More Related Content
More from lesleyryder69361
More from lesleyryder69361 (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Sheet1Total cost of the roomTotal Services done for the monthAmmen.docx
- 1. Sheet1Total cost of the roomTotal Services done for the monthAmmenitiesQty UsedCost/UnitTotal costServicesQtyDiswashing Liquid10.150.15DepartureDishwashing Powder10.280.28ServiceLaundry Powder10.280.28LinenTea Towel10.270.27Bath towels20.571.14Total Services0Face towel20.230.46Hand Towel10.320.32pillow cover30.320.96bedsheet30.982.94Bath Matt10.410.41Soap Bar20.140.28Shampooo10.210.21Body Lotion10.210.21Body Conditioner10.210.21Body Wash10.210.21Toilet Paper20.691.38Tissue Box20.861.72Grooming Kit10.190.19Sanitory Bag10.120.12Bin liner10.020.02Housekeeping 117.89 Reception2: Reception2: Needs to be updated in reference to the spreadsheet sent by Natalie 17.89Rent131.2531.25Electricity15.835.83Note Pad10Pen10.40.4Milk10.530.53Tea40.0320.128Coffee40.140.56 Decaff40.190.76Sugar40.120.48Equal40.120.48Salt40.060.24Pa per40.090.36Total Cost In a room70.668Total Stock order this monthAmmenitiesQty in unitPrice/UnitTotal ConsumpltionDiswashing Liquid0.150Dishwashing Powder0.280Laundry Powder0.280Tea Towel0.270Bath towels0.570Face towel0.230Hand Towel0.320Bath Matt0.410Soap Bar0.140Shampooo0.210Body Lotion0.210Body Conditioner0.210Body Wash0.210Toilet Paper0.690Tissue Box0.860Grooming Kit0.190Sanitory Bag0.120Bin liner0.020Housekeeping 00Rent31.250Electricity5.830Note Pad0Pen0.40Milk0.530Tea0.0320Coffee0.140Decaff0.190Sugar 0.120Equal0.120Salt0.060Paper0.090Total Cunsumtion of ammentins/linen0Total Avergae cost of a room this monthERROR:#DIV/0!Differece between the acutal cost and the consumptionERROR:#DIV/0!
- 2. Reception2: Reception2: the value should always be in positive Reception2: Reception2: Needs to be updated in reference to the spreadsheet sent by Natalie Sheet2 Sheet3 As I began reading the four case studies, I had realized just how new I must be to anthropology and anthropological research. I had always believed anthropology was mostly about research on the history of homo-sapiens and our previous ancestors. The depth in research with regards to the regulations and ethics for modern humans was unfounded by me. As I go into thinking about how to consider the rules of anthropological research with virgin eyes and thoughts, I have to imagine a world without any regulations. Undoubtedly, researchers would push the limits of their research and more likely than less would perform experiments which would be looked upon as unethical against the human race. This world nevertheless could be filled with outstanding research and benefits to the human race, but at the cost of innocent people’s privacy, beliefs, and even possibly their lives. One may argue that anthropologists even without these rules and regulations would act morally correct and not push the limits of their research. However, it just doesn't seem possible as even now with present review boards for anthropology
- 3. research that certain studies and experiments are to be unjustly performed innocently or knowingly as seen in case studies 1-3. Of course an inverse thought, which would be a world filled with the strictest of rules and regulations would just be bound to simple and non-constructive research. As seen in the fourth case study, even with current rules that try not to limit potential research, studies can become elongated and even limited to who can be interviewed or studied. This lawful world just seems too locked up for a type of research that involves humans who have free thought and independent actions which could never be assessed by only observational study. With these two ideas in mind, I find the issue and difficulty of finding the right balance for freedom of research and respect for human rights. Without doubt this is why review boards have been placed over anthropology researchers. It's hard if not impossible to create a set of common rules that will be considered perfect for research and ensure protection of all. However, it is possible that one set of rules can always be fairer than another. From my understanding with most forms or research, many studies done seem to be considered acceptable as long as consent of the studied party is agreed upon. This is a rule I believe should be enforced and is being forced now in review boards. With this rule, researchers are allowed to perform a vast amount of studies as long as they can provide sufficient reason for their research and gain the approved and understood consent of those being studied. As long as researchers can explain and get their point across for research, I believe most people and societies would agree to help and participate in benefiting
- 4. research for the human race. To insure this rule is followed and that studied parties are informed of all parts of research, strong laws and fines should be placed to insure that acts against the human race are always in consideration. This allows the largest possible amount of freedom researches could possibly have without putting human respect at risk. One rule however, which cannot be broken even with the fullest of consent of a person or persons, is bringing harm to any human. Harming or even doing experiments on another human seems unethical in all senses and breaks any human dignity a researcher may have. Although there could be beneficial results to such research, there just seems something innately immoral about doing harm to another for the sake of research. Also all researchers should propose there potential studies to their designated review board. The review boards for these researchers should also understand and as well help promote such studies. If an administration would like to be supported and respected, all review boards should respond and cooperate with researchers to get their studies completed. Although this could never be lawfully enforced, if true anthropology was to be promoted it would have to be by the fullest support of review boards. By fullest support I am expecting review boards to Letter D, Page 1 provide timely responses for approval of research, ways in which researchers can get denied proposals approved, and an unbiased review of the proposed research being evaluated.
- 5. Although there are many other rules and concepts that can be brought up about the subject, I feel fundamentally these ideas are necessary for the freedom and respect of research is done in a positive and beneficial way. Letter D, Page 2 10/12/12 OP-ED 2012 What would you do if someone were to infect you with a deadly disease without your knowledge or permission for them doing so? This was the case in the example of the Guatemala Syphilis Experiment, which showed to us the lack of common rules among research by the IRB and the REB. It is clear that there needs to be a set rule of guidelines for researchers in order to protect the participant’s rights to life and privacy. In order to regulate the common rules I agree 100% that researchers should have their studies reviewed before and after their studies are done. If researchers were to have complete freedom to study the way they wanted to without review there is guarantee that people rights to privacy would be evoked. A simple way to know whether or not the research being implemented is positive for society is to simply ask the question if anyone’s rights are being imposed on when conducting the experiment, if so it should not be done. In Case four we hear from a researcher that suggests, "But as long as we have these kinds of boards that review
- 6. every proposal, it's going to be challenging to make significant changes―. It’s hard to believe that because of having ones research reviewed for imposing on human rights would make it impossible to make progress. It seems to me that we have made great discovery’s in the past and continue to progress without having to invade others privacy. If researches had the ability to conduct any survey as they please it would probably end up setting the research program back, because why would people truest an experiment that hasn't been review? It’s easy to see how from a researchers point of view their experiment will be for the greater good no matter what the sacrifice is being made, however, that’s why there is a need for these type of boards who think about the outcome for both parties, not willing to sacrifice another’s happiness for the sake of research. For example, in the case of the Yanomami “Neel decided to do his research without first gaining Yanomami permission. And he decided, on his own, what the reciprocal benefits of his research would be―. Turns out that the Yanomami felt taken advantage of and don’t even acknowledge Neel in ever helping them at all. Neel felt like he had the complete freedom to conduct his research however he wanted, having boards to review these studies before they are done prevents people from feeling taken advantage of. In conclusion, the IRB and REB have the right to make common rules and should enforce them rightfully. If researches had the complete freedom to conduct any study they wanted it would actually set back the research program, creating a bad image. The boards should continue the requirement of review over all studies and should not let any studies role out without prior review before and after the study has been done. Sticking to the
- 7. “Belmont Report― is best, to ensure that people have their privacy and justice when needed, which hopefully there isn't going to be need of justice when the rules are enforced. Letter C, Page 1 Researching on the virus, syphilis, i find it disturbing what people have done to actually spread this disease. Paying prostitutes to have sex with prisoners and letting these prisoners out with this disease is horrible. I feel the research needs to go more into stopping the disease from spreading rather than trying to make a cure. There's diseases out there that no man can cure, my opinion is STD's could be one of those diseases. Putting humans at risk as a "test experiment" is beyond crossing human rights. I am disgusted that something like this could occur and some should be ashamed of this. To apologize nearly 64 years later still leaves no remorse in my mind. Guatemala families should definitely compensate for such a crime. Research should look more into stopping this horrible disease at a very minor expense. Letter B, Page 1