The Student Room Group

Unit 7 exam help - preparation

This is for the unit 7 applied science exam, preparation to show you guys how I set up my notes. Feel free to take inspiration. Hope it helps 😄

Question 1 all 3 articles
Discuss the implications of the scientific issue identified in the articles (12 marks)

Social implication- issue that influences and is opposed by a considerable number of individuals within a society.
Economic implication- issue related to the harmful effects of limited/scarce resources.
Environmental implication- issue related to the harmful effects of human activity on the environment.
Ethical implication- issue that is ethically related to aspects that may have affected how research was carried out.

Article 1:

-Social: ‘tiger parenting’/ Burden of perfection from parents can actually make young male athletes feel positive about doping’ - The article highlights how social pressure and parental expectations have an impact on athletes and raises questions about the social implications of doping. Particularly in the setting of "tiger" parenting, the pressure to live up to parents' expectations and aspirations may push young athletes to turn to doping as a way to succeed. This suggests that a large portion of athletes' decisions on doping techniques are influenced by their social surroundings, which includes family dynamics and cultural norms. It emphasises the larger social issue of striking a balance in the competitive sports arena between the pursuit of greatness and moral and health concerns. Link to -ethical point - This suggests that societal and parental expectations can contribute to the ethical dilemma of doping, as athletes may feel pressured to resort to performance-enhancing substances to meet unrealistic standards set by parents or society, raising concerns about the well-being and integrity of athletes.

suggests a negative social implication on doping, and here’s why and to what extent:

Negative Social Implications:

1. Pressure and Expectations: Tiger parenting, characterised by high expectations and intense pressure on children to achieve, can contribute to a culture of unrealistic expectations in sports. The burden of perfection imposed by parents may push young athletes to resort to doping as a means to meet those expectations and succeed at any cost.
2. Psychological Impact: The pressure to excel and the fear of failure can have severe psychological impacts on young athletes. Feeling the need to live up to unrealistic standards set by parents may lead to stress, anxiety, and a distorted sense of achievement. Doping may be perceived as a shortcut to meet the imposed standards.
3. Normalizing Unethical Behavior: When young athletes perceive doping as a positive response to parental pressure, it normalizes unethical behavior in sports. This normalization can perpetuate a culture where cheating is seen as an acceptable means to achieve success, undermining the integrity of fair competition.
4. Undermining Sports Values: Doping goes against the core values of sports, such as fair play, integrity, and respect. When the burden of perfection drives athletes to consider doping positively, it undermines these values, eroding the essence of sportsmanship.

Extent of Social Impact:

The extent of the negative social impact depends on various factors, including the prevalence of such parenting practices, the awareness and education within the sports community, and the overall societal response. In sports cultures where intense parental pressure is common, there may be a higher risk of athletes resorting to doping to meet expectations. Efforts to address this issue should focus on promoting healthy athletic development, emphasizing ethical values, and educating parents, coaches, and athletes about the potential harms of doping. Creating an environment that prioritizes the well-being of young athletes and encourages fair play is essential to counteracting these negative social implications.

+/-Economic: “With so much… and hard cash on the line, sports success is here to stay.” The article suggests an economic challenge in maintaining the integrity of sports and the associated financial interests. The prevalent use of performance-enhancing drugs, despite their questionable effectiveness, indicates that athletes, driven by the desire for success and financial rewards, may resort to substances that could compromise fair competition. This poses a threat to the economic value of sports, as the legitimacy of achievements becomes questionable, potentially impacting sponsorships, broadcasting deals, and overall fan engagement. + = mention of "hard cash at stake" suggests financial incentives for athletes. In some cases, the pursuit of economic rewards can drive athletes to perform at their best, contributing positively to their financial well-being. Can lead to decreased public perception which is a social implication.

+Environmental: ‘farming could impact the results of doping tests in sports’ If farming practices are environmentally friendly, such as in organic farming, the likelihood of contamination from harmful substances could be reduced. This could contribute to a cleaner environment and minimise the risk of substances affecting doping test results.

Article 2:

-Social: “One of the biggest doping scandals to date is the Russian doping scandal, which saw some athletes banned from the 2016 summer Olympics”. The social implication highlighted in the article is the tarnishing of sportsmanship and the integrity of various sports due to doping. The mention of famous scandals, such as the Russian doping scandal, emphasises how doping can lead to the stripping of medals and bans for athletes. This suggests that doping not only undermines fair competition but also erodes the public’s trust in the authenticity of sporting achievements. has repercussions beyond individual athletes, impacting the reputation of entire teams and nations. Affects social sports, creating an atmosphere of suspicion and scepticism among fans.
2nd -Social ‘many famous track stars and field athletes banned for doping’ It signifies a widespread issue of athletes in track and field engaging in doping, which can have several adverse effects on society: Erosion of Trust: The prevalence of doping scandals among famous athletes can erode public trust in sports. Fans may become disillusioned when their sporting idols are implicated in cheating through performance-enhancing substances. Fairness and Integrity Concerns: Doping undermines the principles of fair play and integrity in sports. The negative social implication lies in the perception that success is achieved through unfair means, which contradicts the spirit of healthy competition.
. Linking = The ‘Russian dipping scandal’ can also been seen as -economic implication as 47 medals stripped and over 200 athletes caught, suggests that doping scandals can tarnish the image of a country’s sporting achievements. This tarnishing of reputation may lead to economic repercussions, impacting the financial aspects of sports organisations and economic ecosystem associated with sports. Also, the scandal led to fines, suspensions and bans for Russian athletes affected their chances of participating in international competitions. Negative impact on revenue generation (organisations, sponsors, and broadcasters). The loss of trust integrity had long term economic consequences.

-Ethical: ‘assisting or covering up any intentional complicity’ = it’s considered a negative ethical implication: Violates Fair Play: Assisting or covering up intentional complicity in doping undermines the principle of fair play in sports. Fairness is a fundamental ethical concept in athletic competitions, and actions that compromise this fairness are seen as ethically problematic. Deceives Competitors and the Public: Intentional complicity in doping, especially when covered up, involves deception. Deceiving competitors who are competing honestly and the public that expects fair and clean competitions goes against ethical standards that value honesty and transparency.
Betrayal of Trust: Athletes, sporting organisations, and officials are entrusted with maintaining the integrity of sports. Intentional complicity and cover-ups betray this trust. Trust is a key element in the relationship between athletes, sports organisations, and the public.

Article 3:

Social: ‘if the Goal is to protect health, then medically supervised doping is likely to be a better route’ =
holds both positive and negative social implications in the context of doping:
Positive Social Implications: Health Monitoring: Medically supervised doping implies a more controlled and monitored approach to doping, with a focus on the athletes’ health. This could lead to better health outcomes for athletes who might otherwise misuse substances without proper guidance. Reduced Health Risks: The statement suggests that under medical supervision, athletes might use performance-enhancing substances in a way that minimises health risks. This approach could theoretically lead to safer practices compared to unsupervised, unregulated doping.

Negative Social Implications:
Normalising Doping: Accepting medically supervised doping may contribute to the normalisation of performance-enhancing practices in sports. This normalisation could undermine the principles of fair play and the essence of sportsmanship, as the competitive advantage might become more about pharmacological interventions than natural abilities.
Ethical Concerns: The idea of medically supervised doping raises ethical questions about the integrity of sports. It challenges the notion that athletic achievements are a result of natural talent, hard work, and dedication, potentially eroding the core values of sports.
Unequal Access: If medically supervised doping becomes an accepted practice, there could be concerns about unequal access. Athletes with better resources or connections might have access to superior medical supervision, creating an uneven playing field and potentially exacerbating existing inequalities in sports.

Economic: ‘Dwain chambers, has admitted to using 6 different substances banned by the sporting authorities’ = has negative economic implications on doping. Here’s why and to what extent:
Negative Economic Implications:
Sponsorship Loss: Athletes involved in doping scandals often face consequences in terms of sponsorship deals and endorsements. Sponsors are likely to reconsider their association with athletes tainted by doping. In Chambers’ case, the admission to using banned substances may lead to a loss of sponsors, impacting his financial support.
Endorsement Reduction: Endorsements from brands and companies may diminish for athletes involved in doping, affecting their income. Companies are often hesitant to be associated with athletes whose actions go against the ethical and fair play standards of sports.
Financial Impact on Athlete: The economic consequences extend to the athlete personally. Loss of sponsorships and endorsements can significantly reduce an athlete’s income, especially if they rely heavily on these financial streams. It may affect their livelihood and financial stability.
Team and Event Repercussions: In team sports, doping scandals can lead to the exclusion or suspension of athletes from competitions. This not only affects the athlete individually but also impacts the team’s performance and potential earnings.

Question 2 all 3 articles, don’t need an intro link.
Identify two organisations and scientists mentioned in the articles and suggest how they have had an influence on the main scientific issue (6 marks)
A2 Understand the influence of different organisations/individuals on scientific issues.
Government and global organisation, anything funded by govt e.g., World Health Organization (WHO), European Union (EU), United Nations (UN), Environmental Agency, Food standards agency (FSA).
Non-government organisations, professional bodies, and associations, not funded by govt but well-known, non-profit e.g., Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC), General Medical Council (GMC), National Physics Laboratory (NPL).
Universities and research groups/teams e.g., Oxford, John-Hopkins, MIT
Private and multinational organisations, e.g., oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, fair trade organisations.
Voluntary pressure groups, rely entirely on charitable donations from public e.g., charities, trusts, World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth
Individuals have they done specific research? Have they donated money?
Have they stopped something from happening (e.g., projects not going ahead by cancelling| them?) Have the individuals said anything particularly strong or powerful for or against the issue?

Article 1

Global organisation - The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) is the global governing body for the sport of athletics. They are responsible for setting and enforcing the rules and regulations of athletics competitions worldwide. One of the important aspects they focus on is anti-doping measures. The IAAF plays a crucial role in combating doping in athletics by implementing and enforcing strict anti-doping policies. They conduct drug testing, establish prohibited substance lists, and impose sanctions on athletes who violate the rules. Their influence on doping is significant as they aim to create a fair and clean playing field for all athletes, ensuring the integrity of the sport.

Article 1,2 Global organisation- The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) is a global organization committed to eradicating doping practices in sports. WADA fulfills its mission through a multifaceted approach. Firstly, it collaborates with international stakeholders to develop and enforce the World Anti-Doping Code, setting global standards for anti-doping policies. The agency conducts scientific research to advance doping detection methods, striving to stay ahead of emerging substances and techniques. WADA also emphasizes education, raising awareness about the risks and consequences of doping among athletes and support personnel. Its influence extends to monitoring and ensuring compliance with anti-doping programs worldwide. By establishing stringent testing procedures, promoting education, and fostering global cooperation, WADA seeks to maintain the integrity of sports, providing a fair and level playing field for athletes while sending a strong message against doping practices.

Non governmental - The Sports Nutrition Group of the International Olympic Committee's Medical Commission is a team of experts who focus on nutrition in the context of sports and the Olympics. They work to develop guidelines and recommendations for athletes regarding their nutritional needs, performance enhancement, and recovery. While their primary goal is to optimize athletes' performance and well-being, they also play a role in anti-doping efforts. By providing evidence-based nutrition strategies, they aim to promote clean and fair competition by educating athletes about the importance of proper nutrition and the potential risks of using prohibited substances. Their influence on doping prevention would come from their efforts to ensure that athletes have access to accurate and reliable information about nutrition and the potential consequences of doping.

Article 2

Academic - That's fascinating! Duke University and the University of Brighton have made significant contributions in the field of doping detection. Duke University's research on micro RNA (miRNA) testing has helped differentiate between new and old red blood cells, aiding in the detection of blood transfusion fraud. Meanwhile, the researchers at the University of Brighton are studying the genetic markers in RNA to detect banned substances even weeks after they have been taken. Their advancements in RNA testing have been crucial in the fight against doping in sports. These innovative methods developed by both universities have greatly enhanced the ability to detect doping and maintain fair competition.

Article 3

Individual - Dwain Chambers is a former British sprinter. He has competed in various international athletics competitions, including the Olympic Games and World Championships. Chambers was involved in a doping scandal in 2003 when he tested positive for a banned substance. This incident had a significant impact on the discussion surrounding doping in sports. It highlighted the importance of anti-doping efforts and the consequences of using performance-enhancing substances. Chambers' case contributed to raising awareness about the influence of doping in athletics and the need for stricter regulations and testing protocols.

Individual- Andy Miah, a bioethicist at the University of West Scotland, believes that if the goal is to prioritize athletes' health, medically supervised doping could be a safer option. Miah suggests that instead of solely focusing on banning performance-enhancing substances, there could be a shift towards investing in safer forms of enhancement. Some argue that with the prevalence of enhancers, allowing athletes to use them under supervision could be a more realistic approach. Miah's perspective encourages a discussion on finding a balance between athlete safety and fair competition in the realm of doping.

Question 3 Article 3 ONLY

- Definition of validity is the accuracy of something it measures exactly what needs to be measured. Accuracy in something hits the target.

- Definition of reliability is something that is consistent which is repeated multiple times.

Assessing the reliability and validity of an article involves considering various factors, including the author's credentials, the publication source, the evidence provided, and potential biases. In the case of this article, here are some considerations:
1. Author's Credentials:
The author, Helen Thompson, is identified as an intern at Nature's Washington DC office. It's important to note that being an intern may not necessarily indicate extensive expertise in the subject matter. However, the credibility of Nature as a reputable scientific journal adds weight to the article.
2. Publication Source:
The article is published by Nature Publishing Group. Nature is a well-established and respected scientific journal with a rigorous peer-review process. Articles published in Nature undergo scrutiny from experts in the field, enhancing the reliability of the information.
3. Objectivity and Bias:
The article appears to present a balanced view of the topic, discussing various perspectives on performance-enhancing technologies in sports. However, the tone and emphasis on certain arguments may influence the reader's perception. It's crucial to consider potential biases, especially when the article discusses controversial topics like doping in sports.
4. Citations and References:
The article references studies and research findings to support its claims. The inclusion of citations allows readers to verify the information and assess the reliability of the sources. In this case, references to studies on the effects of certain drugs and therapies provide a basis for the article's content.
5. Date of Publication:
The article was published on July 19, 2012. While the information presented may still be relevant, advancements in the field of sports science and technology could have occurred since then. It's advisable to supplement this information with more recent sources to ensure the data is up-to-date.
6. Ethical Considerations:
The article touches on ethical considerations related to performance-enhancing technologies in sports. While it doesn't explicitly take a stance, it highlights different perspectives, fostering a nuanced discussion.
In conclusion, the article's reliability is supported by its publication in Nature, references to scientific studies, and a generally balanced presentation. However, readers should consider the limitations of the author's credentials, the article's age, and potential biases in their overall assessment. For the most current information, it's recommended to consult additional sources.
this is really good i wish i saw it it a couple of weeks back tho ☹️ deffo flunked mine

Quick Reply