Opioids, after being consumed, target the area of the brain that controls pain and emotion. Then, they begin to drive up the production of dopamine. According to “CNN’s Opioid Crisis Fast Facts”, as the doses increase the brain starts to become reliant on the drug. The more opioids used, the more the brain will need in order to produce the same reaction. CNN’s Library shows that more than two million Americans have become dependant on these prescriptions. Doctors have been prescribing opioids for some time and yet they still do not know a lot about them. There is not a clear solution on how to solve the opioid epidemic but pain specialist, Sean Mackey, explains his thoughts on the topic in an interview with VOX’s senior reporter
…show more content…
When questioned about the events leading up to the opioid crisis, assuming that his readers believe that there actually is an opiod problem, Mackey explains a very structured answer showing all the problems coming together to form a “perfect storm.” First, he explains the “increase in awareness of the importance of treating pain” in the nineties. Then he acknowledges the fact that doctors were not trained well enough on how to treat pain. In addition, he mentions that the doctors did not have many pain treatments at all, unlike the “200 different medications” doctors have today. He moves on to explain that the “drug companies saw this as an opportunity to sell” and, consequently, the doctors felt this high pressure all at once resulting in the crisis seen today. Mackey’s answer sits well with his audience considering they are readers of VOX. VOX has a reputation of analyzing certain situations and their readers expect an explanation on current topics. For example, VOX’s senior health correspondent, Julia Belluz writes an article titled, “The Keto Diet, Explained” summarizing the Keto diet as a whole and analyzing whether or not it actually works. Considering that Mackey’s interview is published on VOX also explains his neutrality. An explanation does not include a biased opinion but in fact, requires the author to stay as neutral as possible. Mackey’s claim can been seen as undermining …show more content…
For example, he gives both the positives and the negatives when he puts in bullet points marijuana “can be effective treatment for chronic pain” and yet can also “increase the risk of a car crash.” However, recent studies have shown that there is an increase in support for marijuana legalization from both parties. According to Christopher Ingraham, drug policy reporter for The Washington Post, “fifty-one percent of Republicans surveyed. . . they support legalization.” That is a huge increase from the “42 percent a year ago.” Assuming that his readers have a positive attitude on the staggering increase in support of medical marijuana, Loria wants to stay neutral on the topic but he can express his claim about legalizing marijuana because there is a huge growth in the support of the
When questioned about the events leading up to the opioid crisis, assuming that his readers believe that there actually is an opiod problem, Mackey explains a very structured answer showing all the problems coming together to form a “perfect storm.” First, he explains the “increase in awareness of the importance of treating pain” in the nineties. Then he acknowledges the fact that doctors were not trained well enough on how to treat pain. In addition, he mentions that the doctors did not have many pain treatments at all, unlike the “200 different medications” doctors have today. He moves on to explain that the “drug companies saw this as an opportunity to sell” and, consequently, the doctors felt this high pressure all at once resulting in the crisis seen today. Mackey’s answer sits well with his audience considering they are readers of VOX. VOX has a reputation of analyzing certain situations and their readers expect an explanation on current topics. For example, VOX’s senior health correspondent, Julia Belluz writes an article titled, “The Keto Diet, Explained” summarizing the Keto diet as a whole and analyzing whether or not it actually works. Considering that Mackey’s interview is published on VOX also explains his neutrality. An explanation does not include a biased opinion but in fact, requires the author to stay as neutral as possible. Mackey’s claim can been seen as undermining …show more content…
For example, he gives both the positives and the negatives when he puts in bullet points marijuana “can be effective treatment for chronic pain” and yet can also “increase the risk of a car crash.” However, recent studies have shown that there is an increase in support for marijuana legalization from both parties. According to Christopher Ingraham, drug policy reporter for The Washington Post, “fifty-one percent of Republicans surveyed. . . they support legalization.” That is a huge increase from the “42 percent a year ago.” Assuming that his readers have a positive attitude on the staggering increase in support of medical marijuana, Loria wants to stay neutral on the topic but he can express his claim about legalizing marijuana because there is a huge growth in the support of the