizabeth was an easy target for the Spanish conquest. Charles V was the father of Philip II and he had an idealist dream. He wanted to wipe clean all other religions besides Christianity. He did in fact accomplish this dream until his created Christendom was split. Charles V was able to conquer all of the land around the Mediterranean and turn all conquered lands into Christianity; this was called Christendom. This was all good for Charles V until the Protestant Reformation ripped his ideal world in half. Now his son Philip II was going to do everything in his power to share in his fathers dream. Nothing was going to stop Philip II from having Christianity all throughout the New World. However, the scary thing about Philip II was that he would use everything and anything in is power until he got what he wanted and so far it was working....

Business Analisys of Coca Cola Brand Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Business Analisys of Coca Cola Brand - Essay Example The essay discusses that the Coca-Cola Company started as a beverage business company in 1886 selling the product at five cents a bottle. The initial escalation was unsurpassed and impressive, but more was characterized when the company established a more and powerful system of bottling. This made the brand rise to be the world’s most liked and known brand of today. The sale of Coca-Cola began in Vicksburg by a storeowner called Joseph Biedenharn who started bottling the product for sale in a common bottle termed Hutchinson. The storeowner accidentally sent a sample to Asa Candler who was the owner of the company who merely thanked him and did not implement this aspect. One of Candler’s nephews persisted for his use of the bottle but he ignored and only centered on the fountain proceeds. Two youthful attorneys from Tennessee trusted that they had the competence to build up a business around bottling the brand. They met with the director of the company who later authoriz ed them to bottle the brand in roughly all the parts of the US. The brand now rose to one dollar a bottle. A third party who was a lawyer joined the duo, thus they further vended the bottle rights to confined wholesalers and entrepreneurs. Their endeavors were further heightened by the major a technological advancements that increased efficiency and quality of the product. With this breakthrough, nearly 500 bottling plants were functioning and small-scale businesses and families owned a majority of them. A number of the plants were only opened in the dry spells when the demand was escalated. Since the straight bottle was confusing to the public, an undersized group on behalf of the company asked the public to give ideas on how to improve the bottle so that it becomes unique to the Coca-Cola brand. With the technological advancements eminent in the global economy, those who sold the brand evolved into global chains. These customers merged for reason of tackling the increasing global market (Tung, 2001, 23). The company is an American beverage institution and manufacturer. It has its HQ in Atlanta Georgia and has Muhtar Kent as its present Director. The company also retails and promotes non-alcoholic juices and syrups. The company is best recognized for its pioneer Coca-Cola product invented by John Pemberton in Georgia. Asa Chandler established the modus operandi and brand of Coca-cola in 1889. It features in the NYSE, and is a component of DJIA and the Russell Index. 2. Organizational Design & Strategy The primary competences that provide the association its unsurpassed competitive merit are its powerful name of product and its system of distribution and bottling. Besides its marketing potentials and extensive collection of products, The Company has key competences that are tremendously complicated, if not impracticable to copy. The powerful Coca-Cola product name provides the company a large amount of bargaining influence and advantage. In 1999, Coca-Cola Com pany and PepsiCo were struggling to develop into merchants of juices for the Wendy’s cafe chain. Wendy’s chose to associate with The Coca-Cola Company albeit PepsiCo was presenting a large amount of money. The Coca-Cola brand name enjoys much domination in the market. The Coca-Cola brand has authority on customer preferences. When Company was endeavoring to initiate Diet Coke, they implemented some sightless taste experiments with customers. The customers favored a glass tagged Diet Coke over a glass tagged Tab by 12%, although the fluids in all the glasses were matching. Designing Organizational Structure: Authority &Control The Company presently recruits nearly 94,800 workers. According to a broad managerial graphical representation acquired from the firm’s website, the company has over 5 hierarchical stages at the corporate strategy. For instance, the director of the Canadian region is subordinate to the

Translation Issues 1 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4500 words

Translation Issues 1 - Essay Example But the transmission of the correct information from the source language and its expression in the target language, to a great extent, pivots on the good command of lexical relations of the both of the languages, as they assist the translators to decode the meaning of a text properly. It is also unquestionably true that when the intention and goal of the author behind the original text and its aesthetic purpose are taken into concerns, the task turns into a form of art that is intended to attain the highest possible level of excellence. This paramount importance of the knowledge of lexical relationships of words in a linguistic system is mainly due to the fact that words convey different connotations and denotations in different lexical positions of words in a sentence, therefore utterly changing the meaning of the words. As in most cases a translator has to perform text analysis, semantic explorations, other meaning related investigations of the languages, an in-depth analysis of th ese languages helps greatly. Qualities of a good translation have been assessed by different scholars in different ways. But the web of relations of the words in a sentence and even in whole of the text is important for all of the good qualities of a successful translation. A translation has certain qualities for which it can be marked as a good translation. Scholars have suggested some factors that are to be maintained for the sake of good translation. According to the French scholar Dolet, â€Å"word for word† translation is detrimental for a good translation. Such type of translation may spoil the beauty of both of the content and the forms of the text. It is because that every language has its own sets of words that are especially unique in nature and consequently they have certain annotations and connotations and are interrelated through several lexical relations with the assigned meaning. Very often these

The Importance Of Photosynthesis

The Importance Of Photosynthesis To understand the importance of photosynthesis, research is conducted to help determine which wavelength of light and light intensity the chloroplast would generate the fastest photosynthetic reaction rate of photosynthesis. In plants, photosynthesis takes place in the chloroplast. The chloroplast absorbs the light energy to convert to chemical energy such as ATP AND NADPH. Photosynthesis is the process of converting carbon dioxide to organic compounds, such as simple sugar, using the energy from sunlight (Smith, A.L.). The chemical reaction equation of photosynthesis is as followed: 6 C02 + 6 H20 + Light Energy → C6H1206 + 6 02 There are a number of limiting factors on the rate of reaction for photosynthesis. However, the purpose for this lab experiment is to measure the light intensity and the wavelength. Light is a form of energy known as electromagnetic energy, also called the electromagnetic radiation (Campbell 190).The most important segment of the visible light is the narrow band range from 380 nm to 750 nm (Campbell 190). Pigments are substance that absorbs the visible light; however, it may be also reflected or transmitted. Different pigments absorb light of different wavelengths (Campbell 190). Light emits a wavelength, the distance between the crest of electromagnetic waves, is inversely related to the amount of the energy: the shorter the wavelength, the greater the energy of each photon of that light (Campbell 190). Chloroplast contains pigment chlorophyll that absorbs the light energy from the sunlight and drive synthesis of organic molecules (Campbell 186). In addition, plants also use other p igment, such as carotenes and xanthophyll, to absorb different wavelength of the light. Chlorophyll absorbs violent-blue and red light while transmitting and reflecting green light, which gives leaf its color. Violent-blue and red light are the most effective color of the light spectrum to conduct photosynthesis, whereas green light is the least effective color (Campbell 192). Photosynthesis starts when the chlorophyll molecules are excited by the absorption of light. The chlorophyll molecules are organized along with other small organic molecules and proteins into photosystem (Campbell 193). The photosystem are composed of a protein complex called a reaction-center complex that is surrounded by several light-harvesting complexes, which contain various pigments that are embedded to the protein. In Photosystem II, light travels through the chloroplast and strikes a pigment molecule in the light harvesting complex. This excites the electron to a higher energy level and fall back down to ground state. As the electron falls back down to its ground state, it stimulate a nearby pigment until this process reaches the reaction center called the P680, a pair of chlorophyll ÃŽ ± molecules in the Photosystem II reaction -center complex. The electron is then transfer to the primary electron-acceptor. As the P680 loses its electron, it is replace by the enzyme catalyze s the splitting of water molecules into two hydrogen ions and  ½ of oxygen in the thylakoids space. The oxygen atom immediately combines with another oxygen atom, forming O2, which was generated from the splitting of another water molecule. The excited electron from the primary electron-acceptor in PS II passes through the electron transport chain to the chlorophyll ÃŽ ± molecules, which is called P700, located in PS I. In the meantime, light energy travels through the light harvesting complex into the P700, which excited the electron, transferring the electron to PS I primary electron-acceptor. These electrons are passed on through electron acceptors that donate the electron to NADP+. The energy release drive the transfer of electron in an oxidation-reduction mechanism in which NADP+ is reduced to NADPH. Involving a redox reaction, oxidation is the loss of electrons from a substance, whereas reduction is the addition of electrons to a substance. The excess of energy from the oxid ation-reduction process provides energy for the synthesis of ATP, which generates a proton gradient across the chloroplast membrane that is used in chemiosmosis. Overall, the light reactions are steps of photosynthesis to convert light energy to chemical energy, such as ATP and NADPH, in order to produce pieces of sugar in the Calvin cycle. In this study, we first separate and identify pigments within plants cells by a process called chromatography. We will also study how several factors quantitatively affect the rate of photosynthesis. The factor that was tested includes the light intensity and wavelength. Thus, we can determine the effectiveness of the different pigments to absorb light to different wavelength and light intensities. The hypotheses are formed as follows: H1: Violent-blue and red light would have a faster photosynthetic rate compared to green light. H2: Light intensity is directly correlated with rate of photosynthesis. H3: Carbon dioxide is directly proportional to the amount of carbon present in the atmosphere. Materials and methods Chromatography is to separate and identify pigment within the plant cell which spinach leaves was use to conduct this experiment. Using a paper chromatography of 14 cm wide by 16cm tall, a pencil line of 2 cm is drawn from the bottom edge of the paper. Then apply the plant extract along the line to within 1 cm of each edge. Allowing the extract to dry each time, this process is repeated 10 times or more to ensure the pigment are on the chromatography. The paper chromatography is stapled into a cylinder at the bare edges and place into chromatography jar that contain a 15 ml solvent of petroleum ether-acetone. The chromatography jar is set under a vented-hood with the jar covered. This will allow the atmosphere inside to be saturated with the solvent. The solvent will move up the paper chromatography and carry the pigments along. Each pigment will move at different rate along the paper. The discrete pigment band will be formed from the front, which is the leading edge of the solvent, to the origin where the pigments were added to the paper. To determine the distance of each discrete pigment band, Rf ratio is used. The Rf is the ratio of the distance a band travels to the distance the front traveled (lab manual). The Rf equation is as follow: After the pigments are separated, each band will be pooled with other group and eluted into 10 cc of acetone. The unknown pigments from the each band are placed in a cuvette and place in a spectrophotometer. Four cuvettes were obtained and label as band 1, 2, 3, and 4. A spectrophotometer is used to measure the percent of each wavelength of light absorbed by the pigment (Campbell 190). Each band is measure at specific wavelength ranging from 400 nm to 680 nm. Thus, each of the bands is identify according to its pigment by comparing its wavelength to the known standard wavelength. To determine at which wavelength of light and at which light intensity the chloroplast would generate the fastest photosynthetic reaction rate of photosynthesis, the floating leaf disk assay is use for this experiment. The wavelength of red, green, and blue light is test to determine the rate of photosynthesis. In addition, the effect of light intensity is determined by the distance of light (white) from the leaves. For each trail, a 0.2% of 300 ml sodium bicarbonate solution (baking soda) is use as an alternate dissolved source of carbon dioxide for photosynthesis by using 1/8 of a teaspoon of baking in a 300 ml of water (lab manual). Then a hole-punch is use to cut out 10 or more uniform leaf disks (avoid major veins). The air space of the leaf disks is infiltrates with the sodium bicarbonate solution, which the solution will cause the leaf disk to sink due to its increase in density. Infiltration of the leaf disks with sodium bicarbonate is as followed: Remove the plunger and place the leaf disk into the syringe barrel. Replace the plunger and slowly push air out while being careful not to crush the leaf. With a small volume of sodium bicarbonate solution into the syringe. Tap syringe to suspend the leaf disks in the solution. While holding a finger over the syringe opening, draw back the plunger to create a vacuum for 10 seconds. In addition, swirl the leaf disks to suspend them in the solution. This procedure may be repeated 2-3 times in order to get the leaf disk to sink. After the leaf disks sink, pour the disk and the solution into a clear cup or beaker. A constant volume of bicarbonate solution is added and should be the same depth for each trail. Place the cup or beaker under the light source and start the timer. Each minute is to record the number of floating disk. In addition, dislodge any disks stuck against the sides of the cup by swirling the disks. Continue until all of the leaf disks are floating. In addition, the presence of CO2 is measured.

Glasses or No Glasses? :: Personal Narrative Writing

Glasses or No Glasses? â€Å"So, glasses or no glasses?† I’m trolling the hallway, nabbing every student I can find. My senior portrait sitting is tomorrow and I can’t decide: Glasses or no glasses? Maybe other people can give me their opinions. â€Å"Um, I think glasses,† said one of my neighbors, â€Å"but then again, Michael, you should know that I like it more when people wear glasses as a general rule.† â€Å"No glasses would be better,† said another. â€Å"Glasses, definitely. You have small eyes.† â€Å"No, no glasses I think.† So it went on and on. And on. Then finally, an interesting tidbit of advice: â€Å"So I think you should wear whatever you feel most comfortable in; whatever best reflects who you are—I mean, do you often wear glasses or not?† Ah, but there’s the rub. Sometimes I wear them, sometimes I don’t. I wear glasses when I read, because contacts dry out my eyes too fast. I wear glasses when I relax, or when I take a shower. On the other hand, I wear contacts when I play sports or get a haircut. So I guess my problem is simply this: I’m both glasses and no glasses. Now if a friend of mine were here, he would probably roll his eyes and say something along the lines of, â€Å"You know, glasses or no glasses doesn’t really matter. They’re only the superficial part of you. What’s really you is deep inside, and that part of you is the most important part. Glasses or no glasses, that part will shine through.† But see, that’s just the same problem right there, except it’s reworded to sound wiser. Do glasses not matter at all to the â€Å"real† me—to who I am?

Genetically Modified/Engineered Foods Essay

Genetically modified food products first emerged in the commercial markets some time around the mid 1990s and were a hot topic among producers and potential buyers alike. A decade has passed ever since and the debate around genetically engineered foods shows no signs of retreat. Initially, there was much enthusiasm to these foods due to the many advantages expected from these modified food crops, such as resistance to pests and the use of herbicides for the control of weed production in addition to the high nutritional value. Proponents of this new technology of food production were confident that its employment would yield extremely positive results including improved crop yield, agrochemical use and the production of highly nutritious food crops even in nutritionally drained soils. However, as time elapsed, research and study began to be conducted on these foods and it was soon brought to light that these foods are not safe for consumption, resulting in a backlash against the use of these foods. Opponents argue that the dangers associated with genetically engineered foods far outweigh the few benefits. The methods of production of foods due to gene slicing biotechnological are new and hence, the products obtained from them cannot be appropriately tested by the old methods. There is also a growing concern that genetically modified foods would create a monopoly of food supply in the hands of a few large companies which would cause tremendous harm to smaller farmers and agriculture businesses. The matter has become a political issue in many countries due to this fast, which has the power to influence the lives of millions of farmers across developed countries. The paper attempts to analyze both sides of the argument by highlighting some of the advantages and disadvantages of genetically modified foods. The primary worry is of course the danger and risk to the original composition of crops which would be substantially modified by the new techniques. The debate regarding genetically modified or engineered foods is getting more serious as there are numerous concerns regarding the environmental and health risks of food produced from this new technology. The primary causes of problems are believed to rise due to the antibiotic resistant genes used in the crops which are altered and modified. The production process also includes increased use of pesticides while planting the many varieties of modified plants (CFS 2000, 2004). Some authors have stated that genetic modification of foods is the new technology in agriculture which is â€Å"here to stay† (Schmidt 2005) ignoring the possibility of allergens which have the potential of triggering allergies in people due to the consumption of genetically engineered species of crops and agricultural products is a cause of concern. The growing episodes of food contamination prove that genetically modified foods are not absolutely safe to consume. The contamination of food due to the altered species of corn termed as ‘Starlink’ was the cause of contamination in numerous food products and due to which the company Aventis had to suffer huge losses to pay one hundred and ten million dollars in order to compensate the losses of farmers, food processors and grain handlers (Harl 2003; Jacobs 2003). There have been other contamination incidents which have resulted in severe health and financial problems to the biotech industry. Gillis (2002), Nichols (2002), and Greenpeace (2005). Besides, researchers are apprehensive of the testing methods of the FDA due to the alterations in the composition of these modified foods which subsequently results in changes of â€Å"toxicological, immunological, or nutritional concern† (Schenkelaars, 2002). The testing techniques of genetically modified foods by the FDA has attracted severe criticism for by top level scientists who are opposed to the process of gene alteration in food production and agriculture (Alliance for Biointegrity 2004). The general public too is apprehensive over the techniques used in the manufacture and production of genetically engineered foods (Schmidt, 2005). Schmidt (2005) explains that biotechnology enables scientists to employ methods for combination of genes from unrelated species of plants, animals and microorganisms for which many methods are used. The genes can be artificially combined using natural techniques to allow bacterial and viruses to â€Å"penetrate cells† or electric shocks â€Å"to destabilize the cell membranes† which would help in making the cell membranes â€Å"permeable†. All these artificial techniques facilitate the permeability of the cell membrane which otherwise evades the entry of any foreign genes or DNA from entering the original structure of the cell (Schmidt, 2005). Genetic engineering would mean going against nature for the creation of new substances, the validity of which remains an unanswered question. What is worse is the fact that the natural boundaries of the entire animal and plant kingdom will be at potential risk, since genetic engineering provides scientists with the ability to combine the genes of any existence on the face of the earth. The gene of a potato can be combined with the gene of a fish by introducing the former into the latter or vice versa. This scientific manipulation of foods is a growing concern among many scientists who feel that genetic alteration by humans can increase the levels of natural toxins in plants or allergens in foods. Genetic modification also increases the potential to enable plants and natural foods of â€Å"switching on genes that produce poison† (Shan, 2006). Other dangers of engineered foods include â€Å"antibiotic resistance† among foods, â€Å"increased pesticide residues†, â€Å"genetic pollution† and damage to soil fertility and the beneficial insects which would all subsequently cause â€Å"socio-economic hazards and ethical hazards to the entire human community† (Cummins 1999). Additionally, injection of chemical hormones like the IGF-1 in animals such as the cow increases the risk of serious diseases like cancers of the breast, colon and the prostate among consumers (Cummins 1999). Proponents of genetically engineered foods argue that these foods grown without the use of chemical additives are â€Å"superior†. The addition of food colors such as Para Red and Sudan III to naturally grown foods have resulted in several hazardous incidents as reported by the BBC News (2005) and since genetically produced foods are grown and stored without the use pesticides or fertilizers and any kind of artificial additives, supporters advocate its use. Reports regarding the growing cases of diseases such as asthma (Salam et al 2004), cancers (Muir 2005) and other harmful diseases caused due to farming techniques and pollution is a prime concern to the proponents of genetically modified foods. Heaton (2001) affirms the many health problems which occur due to the growing use of pesticides in natural foods including hormone disturbances, repression of the human immune system and other neurological damages. The chemicals used as pesticides in naturally produced foods include the likes of DDT which has been banned by most of the developed nations, and others such as lindane and astrazine (Shan, 2006). The pesticide residues such as organophosphates found in foods have been associated with hazardous effects such as reduced male fertility, cancer, abnormalities of the fetus, and even Parkinson’s disease (BMA 1992 and Robbins 1991). Additionally, high exposures of the farmers to pesticides have also enormously increased the risks of these farmers to cancers and other harmful diseases associated with them. (Schreinemachers, 2000; Alavanja et al. ,2003). Nutritionally too, genetically modified foods are believed to fare better than their natural counterparts. Research confirms that the nutritional value of genetically modified and grown foods is more than naturally grown foods. Worthington (2001) affirms that organic crops contain far more vitamins, minerals and other nutrients which are beneficial for the functioning of a healthy body. Besides, organic foods are believed to contain much less percentages of nitrates than naturally produced foods (Williams, 2002). The report by the Soil Association compares the nutritional value of genetically modified foods and naturally produced foods (Heaton 2001). Since many food products contain less water, which is why they shrink on storage, genetic engineering of foods tends to alter the structure of the plants so that the ability to retain more water in increased. This would also prevent the food from shrinking on being cooked. Genetic farming and modification of foods also restrict the use of drugs, especially in animals which reduces the risk of infections to humans. Besides, genetically engineered foods and products have higher levels of flavonoids, which act as a natural defense mechanism against the pests feeding on them (Shan, 2006). Flavonoids also play a crucial role in the prevention of cardiac problems and fatal diseases such as cancer. These foods also tend to have greater ant oxidation properties, due to the antioxidants like lycopene and phyto-nutrients like tannins present in them (Shan, 2006). Genetically modified foods have been an issue of debate over the possible advantages and disadvantages they may have on the health of humans. Thus, while it is important to adopt new technologies and procedures to better human life, the health and quality should not be compromised. It is the responsibility of regulatory authorities to adopt means and measures for appropriate testing of foods so that the general public gets maximum benefits from advancing technological processes without having to compromise health and wellbeing.