Changes for page Isidore Newman Kanner Neg
Summary
-
Objects (0 modified, 3 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Caselist.CitesClass[0]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,40 @@ 1 +T-Plural 2 + 3 + 4 +===A. Interpretation: The aff must defend countries in general and not specify one or several countries === 5 + 6 + 7 +===B. Violation – The aff specifies one nation or group of nations === 8 + 9 + 10 +===C. Standards === 11 + 12 + 13 +====1: Predictability – ==== 14 +They can pick any of 200 countries to avoid neg prep. Each one of the countries in the world has a unique nuclear power situation, which would create a huge burden on the neg to prep out each country. Also the aff could do any combination of the 200 countries meaning that there are over 40,000 scenarios that the neg would have to prep out. Predictability links to fairness because if I can't predict and prepare a debate, there's no way I could ever be fairly prepared to engage it. And predictability links to education because if I have no prep or knowledge on the countries they spec, we will never have educational and clashing debates. 15 + 16 + 17 +====2: Grammar – ==== 18 +The resolution uses the grammatical term known as zero + plural which implies that we are using first) a plural noun, in this case, "countries", and second) the "zero" is the lack of an article in front of the plural noun. The resolution "Countries ought to prohibit the use of nuclear power" meets this by having a subject without an article. Therefore, the resolution requires us to generalize. Grammar is key to education because if we don't follow the basic rules of grammar, every argument that follows is nonsensical and educational in regards to the resolution at hand. 19 +And, this is the internal link to common usage too – no one would 20 +AND 21 +says. Common usage is key to predictability which is key to fairness. 22 + 23 + 24 +====3: Clash – ==== 25 +By specifying one country or a specific group of nations you are avoiding clash because you could just avoid any general neg evidence I use by creating a combination of countries that somehow does not apply to my Das. Clash is key in order to have the most educational round and in order to truly challenge each other's ideas. 26 + 27 + 28 +===D. Voters === 29 + 30 + 31 +====First is Fairness ==== 32 +When debate's rules are unfairly skewed, the activity becomes more risky while the payoff remains the same. If risk calculations assume that we have an equal chance of winning on either side, but in reality we do not, there is a disincentive to participate. 33 + 34 + 35 +====Second is Education ==== 36 + The impacts garnered from education are lasting, and impact our real lives, as well as the lives of those around us. Additionally, it's the reason schools fund debate in the first place – if debate ceased to be educational, the activity would cease to exist. 37 +And Drop the debater 38 +1. The abuse has already happened and cannot be 39 +AND 40 +the advantage that my opponent takes with the affirmative strategy is by rejecting RVIs - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2016-09-17 18:21:21.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +NA - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +NA - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +0 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2 - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Isidore Newman Kanner Neg - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Country Spec T - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Greenhill
- Caselist.CitesClass[1]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,52 @@ 1 +=Nuclear Medicine PIC Outline = 2 + 3 + 4 +==A: FRAMEWORK: Util== 5 +Util is the only way actual policy-makers make decisions 6 + 7 + 8 +==B: COUNTERPLAN TEXT: == 9 +Countries ought to prohibit the production of nuclear power except in instances of using nuclear power for medical developments. 10 +http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nuclear20medicine 11 +Nuclear medicine is defined by Merriam Webster as: a branch of medicine dealing with radioactive materials in the diagnosis and treatment of disease 12 + 13 + 14 +==C: COMPETITION:== 15 + 16 + 17 +===Mutual exclusivity – === 18 +You cannot advocate for anything but a complete ban on the aff and this is not a complete ban since nuclear power is key to the production of nuclear medicine 19 +Department of Energy 01, 2001, Report to Congress on the Extraction of Medical Isotopes, http://www.nuclear.gov/pdfFiles/U233RptConMarch2001.pdf 20 +U.S. must develop its own nuclear power to lead in radio isotope development For the United States to continue contributions in the application of radioactive materials for biomedical investigations, it is essential that we establish a reliable source and supply of radioisotopes. Because of the uncertain supply of radioisotopes in the United States, many nuclear medicine researchers have become dissuaded from pursuing their ideas for new medical advances, threatening the future of nuclear medicine in the United States. To correct this gradual decline, the Department must continue to invest in dedicated, state-of-the-art facilities in order to reliably supply existing radioisotopes in use and develop new radioisotopes in sufficient quantity and year-long availability to support clinical research. Alpha-emitting radioisotopes are an example of this investment. 21 + 22 + 23 +===Net benefits === 24 + 25 + 26 +====Part 1) nuclear medicine saves thousands of lives per year and improves health care==== 27 +Department of Energy 01, 2001, Report to Congress on the Extraction of Medical Isotopes, http://www.nuclear.gov/pdfFiles/U233RptConMarch2001.pdf 28 +Nuclear power save lives and reduce health care costs. Some of the more frequent 29 +AND 30 +the debilitating side effects and extended hospital stays associated with more common treatments. 31 + 32 + 33 +====Part 2) The use of nuclear medicine is so common that prohibiting it could billions of lives and dollars to replace==== 34 +Department of Energy 01, 2001, Report to Congress on the Extraction of Medical Isotopes, http://www.nuclear.gov/pdfFiles/U233RptConMarch2001.pdf 35 +Each year, about one-third of the 30 million Americans hospitalized are diagnosed 36 +AND 37 + 38 +Part 2) Alternatives to medical isotopes are overpriced or impossible to find 39 + 40 + 41 +====Part 3) Nuclear power crucial to advancing cancer treatment ==== 42 +International Atomic Energy Agency, 2008, Nuclear Technology Review, http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC52/GC52InfDocuments/English/gc52inf-3_en.pdf 43 +Successful treatment of cancer requires a comprehensive understanding of the complex interaction among the various 44 +AND 45 +treating localized or disseminated solid cancer and for treating blood-borne malignancies. 46 + 47 + 48 +====Part 4) There is no alternative to nuclear medicine ==== 49 +Radiology information 16 http://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/info.cfm?pg=gennuclear 50 +Nuclear medicine imaging uses small amounts of radioactive materials called radiotracers that are typically injected 51 +AND 52 +other imaging procedures and offers the potential to identify disease in its earliest stages - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2016-09-17 18:23:07.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +NA - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +NA - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +1 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2 - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Isidore Newman Kanner Neg - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Nuclear Medicine - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Greenhill
- Caselist.RoundClass[1]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +1 - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2016-09-17 18:22:48.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +NA - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +NA - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2 - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Greenhill