Experiment

Badminton is widely known as the fastest racket sport. Specifically, as an intermittent, high intensity sport, badminton players demonstrate acute reaction and movement speed.

However, looking at the bigger picture, badminton is more than just speed, so what are some factors that determine one’s performance in badminton? First of all, Manrique and Gonzalez-Badillo (2003) had suggested in their study of competitive badminton characteristics that good badminton performance relies heavily on players’ systemic aerobic capacity, as well as anaerobic capacity for short recovery period between rallies (pg. 66).

Secondly, Lin et al. (2007) suggested that appropriate muscle warm-ups are effective in improving footwork performance (p. 1082). Also, interestingly, Abian-Vicen, D. Coso, Gonzalez-Millan, J. Salinero, and Abian (2012) mentioned in their study that dehydration can “negatively” (pg. 7) impact athletes’ badminton performance, due to prolonged capillaries constriction in high intensity matches. In addition, Felder, Fröhlich, and Wey had expressed that muscular characteristics like strength and flexibility leads to optimal “movement patterns” (p. 19) which can largely benefit athletes’ performance.

In this article, I am going to discuss how specific muscle characteristics contribute to badminton performance. Sonoda et al. (2018) found out that specific lower limb muscles benefit badminton players’ performance through enhancing agility. In addition, core strength has a significant effect on maintaining postural balance (Ozman & Aydogmus, 2015, p. 569). Sakurai & Ohtsuki (2010) had studied the specific muscles on the upper extremity that contribute to badminton athletes’ accuracy of performance (p. 914).

In a badminton match, players’ performance is tightly related to agility, which relies heavily on the lower limb muscle strength (as cited in Young et al.). Despite the existing studies about how agility relates to muscle power, Sonoda et al. (2018) suggested that there’s little information on the specific groups of muscle that enables athletes’ agility (p. 321).

The study involved “23 male university badminton players” with various years of experience in badminton. Participants’ agility data were collected through side-shuttle test. During the test, participants took side steps to cross the line drawn 1 meter apart from the middle line. The more crossing-overs they accomplish in 20 seconds, the higher scores they get (Sonoda et al., 2018, p. 321).

In addition, the muscle tests focused on the extension and flexion movements of hip joint, ankle joint and knee joint were measured using designated machines. As a result, the study found out that the more experienced the participants were, the higher agility score they receive. Correspondingly, those who scores higher in agility demonstrated higher lower limb muscle strength (Sonoda et al., 2018, p. 321).

Study also showed that gluteus maximus acts as a major hip extensor in maintaining squatting position in badminton. The ankle plantar flexors, which locates on the ground side of the feet, was proved to be important for movements in direction changing. Plus, strength of these two muscles are key to participants’ agility in the side-shuffle test, regardless of playing experience. However, Sonoda et al. (2018) suggested that this study could be expanded as it lacks the specific timing of when the muscle come into play during the movements.

While lower limb muscle plays a big role in badminton, core strength training is crucial in maintaining postural control throughout a match. As illustrated in previous studies, core strength trainings benefits badminton performance and reduce chance of injuries from muscle imbalance (as cited in Saeterbakken et al., 2011; Schilling et al., 2013; Stantonet al., 2004; Tse et al., 2005; Sekendiz et al., 2010; Davidson et al., 2004; Granata and Gottepati, 2008; Van Dieën et al., 2012).

Ozmen et al. (2015) further investigated the impact of Core Strength Trainings (CST) on “core endurance, dynamic balance and agility in badminton players” (p. 566). The study was performed with twenty adolescent badminton players. During the study, all three core-related performance tactics were paired with designated testing method, which were done both before and after a 6-week CST program.

By analyzing statistics, Ozmen et al. (2015) suggested that CST had obviously benefited participants’ core endurance and postural stability, while not as much in their agility (p. 569). To clarify, core muscles helps support lower limb muscles and thus maintain static and dynamic postural control, while explosive power training may be more helpful in improving agility (Ozmen et al., 2015, p. 569).

They also explained that because agility is also affected by other muscles groups and, core strength independently might not make a big difference in agility improvement. Nevertheless, they concluded that core strength training is beneficial to badminton performance enhancement as it helps improving postural stability throughout the high intensity, yet fast-speed badminton matches (Ozmen et al., 2015, p. 569).

Despite lower extremity stability and agility, badminton performance accentuates on “precision” of strokes. Sakurai and Ohtsuki (2000) focused on the relationship between muscle and performance, as well as the muscular activity related to smash stroke (p. 902). Participants in the study were 5 advanced badminton players and 5 novice players (p. 902).

Researchers collected participants’ electromyogram (EMG) that record the muscular activity of bicep brachii, tricep brachii, and the two forearm antagonists—flexor and extensor ulnar radialis (p. 903) to analyze their muscular activities. Bicep brachii was not analyzed due to unreliable original measurements from participants (Sakurai & Ohtsuki, 2000, p. 903). 2 experiments were set up in comparison of muscle activity variance skilled and unskilled players under controlled conditions.

Experiment 1 targeted on individual’s muscular activity without intervention (Sakurai & Ohtsuki, 2000, p. 902), while experiment 2 focused on individual’s performance change throughout a period of muscular training (Sakurai & Ohtsuki, 2000, p. 907). Procedures in two experiments were identical, while experiment 2 emphasized individual’s progression under the same training scheme, in order to minimize potential bias towards experienced player.

Participants were assigned to perform smash stroke toward the set target (Sakurai & Ohtsuki, 2000, p. 913). Amount of deviation was recorded on the graph (Sakurai & Ohtsuki, 2000, p. 908). The result showed that skilled players indicated longer preparation latency of bicep brachii.

Moreover, skilled players demonstrated more intense and acute muscular activity at the time of the stroke compared to unskilled players. Also, from experiment 2, study found that experienced players tend to improve accuracy more than unskilled players in the same amount of time (Sakurai & Ohtsuki, 2000, p. 908).

On the other hand, Sakurai and Ohtuski (2000) suggested, based on the EMG data, that skilled badminton players demonstrated more stable power production and longer preparation latency. Therefore, Sakurai & Ohtsuki (2000) concluded that skilled players had already formed an “automated voluntary movement” (p. 913) due to previous playing experience.

When looking at specific arm muscles, however, they found out the muscular activity of tricep brachii and trapezius did not differ much between skilled and unskilled players, while the two forearm muscles appeared to have higher activity in skilled players (Sakurai & Ohtsuki, 2000, p. 913). Therefore, they suggested that the forearm muscles were the key to accurate badminton performance through controlling flexible wrist movements (Sakurai & Ohtsuki, 2000, p. 913).

From all the articles I have discussed above, we can see that muscle characteristics contribute to so many aspects of badminton performance. On-court practice is a vital part of badminton training, but specific muscle training should not be undermined as it plays such a big role in enhancing performance.

However, it appears that the existing studies had not talked too much about ethnic and genetic factors, or how ethnic and genetic factors may impact on muscular performance. Therefore, I suggest that further studies can include anthropometric in the process in order to make the result more application for people from all over the world and different genetic background.

Reference

1. Sakurai, S. & Ohtsuki, T. (2000) Muscle activity and accuracy of performance of the smash stroke in badminton with reference to skill and practice, Journal of Sports Sciences, 18(11), 901-914. DOI: 10.1080/026404100750017832
2. Ozmen, T. & Aydogmus, M. (2015) Effect of core strength training on dynamic balance and gility in adolescent badminton players,
3. Journal of Bodywork & Movement Therapies, 20(3), 565-570. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2015.12.006
4. Abián-Vicén, J., Del Coso, J., González-Millán, C., Salinero, J. J., Abián, P. (2012) Analysis of Dehydration and Strength in Elite
5. Badminton Players. PLoS ONE 7(5): e37821, 1-7. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037821
6. Sonoda, T., Tashiro, Y., Suzuki, Y., Kajiwara, Y., Zeidan, H., Yokota, Y., … Aoyama, T. (2018). Relationship between agility and lower limb muscle strength, targeting university badminton players. Journal of physical therapy science, 30(2), 320–323. https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.30.320
7. Cabello Manrique, D., González-Badillo, J. J. (2003) Analysis of the characteristics of competitive badminton. British Journal of Sports
8. Medicine, 37(1), 62-66. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1136/bjsm.37.1.62
9. Lin, H., Tong, T. K., Huang, C., Nie, J., Lu, K., & Quach, B. (2007). Specific inspiratory muscle warm-up enhances badminton footwork performance. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 32(6), 1082-1088. doi: 10.1139/H07-077
10. Felder, H., Fröhlich, M., & Wey, J. (2016). Explorative study on muscle strength and muscle strength ratios in top national and international badminton players. Kuala Lumpur: World Badminton Federation. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/57ec/75749a212e816da4d4311131460268d49b01.pdf

While animal testing for both therapeutic and corrective research has for some time been acknowledged, there are numerous drawbacks to it. Animal testing can have deluding results, in which medicates that passed animal testing had completely various consequences for people. It is inhumane and cruel to conduct this type of research.

Animal can endure similarly as people do, and the Humane Society International expresses that, Society International states that, ‘animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to force-feeding, forced inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint, the infliction of burns and other wounds to study the healing process, the infliction of pain to study its effects and remedies, and killing by carbon dioxide asphyxiation, neck-breaking, decapitation, or other means” (Watts). The entirety of this is done to control factors and produce exact outcomes, which in more than one event it has not.

More exertion and research ought to be placed into discovering choices to test medications and medicines on, and up to that point, animal testing should just be permitted in situations where there is a dangerous infection or condition and animals are sensible guineas pigs on which to lead the exploration. Creature testing is additionally unfeeling and ineffective, Animals don’t get a considerable lot of the human infections that individuals do, for example, significant kinds of coronary illness, numerous sorts of malignant growth, HIV, Parkinson’s sickness, or schizophrenia.

Plainly we need an option in contrast to creature testing These can incorporate modern tests utilizing human cells and tissues (otherwise called in vitro strategies), propelled PC demonstrating methods (regularly alluded to as in silico models), and concentrates with human volunteer. Along these lines there are numerous different options in contrast to creature testing, creature cruelty has a high possibility of flopping in this way decreasing our natural assets.

The outcome of scientific studies that involved animal is not eternally trustworthy. This is due to the reason that in the year 2004, there are 92 % of the medication that successfully gets through the preclinical trials include the use of nonhuman animals in experiment has come to nothing as the medication that had been created failed to appear into the market and are not always safe to be consume. To give you an idea, in the late 1950s and early 1960s, thalidomide which had already pass through extensive animal testing has been honoured as a wonder drug after it has been released to the market. It is often used to treat a number of cancer and diseases including leprosy, anxiety as well as trouble in sleeping. Nevertheless, when this medication is prescribed to pregnant women, it turned out to become a hazardous substance as it will destroy the normal growth of embryonic and causes birth defects in newborn babies. According to the investigation, nearly 10,000 to 20,000 malformed infants were born after their mother had consumed thalidomide. Therefore, based on the investigation, the study has obviously proved that it is not indispensable to involve animals in scientific studies as the test may work on animal but probably not on humans. In another word, certain medical research that required animals are completely meaningless.

The action of scientists that carry out scientific studies which involve animals is brutal and remorseless. This is because all animals have emotions and are able to sense sorrow, anguish and pain in the same way that a human do. In other words, their response towards the discomfort throughout the investigation is similar to the reaction of the human towards the misery. To show you what I mean, the poor creatures such as mice and rabbits are normally be governed as they will be latched into a small cage so they are not able to move around throughout the whole investigation. Besides, animal testing yet endorses the animal to be poisoned, burnt as well as brain damaged which is extremely hurtful to the poor creatures. Nonetheless, most of the poor creatures that are utilized during the experiment are then killed after completing the experiment, as they are worthless. Therefore , animals deserved the same deference and honor that a human is given even though they do no have the rights and liberties.

To wrap it all up, it is illogical to kill millions of animals just for the sake of creating new medication. Animal experimentation is a remorseless way to plague the poor creature for mankind’s own advantage. Thus, it may be said that the use of poor creatures in an experiment is not ethical, cruel and injustice. In fact, animals are born to be wild as well as free and are not to be controlled by humans.. Although, we are not qualified to completely ban the usage of animals in scientific investigations until the scientists successfully discovered a new method that can fully displace the usage of animals. But, the scientist should at least try to lessen the amount of poor creature being used and the misery that they may encounter throughout the test. All in all, protecting the poor creature from these scientific investigation is vital for well-being of the animal kingdom.

Throughout history, animal experimentations have played an important role in leading to new discoveries and human’s benefits however what many people tend to forget about the millions and millions of animals that are getting tortured and even killed during the process of these painful and deadly experiments. Animal testing goes through many factors to make sure the medicine/ cosmetic products are safe for humans at the cost of taking their innocent life, many people seemed to misunderstand the animal’s nature and the laboratory procedures and techniques that are executed on the animals, the procedure they have to go through are cruel and are unreliable, luckily there are more humane alternatives than animal testing that is proved to be working and also cost-efficient. I assume many of you reading this have pet like cats, dogs, fish, rabbits and mice’s, imagine yourself as your pet, getting taken away from your home where you feel welcome and loved with your family to get locked up in a small metal cage with little to no room to move about then put up to miserable pain for the rest of your life until you die. You wouldn’t like that, would you?

Do animals have similar emotions and physical feeling than humans? Yes animals do have the similar emotions and physical feelings to humans that why they use the animals because then they will know how it will work on and human and if they get any reactions from all the medical things they are using and to make sure it is safe for humans to use but why use animals they are just like us but in a smaller form of a human. For its instances it’s like taking a human and testing all these harmful things on us/them just to see if it would be okay for the whole world to use these things such as make-up the number one thing a girl uses they aren’t going to like it if the makeup they like can’t be used because it is harmful to a human. That doesn’t mean you use a living animal just to make it right.

It is estimated that each year there is about 26 million animals across the United States are used for animal testing. They use animals are part of their research to test scientific developments and commercial products. They use new medical treatments to test on animals just to see if they are safe to uses on humans and to make sure they had the right things it as well. The healthcare and commercial also turn to animals testing as a safety net. There is also the 95% of the drugs that are used on animals and that that is proven to be safe for human use isn’t always true and fails on humans who use it. Also, the USA spends $16 billion which is equivalent to around £13 billion pounds and this is just for making it right for us humans to use in our everyday life.

Still, other people think that animal testing is acceptable because animals are a lower species than human and that’s why they use them cause they have no rights to say anything because they can’t speak or anything. Also, animals are just like humans they have feelings, thoughts, needs, desires, and goals that are similar to human capacities. Therefore, animals lives should not be taken but they should be respected because they have the right to be treated just like everything else in life. The harm that is committed to an animal should not be minimized because they are not considered to be “human”.

Animals testing helps save human lives by testing products on animals to make sure it is safe for humans to use, by this fact people often think animal testing is a good thing due to it saves lives at the cost of the animal’s lives, If we were not allowed to test on animal then how would we know what was safe for us humans to use and what isn’t safe for us to use in our daily lives. Also, the testing helps with our pets and their vaccines are also what they test to they know if it will work on them because if we couldn’t use the produced we wanted because of all the animal testing. Without anima, testing we would not have the cure for the disease such as diabetes and asthma and we wouldn’t be able to develop vaccines to prevent illnesses like polio.

In conclusion, you should try to minimize the number of animals that are used each year because it violates animals rights and it causes suffering and pain to the animals guess so we as the human race are able to use the products safely without any cause of harm

Using animals as test subjects for making medicines and cures to treat new diseases is wrong and ethically unacceptable, it’s cruel and inhumane putting the animals lives at risk while still having a low probability of it being effective on humans.

Given that most labs in major beauty companies use animals as test subjects for creating new products trying to convince us that it’s still better than using people instead, is a very wrong path to take. As indicated by Humane Society International, creatures utilized in trials are normally exposed to coercively feeding, constrained inward breath, sustenance and water hardship, delayed times of physical restriction, the infliction of burns and other wounds to study the healing process, the infliction of pain to study its effects and remedies, and “killing by carbon dioxide asphyxiation, neck-breaking, decapitation, or other means.

“The Draize eye test, used by cosmetics companies to evaluate irritation caused by shampoos and other products, involves rabbits being incapacitated in stocks with their eyelids held open by clips, sometimes for multiple days, so they cannot blink away the products being tested. In addition to that, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported in 2016 that 71,370 animals suffered pain during experiments while being given no anesthesia for relief, including 1,272 nonhuman primates, 5,771 rabbits, 24,566 guinea pigs, and 33,280 hamsters.

While you would think that animals would have the most reliable results due to our very similar genetic structure, it has been proven to be wrong. Animals are very different from human beings and actually make poor test subjects. The anatomic, metabolic, and cellular differences between animals and people make animals poor models for human beings. Paul Furlong, Professor of Clinical Neuroimaging at Aston University (UK), states that “it’s very hard to create an animal model that even equates closely to what we’re trying to achieve in the human.” Thomas Hartung, Professor of evidence-based toxicology at Johns Hopkins University, argues for alternatives to animal testing because “we are not 70 kg rats.

Animals have been utilized for medical purposes in the olden days, as an experimental method to test certain medicines or treatments before applying them on human patients. In definition, non-human experimentation refers to the procedure performed on living animals for purposes of research into basic biology together with diseases, testing the effectiveness of new medicinal products, as well as testing the human health. Although animal experimentation has been practiced for centuries and has then been a norm for testing new medicines, there had been arguments in which great scientists should not make use of the animals in the scientific investigation. In my opinion, I strongly agree to this notion of not experimenting on animals, as animals are living things, and are able to feel pain.

The action of scientists that carry out scientific studies which involve animals is brutal and remorseless. This is because all animals have emotions and are able to sense sorrow, anguish and pain in the same way that a human do. In other words, their response towards the discomfort throughout the investigation is similar to the reaction of the human towards the misery. To show you what I mean, the poor creatures such as mice and rabbits are normally be governed as they will be latched into a small cage so they are not able to move around throughout the whole investigation. Besides, animal testing yet endorses the animal to be poisoned, burnt as well as brain-damaged which is extremely hurtful to the poor creatures. Nonetheless, most of the poor creatures that are utilized during the experiment are then killed after completing the experiment, as they are worthless. Therefore, animals deserved the same deference and honor that a human is given even though they do no have the rights and liberties.

To add to that, in the year 2004, there are 92 % of the medication that successfully gets through the preclinical trials include the use of nonhuman animals in the experiment has come to nothing as the medication that had been created failed to appear into the market and are not always safe to be consumed. To give you an idea, in the late 1950s and early 1960s, thalidomide which had already pass through extensive animal testing has been honored as a wonder drug after it has been released to the market. This is due to that fact that it was often used to treat a number of cancer and diseases including leprosy, anxiety as well as trouble in sleeping. Nevertheless, when this medication is prescribed to pregnant women, it turned out to become a hazardous substance as it will destroy the normal growth of embryonic and causes birth defects in newborn babies. According to the investigation, nearly 10,000 to 20,000 malformed infants were born after their mother had consumed thalidomide. Therefore, based on the investigation, the study has obviously proved that it is not indispensable to involve animals in scientific studies as the test may work on animals but probably not on humans. In another word, certain medical research that required animals are completely meaningless.

However, due to the inevitable and constant evolution of the human population, scientists have been able to come up with methods to try to preclude animals from experiments. This is followed by the three R’s – Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement. Replacement simply means to completely remove animals from experiments with other methods. For example, microdosing is a procedure in which human volunteers are used instead of animals, and are given small dosages of medicine for testing purposes. This method is very beneficial in a sense that it eliminates the need of animals in experiments. However, only non-lethal dosages are allowed, otherwise, the human life is also at risk.

To wrap it all up, it is illogical to kill millions of animals just for the sake of creating new medication. Animal experimentation is a remorseless way to plague the poor creature for mankind’s own advantage. Thus, it may be said that the use of poor creatures in an experiment is not ethical, cruel and injustice. In fact, animals are born to be wild as well as free and are not to be controlled by humans. Although, we are not qualified to completely ban the usage of animals in scientific investigations until the scientists successfully discovered a new method that can fully displace the usage of animals. But, the scientist should at least try to lessen the amount of poor creature being used and the misery that they may encounter throughout the test. All in all, protecting the poor creature from this scientific investigation is vital for the well-being of the animal kingdom.

The last reason Rosalie Is Ideal for research Is the fly size and manipulability, since we can easily control them combined with the previous reasons makes them ideal for research. In our experimental research we attempted to observe genetic changes in three generations of flies. We were given the second generation to observe the traits and record. Our hypothesis is if the drosophila are allowed to interbreed, then genetic variation will occur. Materials 1. Culture vial of wild-type Drosophila 2. Culture vial A or B or C 3. Spoilsport Alcohol 10%, mall 4. Camel’s hair brush 5.

Thermo-anesthetizes 6. Petri dish Drosophila vials ; labels with medium 7. 8. Fly morgue 9. Forceps Procedures Part A 1 . Thermally Immobilizers a vial of wild-type Drosophila. Your Instructor will demonstrate the proper Manipulation technique. 2. Observe the flies’ traits, particularly body features that distinguish males and females, eye color, and wing size and shape. Record your observations in Table 1 in the Analysis section. If, at any time during your observations, the flies begin to become active, re-immobilizers them according to your instructor’s directions. Part B 1.

Obtain a vial off prepared Drosophila cross. 2. Record the letter written on your vial In Table 2 In the Analysis sections to help you keep track of which cross you have received. TLS will lad In determining expected results, as well as allow your instructor to identify any problems you may be having and to help correct them. 3. Immobilizers the parental generation of your cross and observe the flies under a stereoscope’s. If, at any time during your observations, the flies begin to become active, re-immobilizers them according to your instructor’s directions. 4. Separate the males from the females.