Aircraft crash and emergency management Essay Example

Aircraft crash and emergency management Essay Example Aircraft crash and emergency management Essay Aircraft crash and emergency management Essay Abstraction This is an over position of United Airlines Flight 232. This is about a DC-10 that was holding mechanical troubles and landed at the nearest airdrome possible. The airdrome it landed at was a Category 6 airdrome. This airdrome was excessively little for this type of aircraft. The aircraft so landed at full accelerator. Flight 232 United Airlines Flight 232 was en-route from Denver to Chicago on the 19 July 1989. During the flight there was a loud noise that was coming from the tail mounted engine. At the clip of the incident the crew heard the noise but did non cognize that the engine fan assembly had came apart with adequate force and severed through the right horizontal stabilizer. In this same country was a 10 inch broad path that all three hydraulic systems shared. When the engine cut through this it caused the aircraft to lose all three hydraulic systems that power all the flight controls on the aircraft. The crew still had control of the other two engines but no flight control power. This would hold command the flight surfaces i.e. flaps, perpendicular and horizontal stabilizers. So with this being realized the crew so started utilizing the accelerators to command the aircraft. They powered one engine to full power and throttled the other back. This helped keep the necessary header but increased velocit y greatly for all landing intents. Next the crew found the closest airdrome that they could set down the plane at. The crew found Sioux City Gateway Airport, besides known as Colonel Bud Day Field, is located 6 stat mis south of Sioux City and west of Sergeant Bluff, in Woodbury County, Iowa. This airdrome is considered a Category 6 airdrome. Sioux Gateway Airport covers a monolithic country of 2,460 estates this contains two tracks: 13/31 with a concrete surface mensurating 9,002 ten 150 foot and 17/35 with an asphalt surface mensurating 6,600 ten 150 foot ( US DOT A ; FAA, 2010 ) . I could non happen any information from day of the month of the accident but for the 12-month period stoping April 30, 2006, the airdrome had 30,726 aircraft operations, an norm of 84 per twenty-four hours: 65 % general air power, 19 % military and 16 % scheduled commercial. There are 67 aircraft based at this airdrome: 66 % individual engine, 19 % jet aircraft, 13 % military and 1 % choppers. This peculiar landing field is a double usage airdrome. Meaning that both civilian and Air National Guard usage this airdrome. The ARFF services provided for the airdrome are provided by the Air National Guard ( US DOT A ; FAA, 2010 ) . The National Fire Protection Association ( NFPA ) classifies this as a class six for their current ARFF capablenesss. After making some probe, and traveling under the ( NFPA 403 ) there are really two different class 6s. There is a 6a and a 6b, the intent for the two different class 6s is for snuff outing agent capablenesss. The one large difference that I can state between the two is that the 6b demands to be able to manage a dual decked aircraft. The installation, which is certificated under Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA ) ordinances 14 CFR 139, as an Index B airdrome ( Boucher, 2003 ) . The index is based on the largest aeroplane with an norm of five or more scheduled day-to-day goings ; the ordinances stipulate the minimal degree of firefighting equipment and agents for each index. For SUX, Index B was based on an aeroplane equivalent to the Boeing 737-200 series and requires a minimal 1,500 gallons of H2O for froth production. An airdrome functioning McDonnell Douglas DC -10 series aeroplanes and would necessitate more than double the measure of fire snuff outing agents required for an Index B airdrome ( Boucher, 2003 ) . With that being said and a nice feeling for the land work of the landing field. I was able to happen a picture of the plane coming in for its landing. I was really surprised to happen one and besides really lucky here is a nexus and I would advice to watch the undermentioned nexus: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.dailymotion.com/video/x5yztk_1989-sioux-city-crash_news. The aircraft landing was originally planned for the 9,000 pes Runway 31. There were several troubles in commanding the aircraft. This made run alonging up the aircraft in its current status about impossible. While dumping all most of the extra fuel if non all, the plane executed a series of largely right-hand bends ( it was easier to turn the plane in this way ) the purpose was being able to be easy line up with runway 31. When the air crew came out of there right manus bends, they were left with an attack on the shorter Runway 22, this was merely a 6,600 pess over half a mile shorter, with small or no capacity to s teer. Fire trucks had already been placed on track 22, the clang trucks were expecting a landing on track 31, this caused a monolithic scuffle as the trucks rushed out of track 31 over to runway 22 ( Conroy, 2005 ) . The pilot did his best to go on and seek and command the aircraft s loss of height by seting engine push. With the loss of all fluid mechanicss, the pilot was unable to command any sort of airspeed, that being said the sink rate was really high. When it came in for concluding descent, the aircraft was approaching 240 knots and droping at 1850 pess per minute, while a safe landing would necessitate 140 knots and 300 pess per minute ( NTSB 1990 ) . The aircraft began to drop faster while on concluding attack and began swerving to the right. The really tip of the right wing was the first thing to hit the track ; this began sloping fuel and ignited instantly. The tail subdivision so broke off from the blunt force of the impact and sent the remainder of flight 232 bounce several times. This shredded the landing cogwheel and engines, eventually interrupting the fuselage into several chief pieces. On the concluding impact the right wing was sheared away and the chief portion of the aircraft skidded sideways, turn overing into its concluding place over on to its dorsum, and slid to a halt upside down in a maize field to the right side of track 22 ( NTSB 1990 ) . The picture of the clang showed the fire right flying toppling end-over-end, but if you watched the picture it is really hard to do this out. Major dust from Engine # 2 and other parts from the tail constructions of the plane, were subsequently found on farming area near Alta, Iowa. The beastly force of this clang caused pieces of the aircraft to set down about 60 stat mis north-east of Sioux City ( NTSB 1990 ) . This is where things get a small intense. The ARFF s ability to continuously remain on top of the station clang fire near the aircrafts right flying root would be a major factor. The probe besides identified several lacks in the current design and operation of the Kovatch A/S32P-18 ( P-18 ) H2O supply vehicle, the absence of FAA demands to regularly trial fire service vehicles at their maximal discharge capacity, every bit good as holds in rectifying reported lacks in Kovatch P-18 fire service vehicles ( Kolstad 1990 ) . There were two ARFF vehicles that were foremost to get at the scene of the accident. They began a mass application of snuff outing froth instantly. The underside of the fuselage, besides known as the bell of the plane was blanketed with froth. The froth cover temporarily suppressed the fire during the emptying of riders and crew ( Remember the plane is belly up ) . Harmonizing to NTSB pproximately nine proceedingss after the set downing both ARFF vehicles had ran out of H2O, a P-18 H2O supply vehicle was positioned next to the two ARFF vehicles, and a 2 1/2-inch hosiery was connected between the P-18 and each vehicle. When the P-18 H2O pump was charged to its maximal capacity of 500 gallons per minute, a limitation developed in the vehicle s tank-to-pump hosiery that stopped all H2O flow to the two ARFF vehicles ( NTSB, 1990 ) . Therefore, the airdrome s primary onslaught vehicles could non be replenished with H2O to go on assailing the fire. Two Sioux City Fire Department pumper tru cks later resupplied the airdrome s ARFF vehicles. On a side note we had discussed this really thing about holding the local fire section holding the ability to refill an airdrome in instance of an accident and this is a perfect illustration of a local section that most probably saved the twenty-four hours. The chief thing that I could non happen was if the local fire section of all time trained with the airdrome crew. However, during this hold of about 8 proceedingss, no snuff outing agent was applied to the fuselage, and the fire at the aeroplane s right wing root ( the original foaming topographic point ) intensified. Soon thenceforth, fire penetrated the cabin, ensuing in privy fires that could non be attacked by exterior fire contending tactics. This was due to the deficiency of entree to the fire being on the interior of the aircraft. Despite efforts to progress manus lines to the inside of the aeroplane, the fire intensified inside the cabin and burned out of control for appr oximately 2 1/2 hours ( Kolstad 1990 ) . The Kovatch P-18 H2O supply vehicle has no foam-producing capableness, therefore why it s a H2O supply vehicle. As Kolsatd said it is designed chiefly to provide H2O to the primary ARFF vehicles. It is certified by the maker of a H2O capacity of 2,000 gallons and a maximal H2O pump discharge rate of 500 gallons per minute ( Kolsad 1990 ) . In September 1988, the Iowa Air National Guard purchased the P-18 through the Air Force and placed it in service at SUX. It was learned that during the 2 old ages after this accident occurred that the Air Force had purchased 210 Kovatch P-18 H2O supply vehicles. The research workers besides learned that some P-18 s are based at joint-use airdromes that are certified by the FAA as holding ARFF capablenesss in conformity with 14 CFR 139. This was evidently incorrect they merely had H2O refilling capablenesss. The H2O supply vehicle was listed in the SUX airdrome enfranchisement manual, the airdrome fire head testified at the Safety Board s hearing th at the vehicle had neer been tested to its maximal discharge capacity of 500 gpm ( NTSB 1990 ) . At this point I tried really diligently to happen what are the requirements for their vehicle proving frequence ( for that specific vehicle from the maker ) . The lone thing that I could happen is that they fell under the FAA s ordinances. I truly wanted to cognize if that vehicle needed to be tested at full discharge daily, hebdomadal, monthly etc. The job here was that the fire head relied on the maker s pre-delivery mill trials of the pump s ability to dispatch 500 gpm with two 2 1/2-inch lines attached. But no testing of their ain was of all time done to verify this. Besides the fire head stated that, SUX tested the P-18 weekly at nominal force per unit area, this was less than 500 gpm. During the National Transportation Safety Board s probe, the P-18 s tank-to-pump suction hosiery assembly, a soft, 11-inch by 4 1/2-inch indoors diameter Gates rubber hosiery, was removed from the vehicle and examined at the SUX installations. The full scrutiny showed that the 2-inch internal polyvin 1 Kovatch ( maker ) stated that the internal stiffener in the soft hosiery assembly is required to forestall the hosiery from fall ining ( NTSB 1990 ) . Kovatch besides stated that the stiffener was installed by a imperativeness tantrum in the centre of the hose alternatively of being welded or made out of a different stuff. This lead to the scru tiny of the revolved stiffener, this strongly suggests that when the P-18 operator attempted to resupply the both ARFF vehicles by utilizing the two 2 1/2 inch hosieries, with the pump set to its upper limit operating capacity, there was a fleeting high force per unit area rush had occurred within the tank-to-pump piping system that caused the stiffener to travel and revolve to a place that blocked the flow of H2O to the pump ( NTSB 1990 ) . While looking at the susceptibleness of the internal stiffener to displace and rotate, the Safety Board found that the stiffener s length was about half the internal diameter of the soft suction hosiery and in head this would make a obstruction on its ain being half the diameter if non merely decelerate the volume of the H2O to the truck down. The shorter length of the stiffener caused it non to be clamped, this allowed it free to revolve and barricade the flow of H2O and it cause it to skid toward the pump consumption. This by its ego could do obstruction or failure in the system. This caused the Safety Board to be concerned that the design of the P-18, which uses a soft suction hosiery at a much critical location up watercourse of the vehicles pumps and this makes it extremely susceptible to blockage ( NTSB 1990 ) . Not merely in the P-18 is this construct used but in other pumpers manufactured by Kovatch. There needs to be a hose made of more stiff stuff, this would hold null in voided the demand for an internal stiffener or an improved design. It is necessary to cut down the opportunities of hose obstruction regardless of operating conditions. Kolstad stated on February 15, 1989, a P-18 operated by the Air Force at Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, was unable to provide H2O to an ARFF vehicle during a pumping operation. It was determined that the A/S32P-18 armored combat vehicle suction line was restricted by a PVC stiffener inside the gum elastic suction line, and they installed a clinch around the hosiery and PVC to keep it in topographic point ( Kolstad, 1990 ) . On August 16, 1989, a similar P-18 lack was found at Malstrom Air force Base, Montana. Discussions with the Air Force, Kovatch issued Technical Service Bulletin 86-KFT5-P-18-5, dated August 21, 1989. This called for the remotion o f the armored combat vehicle to pump hosiery assembly installed on all 210 A/S32P-18 vehicles and this caused for the replacing of the hosiery assembly with a new armored combat vehicle to pump hosiery assembly. This one had a 4 inch PVC internal stiffener, much stronger than the original. This caused Kovatch agreed to carry on all the providing alteration kits straight to all air bases whose references were provided by Warner Robins Air Logistics Center ( Kolstad 1990 ) . August 22, 1989, the Air Force issued a Materials Deficiency Report this caused a erstwhile trial of all Kovatch P-18 vehicles. This would demo if the stiffener installed in the hosiery had rotated laterally 90 grades or non. The maximal pump discharge rate of 500 gpm, along with the replacing of the faulty 2-inch stiffener with the greater 4-inch stiffener. This allowed 30 yearss, eight Air Force bases had rapidly responded that trials found similar lacks to those described ( NTSB, 1990 ) . Now back to the clang. From the deficiency of proper processs being followed and running out of agent. Of the 296 people on board, 111 died in the clang. The bulk were killed by hurts sustained in the multiple impacts ( as you could see by the picture ) , several in the in-between fuselage subdivision straight above the fuel armored combat vehicles died from fume inspiration in the post-crash fire. I was really surprised that anybody surprised from this clang, from the picture I thought everybody was done. This portion of the fire burned for longer than it might hold but due to the monolithic holds in the firefighting attempts. Most of the 185 subsisters that were seated right behind first category and in front of the wings. There were many riders that were able to walk out through the ruptures through the construction. Several instances of persons got lost in the high field of maize adjacent to the track until rescue workers arrived on the scene and escorted them to safety ( NTSB 19 90 ) . Of the riders of flight 232: 35 died due to smoke inspiration ( None was in first category ) , 75 died for grounds other than smoke inspiration ( 17 were in first category ) , 41 were earnestly injured ( 8 were in first category ) , 121 had minor hurts ( 1 was in first category ) , 13 had no hurts ( None were in first category ) ( Conroy, 2005 ) . The riders who died for grounds other than smoke inspiration were seated in rows 1-4, 24-25, and 28-38. Passengers who died due to smoke inspiration were seated in rows 14, 16, and 22-30. A individual assigned to 20H moved to an unknown place and died due to smoke inspiration. One individual died 31 yearss after the accident ; the NTSB classified his hurts as serious. Fifty-two kids, including four lap kids, were on board the flight due to the United Airlines Children s Day publicity. This was really dry and really sad at the same clip to hear. Eleven kids, including one lap kid, died. Many of the kids had traveled entirely ( Conroy, 2005 ) . In decision I am grateful figure one for being able to happen the picture of this specific accident. With the picture I was able to to the full understand and see the incident. It merely was nt another narrative out of a book. The interviews with the subsisters showed how existent this state of affairs was and what was traveling through their head during this important clip. Mentions Boucher B. ( 2003 ) Report of the Committee on Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/ROP/403-A2003-rop.PDF Conroy, M. T. ( 2005 ) Aircraft Accidents that Caused Major Changes to Emergency Response Equipment and Procedures. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/Member % 20Sections/ConroyPaper.pdf Kolstad, J. L. , ( 1990 ) . NTSB Safety Recommendation. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.ntsb.gov/Recs/letters/1990/A90_147_150.pdf NTSB ( 1990 ) Aircraft Accident Report of Flight 232. hypertext transfer protocol: //libraryonline.erau.edu/online-full-text/ntsb/aircraft-accident-reports/AAR90-06.pdf United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration ( 2010 ) Airport Master Record, hypertext transfer protocol: //www.gcr1.com/5010web/REPORTS/SUX.pdf

Probability and Sampling Distributions Essays - Sampling

Probability and Sampling Distributions Essays - Sampling STAT 1350: Elementary Statistics Lab Activity #___________ Name(s)_________________________ Probability and Sampling Distributions Date ___________________________ A recent Gallup Poll asked a simple random sample of 1600 American adults, Have you, yourself smoked any cigarettes in the past week? Suppose that in fact 20% of all American adults would answer yes if asked this question. The proportion of the sample who answers yes will vary in repeated sampling. To investigate this, we simulated 1000 samples of size n = 1600 from a population in which 20% would answer yes they smoked cigarettes in the past week. The results of this simulation are provided in the table below. Please fill in the percentage column and write your answers as decimals rounded to three places. Class for Frequency (of the 1000 samples)Percentage 0.165 to 0.1701 0.170 to 0.1756 0.175 to 0.18022 0.180 to 0.18558 0.185 to 0.19089 0.190 to 0.195146 0.195 to 0.200178 0.200 to 0.205182 0.205 to 0.210160 0.210 to 0.21581 0.215 to 0.22049 0.220 to 0.22517 0.225 to 0.2307 0.230 to 0.2354 Please graph the distribution on the previous page with a histogram in the grid below. Place the classes of the sample proportion on the x-axis (make each bar a width of one block) and the frequencies on the y-axis (make each block a frequency of 10). Once you have drawn the histogram, draw the density curve on the histogram that describes this distribution. It turns out that the sampling distribution of for this scenario is a Normal distribution with mean 0.20 and standard deviation 0.01. Use this information to answer the following questions: Questions: 1.Find probability that at least 0.22 of the sample smokes: a)Using the 68-95-99.7 Rule. Make sure to sketch the density curve and shade the area of interest. b)Using the results of the simulation. 2.Find probability that fewer 0.19 of the sample smokes: a)Using the 68-95-99.7 Rule. Make sure to sketch the density curve and shade the area of interest. b)Using the results of the simulation. 3.Find probability that between 0.18 and 0.22 of the sample smokes: a)Using the 68-95-99.7 Rule. Make sure to sketch the density curve and shade the area of interest. b)Using the results of the simulation. 4.Are the results for parts a) and b) EXACTLY the same for questions #1, #2, #3 above? 5.Why is there a difference between the results for parts a) and b) for each question above? 6.What would happen to the results for parts a) and b) if we simulated 50000 samples of size n = 1600 from a population in which 20% would answer yes they smoked cigarettes in the past week. 7.What statistical principle explains the answers to questions #5 and #6?

Early Constitutional Issues Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Early Constitutional Issues - Essay Example Today, racial discrimination not only involves African-Americans. It includes Mexican-Americans, Chinese-Americans and the a lot more. America as a country has evolved to be a melting pot of races and cultures. As a result of this influx of various cultures, the problem of discrimination acquired a different face. It no longer existed against African-Americans but to different cultures as well. Also, being a melting pot of races and cultures, a new problem of cultural diversity emerged. We want to be sensitive of cultural differences and yet we do not want to be discriminatory. Finding the balance is the challenge that we face now-a-days. Glenn Freeman raised the argument that today’s notion of multiculturalism and diversity actually divides American into groups instead of uniting them as one people because the focus is on differences. In a way, I agree with Mr. Freeman. By focusing on differences, on what is unique in one culture, the necessary consequence is division in groups. Of course people tend to gravitate on people who they relate to, who they have more things in common with. However, I believe that cultural division is not always bad. Cultural division does not necessarily result in oppression of one group against another. If people have respect for one another, they would respect difference and they would be able to co-exist despite the differences. Alexis de Tocqueville presented the argument that one of the reason why the abolition of slavery became difficult is because white men believed that by emancipating Negroes, they will revolt and take vengeance against those who enslaved them. Because of this fear of retribution, they became hesitant to give them any privilege whatsoever. Slavery becomes universally abhorred and they free the very people they actually oppressed. The fear that the African race would rise up and avenge the hundred years of oppression is very

Compare and Contrast the Classical, Human Relations, and Systems Essay

Compare and Contrast the Classical, Human Relations, and Systems Approaches to Organization and Management - Essay Example One of the most important and central part of the study of management and organization is based upon how the overall management thinking has evolved over the period of time. Managers therefore must be able to keep themselves updated with the changes in the way management thinking has evolved over the period of time. This allows managers to actually get an insight into how the management has actually changed while facing different issues and challenges. The more managers know about management and organizational methods and operations, better they will be at making critical and important decisions. This knowledge also allows managers to make effective decisions and contribute positively towards the overall development of the organization. It is therefore critical that the overall developments made in the field of management and organizational thinking should be traced. Over the period of time, four important approaches towards organization and management have evolved. These include classical, human relations, systems and contingency approaches towards management and organization. All these approaches evolved as a result of different changes taking place within the domain of organizational development. Issues like leadership, employee motivation, performance, compensation etc dominated the way these approaches gradually evolved and matured over the period of time. Based on these approaches a comprehensive framework evolved regarding theory about management. Classical approach towards management and organizations view purpose of the organization as an essential element to understand as to how organization work and what methods can actually be adapted in order to improve the efficiency and work. Identification of purpose of the organization was also based upon crystallizing the roles and responsibilities within the organization. Since classical approach viewed organization having formal structures therefore it was important that clear roles and responsibilities should be identified first. These roles and responsibilities however, based upon first identifying and refining the purpose of the organization. Scientific management and bureaucracy are the two sub-groups of the classical approach and both the sub-groups have their own merits and de-merits. One of the key arguments of the writers on classical approach was based upon the notion that improving the management will actually improve the performance and the organization. F.W. Taylor was one of the key writers during that era outlining different principles which governed the scientific management approach within classical school of management. He advocated the implementation of scientific methods for selection and hiring of the workers while at the same time also suggested same approach for training and development of workers also. (Crainer, 1998) Classical approach however, visualized organizations and management as entities which can control the behavior of their workers. One of the key criticisms of this approach was therefore based upon the notion that labor workers may react strongly against the management principles of control. The creation of multiple layers of management in order to oversee and supervise the work was considered as essential in order to generate more efficiency and make workers productive. In nutshell, it can be argued that the classical approach was largely based upon the use of scientific methods of management with focus on improving effic iency and productivity by using scientific methods. The Human Relations Approach The main emphasis of classical

Reflective Account of Environmental Assessment Essay

Reflective Account of Environmental Assessment - Essay Example environmental management system (EMS), environmental impact assessment, environmental statement, carbon accounting, and carbon management in buildings, environmental economic appraisal and strategic environment management. All these activities aim at securing the environment. The environmental management system (EMS) is a kind of tool and program that is used in managing the impacts of the activities on the environment at large. EMS provides an effective approach and structure of planning and implementing measures of protection of the environment. An EMS ensures that environmental management are integrated in an organizations day to day activities, short term goals and in long term planning of the organizations objectives (Melnyk, Robert and Roger, 2003). For an organization to be able to come up with an EMS, it should first access and analyze the impact it has on the environment, it should come up with goals of reducing impacts on the environment and come up with a strategy of achieving the goals and objectives that have been set. For the development of an effective EMS, commitment and support should be evident from the top level management to the staff as well (Sroufe, 2003). The environmental policy of the organization should be firstly considered when coming up with an EMS. The policy ensures that the activities of EMS are in line with the objectives of the organization. An environmental audit should be taken before coming up with an EMS to help in identifying the impacts of the organizations activities on the environment. The target and objectives of an organization should also be considered when developing an EMS because it will guide the organization on how to achieve it. The staff and the community surrounding the environment should be committed before, during and after the establishment or developing of the EMS. The operations and procedures also need to be compatible with the objectives of the EMS. The monitoring of the performance of the organization

Anchorage in Orthodontics- A Review

Anchorage in Orthodontics- A Review Orthodontics is the branch of dentistry concerned with facial growth, the development of the dentition and occlusion, and the diagnosis, interception and treatment of occlusal anomalies. The goal of orthodontic treatment is to improve the persons life by enhancing dental and jaw function and dentofacial aesthetics. This is achieved by obtaining optimal proximal and occlusal contact of teeth (occlusion) within the framework of normal function and physiologic adaptation, acceptable dentofacial aesthetics and self-image and reasonable stability (Graber and Vanarsdal, 1994). Conventional orthodontic treatment is achieved using fixed and removable appliances to achieve a planned end point of treatment. Orthodontic anchorage is an important concept in orthodontic treatment, and can be reinforced by many types of appliances. Orthodontic headgear has traditionally been considered to be the gold standard appliance for reinforcing anchorage. However, an increasing awareness of the drawbacks of headgear, mainly poor patient compliance and serious eye injuries, has led to the development of appliances in which the evidence base supporting their use is incomplete. In addition, it has been suggested that functional appliances which are traditionally used for growth modification, can be used for   anchorage preparation. In this section, the concept of anchorage in orthodontic treatment is reviewed. The definition of anchorage is presented including its relationship to space requirements, extractions and certain appliances, including the potential of using functional appliances for anchorage. As the effectiveness of some of these appliances has been evaluated by randomized trial methodology (RCT), an account of the bias that can arise in RCTs is given and the potential effect this bias may have on the trial results. Finally, the important aspect of measurement of variables in orthodontic research is reviewed focusing on the reliability and validity of new measurement methods using computer software and digital models. 1.2.1 Definition and importance Anchorage in orthodontics can be defined as the resistance to unwanted tooth movement [1]. When an orthodontist/dentist plans treatment they evaluate the anchorage requirement by estimating the amount of space that is needed to correct the malocclusion. Anchorage   or space may be obtained by extracting teeth, moving teeth into certain position and/or the use of orthodontic appliances. Achieving anchorage can be obtained by one of the following methods: 1.2.2 Maximising the potential of available teeth: In this method a force is applied between two points (tooth or groups of teeth) and tooth movement is controlled by making one point more resistant to movement than the other. This is done by careful planning of the site of force application. Examples include: Active movement of one tooth versus several anchor teeth, for example correcting the centreline by moving one tooth at a time. Teeth of greater resistance to movement are utilized as anchorage for the translation of teeth that have less resistance to movement. A common example of this is closing space by pitting the posterior teeth (greater resistance) against the anterior teeth (less resistance). Increasing the number of teeth in the anchor unit, examples are: Adding the second molar to the fixed appliance. Adding the anterior teeth to reinforce posterior anchorage by bending loops mesial to the first molars. Adding teeth from the opposing arch to the anchor unit by utilizing inter-arch elastics. Making movement of anchor teeth more difficult, for example putting a tip- back bend in first molars. Using ankylosed teeth as anchors. 1.2.3 Providing an additional form of orthodontic appliance: The anchorage gained from the previous methods is limited. As a result, it is necessary to reinforce the anchorage with an additional appliance. The most commonly used orthodontic anchorage devices are: Extra oral anchorage (EOA) with headgear Intraoral anchorage with palatal and lingual arches. 1.2.4 Headgear Headgear is an orthodontic appliance that is used to apply forces to the teeth utilising structures outside the oral cavity. Headgear is usually applied to the first maxillary molar via a tube attached to the molar band. The force necessary to provide extra oral anchorage is 200 to 250 gm applied for 10-12 hours per day [2]. Headgear was first used for anchorage by Kingsley in 1866 to retract upper incisors in an upper premolar extraction case [3]. This was followed by Angle in 1888 and Case in 1907 [3]. In 1953, Kloehn developed the contemporary design of headgear that orthodontists   use today [3]. Since then, headgear has been used conventionally when maximum anchorage is required. As a result, it may be considered the gold standard for anchorage in orthodontic anchorage. 1.2.5 Disadvantages of headgear: The use of headgear has the following disadvantages or risks: Compliance: From the early days of headgear use, it was clear that substantial compliance was required and failure to wear headgear, for the prescribed amount   of time, was recognised [3]. Headgear compliance is measured as the discrepancy between actual hours of wear and reported hours of wear and has been evaluated in several studies. Results of these studies have been discouraging as the actual hours of wearing headgear appear to be much lower than that required [4-6]. For example, Brandao et al in 2006 suggested that patients who had been asked to wear their headgear for 14 hours a day, reported wearing their headgear an average of 13.6 hours a day while the actual hours of wear were only 5.6 hours [4]. Cole [6] and Cureton [5] also found that the reported hours of wear were much less than the actual hours of wearing headgear . Soft tissue injuries: Apart from minor injuries to the surrounding intraoral and   extra oral soft tissues, serious ocular injuries have been reported both in Europe and the United States. In some of these instances blindness has resulted as a final result of the injury. Ten eye injuries have been reported in the literature; 2 in the UK, 3 in France, 2 in Italy, 1 in Germany and 2 in the United States [7, 8]. These injuries resulted from one of several factors including dislodgement during sleep, improper removal of headgear or improperly playing with the headgear. Nickel Allergy: A small portion of the population will exhibit sensitivity to the Nickel alloy in facebows [9-11]. Nickel allergies in response to orthodontic appliances are not considered a major health risk. Exacerbation of pre-existing eczema: there has been a case reported in the literature in which an increase in the severity of a pre-existing atopic eczema was observed after headgear wear [12]. It is evident from the problems mentioned that the most significant drawbacks of headgear use are non-compliance and serious eye injuries. Several measures have been taken to overcome these two problems with varying amounts of success. 1.2.6 Improving headgear compliance: Suggestions have been made in the literature to encourage patients to increase the actual number of hours in which headgear is worn; these include the following: The use of a headgear calendar [13], The use of a headgear timer or electronic monitoring device and informing the patient of its presence [14], The use of conscious hypnosis for patient motivation during headgear wear [15], Treatment by a defined behavioural model which depends on a schedule for wearing headgear, in addition to parental observations and rewards based on patient compliance. This behavioural model is flexible and will evolve according   to the patients response and needs [16], Promoting headgear wear by considering gender differences, making patients more aware of their malocclusions and the effect of treatment [17]. 1.2.7 Headgear safety mechanisms: Several features have been added to headgear in an attempt to prevent elastic   recoil injuries or unintentional detachment of the headgear. These include: Lock mechanisms which prevent release of the facebows from the molar tubes [18], Snap-release headgears which prevent elastic recoil of the facebows when an excessive force is used [7], Plastic safety straps which attempt to limit the movement of the facebows [7], Intraoral elastics to attach the inner bow to the molar tube [7], Blunting and smoothening the ends of the facebows to reduce the potential for injury [7]. It has been recommended that at least two of these mechanisms are used simultaneously in addition to clear verbal and written instructions to the patients and parents [19]. In summary, headgear is considered the gold standard appliance for providing anchorage. However, in order for it to work effectively, it requires a significant amount of patient cooperation and compliance. There have been many attempts to improve headgear compliance, which is a reflection of the failure to overcome this problem. Finally, there   are several safety issues related to headgear, which may discourage patients and orthodontists from its use. The ideal solution would be to use an anchorage device that provides at least the same anchorage potential as headgear, but requires little or no compliance. This has led to the development of surgical anchorage devices. 1.2.3 Surgical anchorage In this thesis I will use the term surgical anchorage to denote all types of anchorage devices which are surgically placed in the maxilla or mandible. The use of implants for orthodontic anchorage is a rapidly developing field and appears to be very promising. It has evolved from using conventional restorative implants in the line of the arch to more specialized palatal implants and mini-plates, to mini-screw implants. Types of surgical anchorage include mini-screw implants, mini-plates and midpalatal implants. The mini-screw implant is a modification of screws used for fixation of maxillofacial fractures. Although they have varying lengths and diameters, they are generally smaller than maxillofacial fixation screws, hence the term mini. It is also important to distinguish mini-screw implants from midpalatal implants which can be used for orthodontic anchorage, as the latter are endosseous implants and a modification of prosthetic implants. Mini-plates are small surgical plates that must be surgically screwed to bone under the soft tissue. Mini-screw implants may provide anchorage reinforcement because of the combination of mechanical retention immediately after insertion (primary stability) and a degree of osseointegration. Mini-plates provide a stable structure fixed to bone for application of forces and midpalatal implants offer stability by osseointegration. Despite the widespread adoption of this type of technology, there is a dearth of high quality clinical research into their effectiveness. The literature concerning their use is referenced in section III as part of the systematic review. 1.2.4 Class II functional appliances Functional appliances are orthodontic appliances that utilize the facial and masticatory musculature to produce orthodontic forces. They are commonly used in the treatment of Class II malocclusions. They can either be removable, for example the Clarks Twin Block appliance, or fixed, for example, the Herbst appliance. In the UK, the most popular functional appliance for treating Class II malocclusions is the Twin Block [20]. Functional appliances were developed to treat malocclusions by growth modification,   by encouraging differential growth of the mandible and maxilla. In Class II malocclusions the objective is to encourage growth of the mandible and/or restrain growth of the maxilla. While this theoretical effect of functional appliances is often quoted, the evidence behind these concepts is lacking.   Recently, there have been a number of randomized clinical   trials evaluating the skeletal effect of functional appliances. These are summarised in a Cochrane systematic review published in 2013 which assessed and analysed outcomes of 17 studies [21]. These studies produce interesting results. When early two-phase treatment with a functional appliance was compared to adolescent one phase treatment (patients who did not receive a functional appliance), there was no difference in the final ANB (MD -0.02 °, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.43. P = 0.92). Similarly, when a comparison was made for early treatment between headgear and functional appliances, there was no difference in the final ANB (MD -0.17 °, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.34, P = 0.52). When functional appliance treatment was performed in adolescents and compared to untreated controls, there was a statistically significant difference in ANB (MD -2.37 °, 95% CI -3.01 to -1.74, P It was concluded from the results of these trials that the amount of skeletal change (growth modification), from the use of functional appliances is small and is unlikely to be   clinically significant. Nevertheless, it is clear that these appliances are very effective in the correction of Class II malocclusion primarily through dentoalveolar movements. The following effects of Twin Block treatment are clinically useful: Enhancing facial appearance [22, 23] Distalising upper molars and molar correction [24, 25] Reducing the overjet [24-30] Proclination of lower incisors [24-26, 28, 30, 31] Retroclination of upper incisors [24-26, 28, 30] A case report using Twin Blocks to treat a Class II division II case suggested that a Twin Block can be used instead of headgear derived anchorage [32]. When we consider the preparation of orthodontic anchorage it is common clinical experience that molar correction and the reduction of the overjet are major factors in reducing the anchorage requirements of a case. As a result, some clinicians use functional appliances in anchorage preparation with the aim of avoiding dental extractions or other forms of anchorage. A common method of achieving this is by utilizing a 2-phase treatment protocol during adolescence [33]. The first phase of treatment is achieved by using only a functional appliance. This phase usually continues until the overjet and/or molar relationship is corrected. The clinician may then choose to retain the correction obtained by the functional appliance by keeping the functional appliance in place or by using a simple removable appliance [34]. This is immediately foll owed by a second phase of active fixed orthodontic treatment. 1.2.5 Extraction As mentioned in the previous section, the anchorage requirements of a case are related to the space available in the upper and lower arches. It is common orthodontic practice to change anchorage requirement by the extraction of teeth [2]. The literature examining factors influencing the extraction decision can be divided into three different methodologies according to the method of study. These are: (i) the studies that directly ask clinicians their stated reasons for extraction, (ii) studies that measured the influence of the presence or absence of a cephalometric radiograph on the decision to extract, and (iii) studies that define some patient characteristic, such as cephalometric variables or orthodontic indices, and attempt to identify a correlation between these characteristics and whether or not extractions had been undertaken. I will discuss these studies in the following section: 1.2.5.1 Clinicians stated reasons influencing the extraction decision Only one study, Baumrind et al, directly asked orthodontists the factors that were related   to their decision to extract teeth as part of a course of treatment [35]. In this study full orthodontic records of 72 patients were given to 5 clinical instructors in a University setting in the USA. They were given a treatment planning form to complete for each patient; included in the form were questions about the extraction decision and the reasons for extraction. The clinicians stated that the most important reasons for extraction were crowding (49%), followed by incisor protrusion in 14% and profile improvement in 8%. Other, less frequent, reasons were Concern over Class II severity and concern for post- treatment stability (5%). No other single reason was stated as the most important reason in more than 2% of the forms. When considering all replies, crowding was cited in 72% of forms, incisor protrusion in 35%, profile improvement in 27% and Class II severity in 15%. No other si ngle reason was stated in more than 9% of forms. This was a simple cross-sectional study, in which the patient records and the participants were a convenience sample. It does, however, provide some relevant information on the reasons for extraction. 1.2.5.2 Cephalometric radiographs influencing the extraction decision: There have been several studies that have evaluated the effect of radiographs on the extraction decision. For example, Devereux et al [36] carried out a study in which a group of orthodontists were sent the orthodontic records of 6 patients on a CD, not containing lateral cephalometric radiographs or tracings, and were asked if they would extract teeth (T1). At this point, the orthodontists did not know that they were to be asked to examine the cases again after a washout period. After a period of 8 weeks (T2), the orthodontists were sent the records of the same 6 patients, but the lateral cephalometric radiographs and tracings were included in the records. They were asked again if they would extract teeth. The decisions made by this group (group A) were compared to another group of orthodontists (group B) who had full patient records, including lateral cephalometric radiographs and tracings, at both T1 and T2. It was found that the orthodontists in group A were 1.7 (95% CI, 1.0-2.8) times more likely to change their extraction decision than those in group B (odds ratio). In a similar investigation, Nijkamp et al investigated the influence of lateral cephalometric radiographs on the treatment planning decision [37]. This was a crossover design in which diagnostic records of 48 patients were given to 10 orthodontic postgraduates and 4 orthodontists. They were asked to formulate a treatment plan based around a dichotomous decision regarding three treatment options; (i) extraction, (ii) the use of a functional appliance and (iii) the use of rapid maxillary expansion. The diagnostic records at T1 included dental casts, but did not include a lateral cephalometric radiograph. T2 was 1 month later, and included both dental casts and lateral cephalometric radiographs and values. This design was repeated so that at T3, which was one month after T2, only dental casts were included; and at T4, which was one month after T3, dental casts and lateral cephalometric radiographs were included in the diagnostic records. Agreement between the treatment planning decision with and without the lateral cephalometric radiograph was assessed. In order for the treatment plans to agree, decisions about all three treatment options had to be the same. There was no statistically significant difference in the treatment plans between the use of only dental casts or with additional cephalometric information (P = 0.74). Another study by Han et al evaluated the effect of the incremental addition of diagnostic records on the extraction decision [38]. Five orthodontists provided a treatment plan for 57 patients. Orthodontic records were given to each of the five orthodontists in the following order: Session 1: study models only Session 2: study models and facial photographs Session 3: study models, facial photographs, and panoramic radiographs Session 4: study models, facial photographs, panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs. Session 5: all the previous records in addition to a lateral cephalometric tracing. The time interval between each session was 1 month, and the records were re-numbered between sessions. In each session, the orthodontists were asked to select a treatment pathway from a decision tree. The end point of each of the treatment pathway was a decision on whether or not to extract. The treatment planning decisions for each of the orthodontists in session 5 was considered the gold standard for that clinician. As a   result, the proportion of agreement between the treatment plan in each of the four sessions and the treatment plan in session 5 was obtained. The proportions of agreement between sessions 1, 2, 3, 4 and session 5 were 55%, 55%, 65% and 60% respectively. Therefore,] they concluded that study models alone are adequate for treatment planning, and that the addition of other types of diagnostic records made only a small difference. These three studies were good quality cross-sectional studies. The randomisation and method of washout were clear strengths of the studies. In addition sample size calculations were undertaken in two of these studies; Devereux et al and Nijkamp et al. 1.2.5.3 Patient characteristics influencing the extraction decision: The final type of studies evaluating the extraction decision are studies which attempt to identify a correlation between patient characteristics and whether or not extractions had been undertaken. Two studies, Xie et al and Takada et al, used a mathematical model to construct a decision-making Expert System (ES), which could formulate treatment decisions. [39, 40]. ES is a branch of artificial intelligence in which the computer programme simulates the decision-making and working processes of experts and solves clinical problems. They developed a model in which twenty-five patient characteristics were tested on 180 treated patients [39]. The rate of coincidence between the recommendations given by the optimized model and the actual treatments performed was found to be 100%. The characteristics that influenced the extraction decision were the anterior teeth uncovered by incompetent lips and IMPA (L1-MP). Another similar study was carried   out by Takada et   al whenÂà ‚   they selected   25 patient   characteristics   and 188 treated patients in their model [40]. The rate of coincidence between the recommendations given by the model and the actual treatment performed was 90.4%. The characteristics mostly influencing the extraction decision were incisor overjet and upper and lower arch length discrepancies. Heckmann et al investigated the influence of the angulations between the first and second lower molars on panoramic x-rays, on the extraction decision [41]. They used a sample of 30 patients treated by a premolar extraction approach, and a further matched sample of patients treated with a non-extraction approach. Pre- and post-treatment panoramic x-rays were scanned and computer software used to measure the angulations between lower first and second molars. Comparison between the mean angulation of the molars before treatment in the extraction and non-extraction group was not significant. Li et al compared mean cephalometric parameters and model analysis of Class II division 1 patients who were treated with either an extraction or non-extraction approach [42]. The sample consisted of 81 patients; 42 who had 4 premolar extractions and 39 who had non- extraction treatment. The extraction group had statistically significant greater values for the following parameters; arch length discrepancy, curve of spee, upper incisor tip, Frankfort-mandibular plane angle and lower anterior facial height. Bishara et al compared patient characteristics of Class II division 1 patients who were treated with either an extraction or non-extraction approach [43]. The sample consisted of 91 patients; 44 had first premolar extractions and 47 who had non-extraction treatment. A statistically significant difference was found between the extraction and non-extraction groups with regards to the following parameters; upper and lower arch length discrepancy, upper and lower lip protrusion in relation to the aesthetic plane in male patients, and the protrusion of the lower lip in female subjects. These studies were retrospective in nature. There were variations among the studies in the application of inclusion criteria in an attempt to control the characteristics of patients included in the study. Nevertheless, selection bias was inevitably present in these studies. Bias due to periodical changes may also be present due to the retrospective nature of the studies. In summary, studies evaluating the factors influencing the extraction decision are few in number. They have been carried out by gathering the opinion of clinicians in cross sectional studies or by conducting retrospective investigations on a sample of cases in which teeth were extracted as part of orthodontic treatment. The main deficiencies of the studies were due to inadequate selection and number of the study sample; and bias arising from their retrospective nature. References: 1.Roberts-Harry, D. and J. Sandy, Orthodontics. Part 9: Anchorage control and  distal movement. British Dental Journal, 2004. 196(5): p. 255-263.   2. Mitchell, L., An Introduction to Orthodontics. Second Edition ed. 2002, Oxford,  UK: Oxford University Press. 3. Charles T, P., Jr., Cervical headgear usage and thebioprogressive orthodontic  philosophy. Seminars in Orthodontics, 1998. 4(4): p. 219-230. 4. Brandao, M., H.S. Pinho, and D. Urias, Clinical and quantitative assessment of  headgear compliance: a pilot study. American Journal of Orthodontics Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2006. 129(2): p. 239-44. 5. Cureton, S.L., F.J. Regennitter, and J.M. Yancey, Clinical versus quantitative  assessment of headgear compliance. American Journal of Orthodontics   Dentofacial Orthopedics, 1993. 104(3): p. 277-84. 6. Cole, W.A., Accuracy of patient reporting as an indication of headgear  compliance. American Journal of Orthodontics Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2002.  121(4): p. 419-23. 7. Samuels, R.H.A. and N. Brezniak, Orthodontic facebows: safety issues and  current management. Journal of Orthodontics, 2002. 29(2): p. 101-7.   8. Samuels, R.H., A review of orthodontic face-bow injuries and safety equipment.  American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 1996. 110(3): p.  269-272. 9. Burden, D.J. and D.J. Eedy, Orthodontic headgear related to allergic contact  dermatitis: a case report. British Dental Journal, 1991. 170(12): p. 447-8.   10. Lowey, M.N., Allergic contact dermatitis associated with the use of an Interlandi  headgear in a patient with a history of atopy. British Dental Journal, 1993. 175(2):  p. 67-72. 11. Kerosuo, H.M. and J.E. Dahl, Adverse patient reactions during orthodontic  treatment with fixed appliances. American Journal of Orthodontics Dentofacial  Orthopedics, 2007. 132(6): p. 789-95. 12. McComb, J.L. and C.M. King, Atopic eczema and orthodontic headgear. Dental  Update, 1992. 19(9): p. 396-7. 13. Cureton, S.L., F.J. Regennitter, and J.M. Yancey, The role of the headgear  calendar in headgear compliance. American Journal of Orthodontics   Dentofacial Orthopedics, 1993. 104(4): p. 387-94. 14. Doruk, C., U. Agar, and H. Babacan, The role of the headgear timer in extraoral  co-operation. European Journal of Orthodontics, 2004. 26(3): p. 289-91.   15. Trakyali, G., et al., Conscious hypnosis as a method for patient motivation in  cervical headgear weara pilot study. European Journal of Orthodontics, 2008.  30(2): p. 147-52. 16. Gross, A.M., G. Samson, and M. Dierkes, Patient cooperation in treatment with  removable appliances: A model of patient noncompliance with treatment implications. American Journal of Orthodontics, 1985. 87(5): p. 392-397.   17. Clemmer, E.J. and E.W. Hayes, Patient cooperation in wearing orthodontic  headgear. American Journal of Orthodontics, 1979. 75(5): p. 517-24.   18. Samuels, R., et al., A clinical evaluation of a locking orthodontic facebow.  American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2000. 117(3): p.  344-350. 19. ADVICE ON THE USE OF HEADGEAR, D.A.S.C. The British Orthodontic  Society (BOS), Editor. 20. Chadwick, S.M., P. Banks, and J.L. Wright, The use of myofunctional appliances  in the UK: a survey of British orthodontists. Dental Update, 1998. 25(7): p. 302-8.   21. Thiruvenkatachari, B., et al., Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front  teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children. Cochrane Database of Systematic  Reviews 2013, Issue 11. Art. No.: CD003452. DOI:  10.1002/14651858.CD003452.pub3., 2013. 22. OBrien, K., et al., Early treatment for Class II malocclusion and perceived  improvements in facial profile. American Journal of Orthodontics Dentofacial  Orthopedics, 2009. 135(5): p. 580-5. 23. Singh, G.D. and W.J. Clark, Soft tissue changes in patients with Class II Division 1  malocclusions treated using Twin Block appliances: finite-element scaling  analysis. European Journal of Orthodontics, 2003. 25(3): p. 225-30. 24. OBrien, K., et al., Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block  appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part 1: Dental and skeletal  effects. American Journal of Orthodontics Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2003.  124(3): p. 234-43; quiz 339. 25. Keeling, S.D., et al., Anteroposterior skeletal and dental changes after early Class  II treatment with bionators and headgear. American Journal of Orthodontics   Dentofacial Orthopedics, 1998. 113(1): p. 40-50. 26. Illing, H.M., D.O. Morris, and R.T. Lee, A prospective evaluation of Bass,  Bionator and Twin Block appliances. Part IThe hard tissues. European Journal of  Orthodontics, 1998. 20(5): p. 501-16. 27. Thiruvenkatachari, B., et al., Comparison of Twin-block and Dynamax appliances  for the treatment of Class II malocclusion in adolescents: a randomized controlled  trial. American Journal of Orthodontics Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2010. 138(2):  p. 144.e1-9; discussion 144-5. 28. OBrien, K., et al., Effectiveness of treatment for Class II malocclusion with the  Herbst or twin-block appliances: a randomized, controlled trial. American Journal  of Orthodontics Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2003. 124(2): p. 128-37. 29. OBrien, K., et al., Early treatment for Class II Division 1 malocclusion with the  Twin-block appliance: a multi-center, randomized, controlled trial. American  Journal of Orthodontics Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2009. 135(5): p. 573-9.   30. Tulloch, J.F.C., W.R. Proffit, and C. Phillips, Outcomes in a 2-phase randomized  clinical

The Problems with Bandwagon Patriotism Essay -- Politics Political Ess

The Problems with Bandwagon Patriotism I’ll admit it, I’m American. I’m an American and I admit, I enjoy it very thoroughly. I enjoy having the right to a free education, choice in who rules over me (who rules, who cares? pun intended), and the right to walk around the streets at three a.m. because I can. But I do not consider myself patriotic, in any way, sense or fashion. The astounding number of Americans nowadays who consider themselves patriotic can overwhelm the small few who were there for America before 9/11. But just what can we do about the bandwagon patriotism and its abuse on middle-eastern oriented Americans; it’s manipulation of American’s gullibility for cheap trinkets, and the backing of leaders in a war we don’t belong in. I believe it’s time to instill more peaceful tactics in our country today. It’s time to stop calling ourselves Americans and start calling ourselves humans. So far America has lost more soldiers in Iraq since the war end ed than we actually lost in the war itself and people of Middle Eastern decent have suffered more embarrassing attacks than most â€Å"average† Americans. Perhaps its time to reconsider the Patriot Act, because truth be told it’s not exactly what our true patriotic forefathers had in mind when they wrote that all men were created equal(despite the fact these men had slaves). Most Americans that watch CNN or FOXnews can tell you that exactly one month after the attacks on the twin towers, that Congress passes â€Å"The Patriot Acts†. But what most Americans can’t tell you is what exactly is inside of these acts. According to the actual document itself, the purpose of The Patriot Acts is: To deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around... ...ic) descent she gave me perhaps one of the most memorable quotes I felt I could have used in my paper. I’m not sure of the legalities of this, or if I should have gotten a written paper, but she said if I wanted to I could use this quote of hers. We were sitting in Barnes and Nobles, and the topic of stealing came up and how ridiculously easy it would be to steal something. Upon hearing this she said, â€Å" It might be easy for you, but whenever I’m shopping somewhere I almost always feel the workers eyes on me, like I’m F(bleep)ing Osama Bin Laden’s daughter or something†. So what does this say about Bandwagon Patriotism? All it does is give Americans another reason to hate, gives scared Americans another scapegoat to point the finger at. So armed with my solutions I hope you will ask yourself, just when will we stop being Americans, and start being humans?