In MIT Student Joanna MacKay’s essay, Organ Sales Will Save Lives, she argues that the selling of human organs should be legalized. She mentions that government regulation of human organs would save lives since people are suffering and dying. No drugs can cure a failed kidney so people use dialysis, a long, expensive, temporary solution. MacKay notes that in the year 2000 there were 2,583 American deaths waiting for a transplant and 50,000 worldwide (157). There is a long wait list for transplants so people turn to the black market to buy a live kidney, versus a cadaverous transplant. These live kidneys last longer but cost $150,000 (MacKay 157). Some people that would benefit from the legalization of organ sales would be people in third-world countries living in poverty. These people selling kidneys on the black market receive $1,000 after the
…show more content…
Looking back into her essay there is no citation after this statistic to show where she got the information from. This makes the reader question the reliability of the information. There is no proof to show that those numbers are accurate statistics or if they came from a credible source, such as a journal written by experts on the topic. Incorporating a statistic with no citation will most likely question the readers ethos, or trustworthiness, of the writer. Ethos refers to the credibility of the author and what makes people believe what she is writing. Since Joanna MacKay is only a MIT student, her evidence with no citation might not be as credible as a an expert on the topic who has a masters degree. This leaves the writer unsure if the 10 year long wait list is correct. MacKay also includes another statistic that “in the year 2000 alone, 2,583 Americans died while waiting for a kidney transplant” (157). This is relevant to her argument because it supports her claim that regulating kidney sales would save the lives of those Americans waiting for kidneys. The sufficiency of statistics help persuade her
Looking back into her essay there is no citation after this statistic to show where she got the information from. This makes the reader question the reliability of the information. There is no proof to show that those numbers are accurate statistics or if they came from a credible source, such as a journal written by experts on the topic. Incorporating a statistic with no citation will most likely question the readers ethos, or trustworthiness, of the writer. Ethos refers to the credibility of the author and what makes people believe what she is writing. Since Joanna MacKay is only a MIT student, her evidence with no citation might not be as credible as a an expert on the topic who has a masters degree. This leaves the writer unsure if the 10 year long wait list is correct. MacKay also includes another statistic that “in the year 2000 alone, 2,583 Americans died while waiting for a kidney transplant” (157). This is relevant to her argument because it supports her claim that regulating kidney sales would save the lives of those Americans waiting for kidneys. The sufficiency of statistics help persuade her