Title of article: Dengue cases still on the rise
Author: Salma Khalik
Publication: The Straits Times
Date of article: 15/04/2008
In the past few years, the National Environment Agency (NEA) has been actively publicizing the effects of dengue fever and preventive measures for the breeding of mosquitos. Despite the stepped-up efforts of the NEA this year to fight mosquito breeding, the number of dengue victims is still relatively high. In the first 4 months of 2008, 1,401 people caught dengue, compared to 944 in the same period in 2007.
It is not a surprise that there are many cases of dengue despite our miniscule population size. With Singapore's hot and wet tropical climate, it is simply too easy for mosquitos to breed. Constant rain increases the possible breeding spots for mosquitoes, while the warm temperature allows the virus to multiply faster due to the shorter incubation period in the mosquito's body.
I personally believe that the NEA has been doing a pretty good job at attempting to reduce the dengue cases. One of the actions NEA takes is to conduct house checks on possible breeding spots in homes. My house has been checked a few times by these NEA officials, and so far, I would have say that these officials have been very professional and detailed.
I believe one of the reasons for the breeding of such mosquitoes in homes is due to a misconception Singaporeans have. Many believe that a substantial volume of water is required for the breeding of these killer mosquitoes. Shockingly, a patch of water around the size of a 20-cent coin is all mosquitoes needs for breeding. This means that is very easy for breeding to occur in homes, especially when only such a small patch of water is required.
Due to the misconception mentioned earlier, many believe that the chances of having a mosquito breeding spot in their homes are very low. However, from the house checks conducted, there were many unexpected areas in which mosquito larvae have been found. Some areas include the inside of a toilet brush holder, toothbrush holder, umbrella and many more.
In my opinion, the most effective solution would be to educate and constantly remind Singaporeans to take preventive measures against mosquito breeding. Recently, there have been an advertisement by the NEA, showing a small boy who want suffering in the hospital due to dengue virus, following up with the parent being very sad and sorry for not doing any preventive measures against mosquito breeding. I think this advertisement is much better than the previous few by NEA, as it touches on the emotional aspect of Singaporeans, since all parents would not want their child to suffer.
Also, NEA should clear some of the misconceptions that many Singaporeans have, one being the amount of water required for mosquito breeding, and I believe by doing so, Singaporeans would be more cautious of the possible breeding spots in their homes and this will thus reduce the dengue cases in Singapore.
Word Count: 479 words.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Friday, May 30, 2008
SS Essay
Before discussing whether democracy can create stability, I would first like to define democracy as citizens of a country being able to decide and elect the leaders to govern their country; and stability as social stability with little hostility between the different population groups in a country.
I believe that it is possible for democracy to create stability in a society. Since a country’s leader is decided by the majority, this majority of the population will have the same values and viewpoints on how the country should be governed, leading to a similar consensus among them. This will result in fewer conflicts between most of the citizens.
In Singapore, Singaporeans get to choose which political party they would support to rule a particular area, such as the People’s Action Party and the Workers Party. However, no matter which party wins the election, there have been few cases of violent objections from the minority.
From the above example, we can see that democracy creates similar view among the majority, thus creating social stability.
However, I also believe that democracy can cause instability in a society. Although the majority has the same viewpoints, the neglected minority may cause problems. An example would be social stability issues like riots and demonstration, especially when the minority is a large one.
In Sri Lanka, 18% of the population is Tamils, making them the largest minority. As Sinhalese made up the majority, the government elected was largely Sinhalese. This government practiced unfair treatment between the two, leading to unhappiness within the Tamil community. The led to the formation of Tamil Tigers, who used violent measures to voice their objections and caused many conflicts in Sri Lanka. Although 18% may seem small, it equates to around 3.6 million of people. If this number of people were to combine forces, it is definitely enough to cause havoc in a country. True enough, there were many social stability issues in Sri Lanka in the past few years despite the Tamil Tigers being a small percentage of the Tamil population.
From the above example, it illustrates that even when majority are of a similar agreement, if the leaders do not treat the population groups equally, conflicts may still arise. Thus, democracy can also cause instability.
In my opinion, I believe that just democracy alone is not enough to create stability or instability in a country. There are many factors that also affect social stability, such as a stable economy, a professional army, citizens having a basic idea of democracy, etc. However, I believe that the underlying factor for social stability is equal treatment of the population by the elected leaders. In Singapore, the leaders treat both majority and minorities equally, thus there is stability. Whereas in the case of Sri Lanka, leaders were biased towards the majority, causing conflicts between the groups and thus instability. Thus, I believe that equal treatment is the underlying basis for stability.
In conclusion, I believe that it is possible for democracy to create stability in a society, but only at the expense when the government leaders treat the population with equality. [517 words]
I believe that it is possible for democracy to create stability in a society. Since a country’s leader is decided by the majority, this majority of the population will have the same values and viewpoints on how the country should be governed, leading to a similar consensus among them. This will result in fewer conflicts between most of the citizens.
In Singapore, Singaporeans get to choose which political party they would support to rule a particular area, such as the People’s Action Party and the Workers Party. However, no matter which party wins the election, there have been few cases of violent objections from the minority.
From the above example, we can see that democracy creates similar view among the majority, thus creating social stability.
However, I also believe that democracy can cause instability in a society. Although the majority has the same viewpoints, the neglected minority may cause problems. An example would be social stability issues like riots and demonstration, especially when the minority is a large one.
In Sri Lanka, 18% of the population is Tamils, making them the largest minority. As Sinhalese made up the majority, the government elected was largely Sinhalese. This government practiced unfair treatment between the two, leading to unhappiness within the Tamil community. The led to the formation of Tamil Tigers, who used violent measures to voice their objections and caused many conflicts in Sri Lanka. Although 18% may seem small, it equates to around 3.6 million of people. If this number of people were to combine forces, it is definitely enough to cause havoc in a country. True enough, there were many social stability issues in Sri Lanka in the past few years despite the Tamil Tigers being a small percentage of the Tamil population.
From the above example, it illustrates that even when majority are of a similar agreement, if the leaders do not treat the population groups equally, conflicts may still arise. Thus, democracy can also cause instability.
In my opinion, I believe that just democracy alone is not enough to create stability or instability in a country. There are many factors that also affect social stability, such as a stable economy, a professional army, citizens having a basic idea of democracy, etc. However, I believe that the underlying factor for social stability is equal treatment of the population by the elected leaders. In Singapore, the leaders treat both majority and minorities equally, thus there is stability. Whereas in the case of Sri Lanka, leaders were biased towards the majority, causing conflicts between the groups and thus instability. Thus, I believe that equal treatment is the underlying basis for stability.
In conclusion, I believe that it is possible for democracy to create stability in a society, but only at the expense when the government leaders treat the population with equality. [517 words]
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Democracy creates stability in a society
Ok guys, post your stuff at the comments area!
Discuss about this motion “Democracy creates stability in a society.”
Lin Jin. :D
Discuss about this motion “Democracy creates stability in a society.”
Lin Jin. :D
Monday, March 10, 2008
MP3s and Loudspeakers
Title of article: Sound Blaster
Author: Benson Ang
Publication: The Straits Times
Date of article: 07/01/2007
Recently, there has been a new trend among teenagers in Singapore: playing music through loudspeakers while taking public transport, such as MRT trains and buses. This trend is known as “sound blasting”. There have been many complaints from the public, describing this behaviour to be inconsiderate towards the other passengers. When interviewed, some teenagers claimed to be unaware of their inconsiderate actions, while others were unconvinced that their actions are causing a nuisance to the other passengers.
I personally have encountered with incidents of sound blasting before. Once I was on a MRT train, there was a middle-aged uncle who was playing Hokkien songs through his mobile phone. Although nobody said anything, I could see that many commuters around him were unpleased with his actions. From this incident, it seems like not only the teenagers are practicing “sound blasting”, even adults are doing so too.
Many people think that the songs that they like are the songs that most people will like, thus, they do not think that it will be a problem if they play the music out loud, as other commuters will get to enjoy it too. However, the truth is, even if the songs these teens are playing are the most popular pop songs, there may still be people who do not like these songs. Furthermore, many commuters often want to enjoy peace after a hard day’s work, and do not want to be disturbed by these music.
An easy alternative to “sound blasting” is to use earphones. Earphones are cheap, portable, and lightweight, and best of all, they let you enjoy your music without interrupting others. Earphones often also provide music of higher quality compared to loudspeakers on mobile phones and other similar devices. By using earphones, it shows that you are considerate and have civil mindedness.
Other commuters can also help to reduce sound blasting. Whenever there is anybody who is practicing sound blasting, it would help to walk up to the person, and request him to kindly reduce the volume of the music. I believe if these “blasters” are asked nicely, they would also have no reason to turn you down.
Playing music in MRT trains and buses may be a good way to relive stress and reduce boredom, but it should be done with consideration for others, and "sound blasting” definitely is not one of the ways to do so.
Author: Benson Ang
Publication: The Straits Times
Date of article: 07/01/2007
Recently, there has been a new trend among teenagers in Singapore: playing music through loudspeakers while taking public transport, such as MRT trains and buses. This trend is known as “sound blasting”. There have been many complaints from the public, describing this behaviour to be inconsiderate towards the other passengers. When interviewed, some teenagers claimed to be unaware of their inconsiderate actions, while others were unconvinced that their actions are causing a nuisance to the other passengers.
I personally have encountered with incidents of sound blasting before. Once I was on a MRT train, there was a middle-aged uncle who was playing Hokkien songs through his mobile phone. Although nobody said anything, I could see that many commuters around him were unpleased with his actions. From this incident, it seems like not only the teenagers are practicing “sound blasting”, even adults are doing so too.
Many people think that the songs that they like are the songs that most people will like, thus, they do not think that it will be a problem if they play the music out loud, as other commuters will get to enjoy it too. However, the truth is, even if the songs these teens are playing are the most popular pop songs, there may still be people who do not like these songs. Furthermore, many commuters often want to enjoy peace after a hard day’s work, and do not want to be disturbed by these music.
An easy alternative to “sound blasting” is to use earphones. Earphones are cheap, portable, and lightweight, and best of all, they let you enjoy your music without interrupting others. Earphones often also provide music of higher quality compared to loudspeakers on mobile phones and other similar devices. By using earphones, it shows that you are considerate and have civil mindedness.
Other commuters can also help to reduce sound blasting. Whenever there is anybody who is practicing sound blasting, it would help to walk up to the person, and request him to kindly reduce the volume of the music. I believe if these “blasters” are asked nicely, they would also have no reason to turn you down.
Playing music in MRT trains and buses may be a good way to relive stress and reduce boredom, but it should be done with consideration for others, and "sound blasting” definitely is not one of the ways to do so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)