The Instigator
frozen_eclipse
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
imabench
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

high school students should be required to take a basic medical class

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
imabench
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/9/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,342 times Debate No: 21848
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

frozen_eclipse

Pro

thanks for excepting this debate....I'm not the best typist so my spelling may be off....This is actually a bill that I'm going to submit for congress.....so feedback would be appreciated.

proposal: students should required to graduate with basic first aid,and over the counter drug knowledge.

civilians can increase there chances of survival if they know basic first aid.
If a person knows to stop the bleeding then they wont bleed to death by the time paramedics get there.

also, There is this good sumeritan law witch states it is against the law when you get into to an accident and you don't help them. How can a person help if they don't know what to do. No one wants to watch people die or be helpless, by requiring high school students to learn some basic skills, America will most likely have lower death rates

Basic pharmacology should also be introduced.
every year people spend lots of money on prescriptions. Most prescriptions have a generic version or naturally occurs in some other retailed product that is way cheaper. just recently i almost spent 200 dollars on panoxl.......I found the same thing in the same pharmacy and it was only 9 dollars........if students are required to learn basic over the counter drug skills then we could save lots of money
imabench

Con

I admire the proposal made by the Pro, however I see a lot of flaws in this proposal which is why I accepted this debate.

"proposal: students should required to graduate with basic first aid,and over the counter drug knowledge."
If we require students to get basic first aid and over the counter medication training then we would have to fit that course into an already crammed curriculum students deal with in High school, and the teachers needed to teach the course, materials needed for it, etc would be a burden on school budgets. If schools try to cut their budgets and cut funding from these med classes it could cause the level of education to become so sub-standard that it may cause students to do more harm then good when the situation comes.

"civilians can increase there chances of survival if they know basic first aid."
They can also do quite a bit of harm though. Think about it if a student knows basic medical training and when helping a person has a choice between trying to be a hero and actually calling for help, that person might put the victims life on the line for a shot of being a hero...................... It would be sort of like a little kid in a weight training class trying to lift a heavy thing off of someone because they think they can pull it off instead of calling someone to do it for them who is way more experienced and qualified.....................



(I apologize for the F word being in there but I couldnt find a different picture of a baby trying to lift a ridiculously large amount)

Point is medical training could cause harm if it empowers students to become cocky enough to try to fix it themselves rather than call a professional and just try to but time until they show up.

"If a person knows to stop the bleeding then they wont bleed to death by the time paramedics get there."
Just how serious medical training are we talking about him? I could under stand maybe a broken bone or some burns but stopping lethal blood loss sounds like something that no student could learn in one class in one year....

" How can a person help if they don't know what to do."
Should we also teach kids how to be firefighters in case of a fire or detectives to find criminals too? Its a noble idea dont get me wrong but this might be a tipping point to try to teach students to learn to fix anything, and that would be a hopeless battle for our underfunded school system to handle.

"Basic pharmacology should also be introduced."
Pharmacology: The study of the interactions that occur between a living organism and chemicals that affect normal or abnormal biochemical function

First off, I dont think we should be telling high school students anything about prescription medicine and over-the-counter drugs since theres a growing trend about high school students using those same things to get high.
http://www.health.ny.gov...
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com...
http://www.life123.com...
http://www.reuters.com...
http://www.momlogic.com...
http://zev.hubpages.com...
http://www.fox16.com...
http://www.infowars.com...
http://www.talkaboutrx.org...
http://www.drugrehabtreatment.com...

Im not trying to saturate this debate with sources, prescription drug abuse is a SERIOUS problem among high schools, and I dont think its good to give kids a COURSE about drugs they could then use to get stoned on....

"if students are required to learn basic over the counter drug skills then we could save lots of money"
Wait a sec, wait a sec............ I thought the goal here was to help students save lives not become savvy shoppers..... I for one dont think we should put a larger burden on schools just to help students be saavy shoppers when it comes down to prescription drugs they could get high off of...
Debate Round No. 1
frozen_eclipse

Pro

First counter:.....well i didnt make this clear earlier but....these classes will be covered by the schools medical program already in place.....and at least at the lowest level will be health and fitness class.....witch the cirriculum will be twerked a little bit...to include some first aid......(im not requiring pharmacology....but i am saying that it may be introduced)

Second counter......im not suggesting that these students be taught how to cauterize bleeding arteries......but just Know to hold the wound and possibly flush it with water....nothing extensive just basics. Were not gong to teach them how to do any risky procedures....because they could mess up.......

Third counter.....we are teaching kids how to find criminals with criminal justice classes........and we are raining students basic firefighter skills.....at least at my school we do....in these courses theres no risk to the student.....its mostly book work...........

Fourth counter.......Basic over the counter drug knowledge and possibly pharmacology........indroucing this will have the same risks of the already in place chemistry program.....chemisry has the possiblity of teaching how to make drugs.....but limits the cirriculum as to not stimulate the thought.....so say.....

Fifth counter......i can understand that this could damage the drug industry....but we also have the possibly of forcing industries to lower there prices............and as i stated earlier people cant afford there meds introducing bsic over the counter knowledge will help with that problem

Thanks for the round.......
imabench

Con

1) Curriculum
The pro says that these new first aid classes would just be implemented int school medical classes, however there are a good number of schools that do not have medical courses and a large majority of schools dont make them mandatory..... So if ALL high school students had to lean basic first aid it would have to come through medical programs that might not exist in schools, but these medical courses would have to be vastly expanded if these courses were to become mandatory.... Making such classes mandatory would require expanding the courses but with school budgets like they are these courses would be very poorly funded and not a good idea if the point is to teach students how to stop a cut....

2) Basics
The Pro says that just the basics would be taught.... But the Pro said earlier that the point of this whole thing was for bystanders to prevent people from dying from their wounds, so if we only teach them the basics then we would be forfeiting the original goal of giving everyone the ability to help potentially save a life since we would only be teaching kids how to stop a bloody nose or basic stuff like that....

3) Other initiatives
Pro completely missed what I was trying to argue here. The point was that if we are supposed to give students the tools and knowledge to help people, then why are we not trying to give them different skills to help people too, and if we decided to do that then where would it end. The pro has no answered this question....

4) Drug abuse
They dont teach kids in chemistry classes how to make Meth Pro, they dont even come close to letting kids handle anything even remotely dangerous... With pharmacology classes though we would be telling kids how to find these drugs, what they look like, what does what to who, basically a crash course for figuring out how to get a cheap high....

5) Goal of this program
My question was whether or not this program was being introduced to give people the knowledge to help people in need, or to help people save money. The Pro danced around this question and instead talked about how giving students basic prescription drug knowledge would trigger price controls on the drug industry or something. My point was that these courses are supposed to let students have the power to potentially save a life, not turn them into savvy shoppers....
Debate Round No. 2
frozen_eclipse

Pro




1. Curriculum.....I'm pretty sure all high schools in America has a health and fitness class( because its a graduation requirement) .....but most schools in America has medical courses already in action. It seems my opponent missed my point being: even your health and P.E class could be the absolute bare minimum of a medical program. All we would have to do is get the teachers cpr certified legally and the other medical directors at the school could teach the basics( or teachers can learn the info over the summer and take a test in witch schools already implement )......were not going to be teaching these students complex procedures......its going to be simple things like holding pressure on wounds witch will massively increase the likelihood of that injured person of surviving until paramedics arrive on the scene. witch would be all that the health teachers would have to learn if they already didn't already Know.....The major point is there is not going to be staggering cost to high schools to implement the proposal.....most high schools already have basic medical classes.

Also I want to add on that if there is funding issues we can use the 800 billion dollars cut from Pakistan just recently to fund implementation witch shouldn't cost much of anything to the department of education or high schools.


2.Basics...... judging by the way he wrote this section it seems my opponent thinks that the basics aren't enough to save lives....,,,,the fact of the matter is not every civilian is going to know how to do brain surgery........but if very civilian knew some basic first aid being given from medical classes ,then citizens will have a much higher chance of being able to preserve that persons life until the paramedics arrive no mater how little it may be the action may preserve that persons life a few seconds or a few minutes longer until more advanced help arrives. So yes only basics will b taught....because our education system will not b able to afford to train all high school students to do emergency surgery. and they absolutely shoudnt be teaching that level of skill to high school students.

3.Other initiatives.......

high schools offer many other programs to witch high school students would benefit.......and are you suggesting that high schools shouldn't have the many programs they already do? its completely up to the department of education and the schools of witch programs they ought to have. If they have the funds then why should it be a problem. Now going into the question my opponent asked witch was ...."then why are we not trying to give them different skills to help people too".........there are many different skills taught in high school that benefits the students and society......and it would benefit society even more if students were trained to deliver some basic aid to preserve life's longer

4. Drug abuse....

I completely understand the position taken by my opponent here but he fails to realise that chemistry programs propose the same risks of drug abuse as chemistry classes.......my opponent states chemistry classes don't teach kids to make meth.....that is true. but the class does provide the knowledge to balance equations to bind chemicals, compound them, and synthesise them. My opponent also states that chemistry classes doesn't let the kids handle anything either remotely dangerous. that is completely false......just last week I was allowed to mix ammonium nitrate zinc and hydrochloric acid to make a chemical fire.......and if you didn't know ammonium nitrate is a key ingredient to making ammonol bombs witch are highly explosive....oh and by the way hydrochloric acid burns the skin if its manages to contact the skin witch is highly unlikely due to safety equipment. though students aren't taught how to make ammonol bombs your still messing with the same stuff in the labs to make it.....the only difference is that teachers aren't teaching how to make drugs or dangerous bombs.....yes I have to admit that the possibility exists that a chemistry nerd like me may dig and find out how to do these dangerous things,The teachers aren't teaching it. but they are teaching the basics needed make drugs..........if you want to make the argument of the possibility of students learning how to make drugs .....then your basicily arguing that chemistry and all medical classes should be done away with.

also I want to make the point that if pharmacology was introduced it would mirror the high school pharmacology program that due offers co-operative to high schools( link below)

http://www.rise.duke.edu...


5. goal of this program

in response to my opponents question....."My question was whether or not this program was being introduced to give people the knowledge to help people in need, or to help people save money." my awnser is both.

my opponent seems to think that shoppers who cant afford there medication and having the knowledge to buy generics is a bad thing.

the point of this proposal was to provide civilians with some basic first aid skills and some basic medical knowledge to be able to help those in need around them......to preserve lives for a couple more seconds or minutes until the emt arrives........also to help some people avoid expensive medication and have the knowledge to buy generics by learning basic over the counter drug knowledge to be able to buy another over the counter medicine witch they can afford.

imabench

Con

1) Curriculum
"All we would have to do is get the teachers cpr certified legally and the other medical directors at the school could teach the basics"
Or hire ones that dont have the necessary skills or knowledge to teach the course,
Or make room in a crammed budget to pay for all the teachers, books, material, and work needed to make this even feasible
Or figure out which rooms to put these classes into if there is any room at all
Or figure out if all of this is even worth it....

"The major point is there is not going to be staggering cost to high schools to implement the proposal.....most high schools already have basic medical classes."
Yeah, as an ELECTIVE COURSE. Medical classes are different from PE in that medical classes arent REQUIRED to take. Most high schools do have basic medical classes but you want to add material to them to have students know enough to save lives, make these classes mandatory for ALL students to take which is going to require a massive addition of these classes, teachers, books, material, etc.

" if there is funding issues we can use the 800 billion dollars cut from Pakistan"
Ok three things,
1) the US isnt cutting 800 billion in aid to Pakistan at all
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com...
2) Any funding that is cut would be minimal not all 800 billion
3) The US isnt going to take that 800 billion and just dump it into education..... Thats not how it works

Basics
"but if very civilian knew some basic first aid being given from medical classes ,then citizens will have a much higher chance of being able to preserve that persons life until the paramedics arrive"
If they decide to call the paramedics instead of trying to handle it themselves.... I asked this already the Pro never responded (see the text right above the picture)

"because our education system will not b able to afford to train all high school students to do emergency surgery"
That backs up my argument a bit about how our education system will not be able to afford to train all high school students to do anything medically advanced at all.....

Other initiatives
" If they have the funds then why should it be a problem"
Its that they DONT have the funds thats the problem. Theres nothing wrong with trying to teach students to be ready for anything but schools dont have the funding to teach them the basics about what is already being taught right now, so going on a campaign to have students prepare for just about anything raises questions since tight budgets may affect the quality of education being given or if the skills can be taught at all.

Drug abuse
" I have to admit that the possibility exists that a chemistry nerd like me may dig and find out how to do these dangerous things"
Ok now think of this, if a smart chem student may look into how to use chemicals to make explosives, then what would stop a typical druggie from getting high on cheap pills after learning about how to buy cheap pills?

"they are teaching the basics needed make drugs..........if you want to make the argument of the possibility of students learning how to make drugs .....then your basicily arguing that chemistry and all medical classes should be done away with."
Nice try Pro, Chemistry serves a million other uses then drug making like basic atomic properties, neutrons, protons, earning about isotopes, how this ties to real world applications, how things react, why they react, how to tell if something reacts, how to classify atoms, how to identify atoms, etc. Basic pharmacology on the other hand introduces students to the very drugs they could get high off of for cheap prices, and the only thing the Pro has to respond to this is that these pharmacology programs will be similar to a workshop taught at Duke. This same workshop though in the link the Pro provided says that this program should NOT be implemented if high schools dont have the freedom in the curriculum to implement the program for schools wanting to make it an ELECTIVE, not a mandatory course....

On another note, a college isnt the best place to structure a program designed to NOT get kids to do drugs. Especially Duke who has their own history of drug problems in its student body
http://dukechronicle.com...

Goal of this program
"my opponent seems to think that shoppers who cant afford there medication and having the knowledge to buy generics is a bad thing."
You left out the part about how this is going to high school students, not people who actually buy their own medicine, along with the part about how having the knowledge to buy generics just as much as having the knowledge to buy cheap medicine to get high off of could ALSO be a bad thing.....

"the point of this proposal was to provide civilians with some basic first aid skills... Basic medical knowledge...... Preserve lives for a couple more seconds or minutes until the help arrives........ Help some people avoid expensive medication and have the knowledge to buy generics by learning basic over the counter drug knowledge"

There are many problems with this proposal (in order of importance)
A) It would be a nightmare to reorganize every school program so that ALL students would take these course, if it could be implemented at all
B) It would put a monstrous burden on school budgets that the government is already trying to make smaller
C) If it was implemented the funding could cause the education being given to students to be sub-standard
D) It would not be 100% effective if the students get scared or try to handle a crisis themselves instead of actually getting help
E) With prescription drugs being abused by high schoolers, teaching kids how to exploit both the drugs and the cost would cause a catastrophic rise in drug usage.
F) The Teachers, material, books, etc needed to carry out this course would be elaborate and expensive before the program can even get started. (this really expands on point B)

I thank the Pro for a fascinating debate and I thank the voters for reading
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by logicrules 5 years ago
logicrules
It's called Biology
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 5 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
If this is a bill you hope to present, you really should sort out your spelling...
Posted by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
I'm probably not gonna take this debate (too much on my plate as it is), but I'd like to point out a few things that I noticed and would've pointed out in round.

1. The good Samaritan law asks that people help out victims of accidents to the best of their ability. It doesn't mandate that they have some knowledge on medical practices that they need to employ to be protected by it. So if all I knew how to do was to put pressure on the bleeding wound to try and stop the bleeding, then I would only be required to do that and nothing else.
2. If we were to teach people what over-the-counter meds did the same thing as prescription meds, we would essentially be eliminating an entire section of the pharmaseutical industry. Obviously (because of prescription meds' high price) people would forgo those meds in favor of the cheaper meds. With no one buying those meds, the pharmaseutical industry would take a massive hit and depression, maybe almost collapse entirely.

Aside from this, it looks like a decent idea. It just needs some research and verification to back up your claims.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by mariahjane 5 years ago
mariahjane
frozen_eclipseimabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: You both need to work on spelling and when to use punctuation correctly. Con made much better arguments and was able to use nice rebuttals. Con also had the sources.
Vote Placed by Yep 5 years ago
Yep
frozen_eclipseimabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Sources easily to con, Con successfully refuted pros arguments, Con makes a good point in his final NR with points E and F. Con could have easily won off of Point F with enough resources, considering even the most basic medical textbooks are hundreds of dollars, in comparison to core class textbooks (Science, Math, English etc.). Even if that is not put into perspective, Con still has much more ground. Good job both of you. Spelling to con Sorry pro saw few mistakes.