As you may know, kissing has its flaws and its benefits. The question is which one is more prominent. Regardless of the outcome, people are still going to kiss because it’s a natural thing that humans do.

There are many health benefits to kissing.  It creates an emotional bond between you and there person and can also serve as a stress reliever (as well as burn 12 calories per 5 seconds). Subsequently, the kissing can lead to foreplay which can lead to sex which is known to greatly enhance a persons physical and mental health. Surprisingly kissing is also good for your teeth. It increases salvia production which can slip under your plaque and remove it.

In the 1950s there was a study done with monkeys testing attachments. To sum it up, Harlow created two fake mother monkeys. One made out of metal and one made out of cotton and soft materials. The baby monkeys gravitated towards the mothers who were soft and “welcoming”. This goes to show that having affection present certainly helps people feel comfortable just as kissing releases epinephrine into your blood. However, there are some negatives to kissing.

There are many germs in everyones mouths and kissing is just going to transfer those more rapidly. There are some surprising and not so surprising issues that can arise. The surprising one is that you can get cavities from kissing. It is said that if you are kissing someone who has had a cavity has a certain amount and type of bacteria in their salvia which can cause you to get a cavity. More common are the diseases and viruses that can be spread. Simple bacteria infections such as colds and mono are prominent but kissing can also lead to herpes and hepatitis.

Now the decision is whether or not to continue kissing. In my opinion and most others, if you’re kissing the same person much less harm is going to be done because the germs transferred aren’t going to be changing so you should. The benefits of kissing are greater than the negatives which also means you should keep kissing!

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Kissing_and_your_health

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/09/05/kissing.aspx

http://www.glamour.com/health-fitness/blogs/vitamin-g/2009/02/kissing-good-or-bad-for-your-h

While surfing the web I found a shocking article. The article was telling the strange history about nutmeg. Turns out in the medieval times woman would eat high doses of nutmeg to terminate unwanted pregnancies. Nutmeg was introduced to Europe first as a medicine. Its high potency made it seem as if it were strong enough to fight infections. They even used it to try and cure Black Plague infected people.

According to poison control,  if you consume enough nutmeg you will begin to get delusional, and go through what they say is like a two day hangover. You have symptoms like feeling sluggish with no memory of what has happened. The reason for this is because there is a chemical in nutmeg is called myristicin. “Myristicin belongs to a family of compounds with psychoactive potential that occasionally are used to make much stronger psychotropic drugs.” (NYTimes) You must consume a lot of nutmeg, (2 tablespoons or so) to undergo these intense symptoms so it should not affect your holiday meals. Almost exclusively only people who intentionally use the spice as a drug  are people who experience extreme symptoms.

http://nutritionfacts.org/2013/10/31/nutmeg-toxicity/

I know many days I wake up and rush off to school skipping breakfast along the way. Also many people trying to lose weight, actually skip breakfast purposely. Doing this actually has the opposite effect and skipping breakfast should not be part of your daily routine. Skipping any meal, especially breakfast, can actually make weight control more difficult. If you skip breakfast, you tend to eat more food than usual at the next meal, or snack on high-calorie snacks to shave off hunger. In a study published in The American Society of Nutritional Sciences’ Journal of Nutrition, researchers found that, “Calories consumed early-on in the day were more satiating than the same amount of calories eaten later in the day; this led to lower calorie consumption overall. Therefore, eating breakfast helps with weight control.”

Kid’s especially need to eat breakfast. Their growing bodies and developing brains need regular refueling often, from food. When kids skip breakfast, they don’t get what they need to perform and be at their best. Studies show that kids who skip breakfast are tardy and absent from school more often than children who eat breakfast on a regular basis. According to the American Dietetic Association, “children who eat breakfast perform better in the classroom and on the playground, with better concentration, problem-solving skills, and eye-hand coordination.”

The NHS says, “Eating breakfast has long term health benefits. It can reduce obesity, high blood pressure, heart disease and diabetes.” A study conducted in England also showed that eating a good breakfast every day decreases your chances of developing insulin resistance. “When your body becomes insulin resistant, your cells become unable to respond to the functions of insulin. As a result, your body produces more and more glucose which accumulates in your blood stream.” Insulin resistance can lead to multiple health conditions such as diabetes, obesity, acne, high blood pressure and high cholesterol. Eric Rimm, Sc.D., a professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston says, “If you don’t bother with breakfast, though, the prolonged fasting might lead to a bigger than normal boost in “hunger hormones” such as ghrelin, encouraging you to overeat at your next meal and leading to spikes and dips in glucose. Over time, if your pancreas is constantly producing insulin to compensate for high levels of glucose, it will burn out and you’ll develop diabetes.” Also, In a recent study that involved almost 27,000 men, researchers found that those who didn’t eat breakfast were 27 percent more likely to develop heart disease than those who did. That is why it is so important that you don’t develop a daily routine of skipping breakfast. Although it may seem like skipping breakfast is not a big deal, research shows that it can lead to multiple health problems later on in life as well.

However, this does not mean ANY breakfast is good for you. It is important that while you are eating breakfast everyday, that it is nutritional. A nutritional breakfast provides energy for the day. Studies show that a healthy breakfast as opposed to an unhealthy breakfast can give you more strength and endurance, lower cholesterol levels, and improved concentration and performance in the classroom. 

Works Cited

http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20140902/breakfast-importance

http://www.jhsph.edu/offices-and-services/student-affairs/_documents/breakfast

http://www.shakeupyourwakeup.com/content/why-breakfast-important-1

http://www.calorieking.com/learnabouts/Why-Is-Breakfast-So-Important_OTI5.html

http://www.3fatchicks.com/the-long-term-benefits-of-eating-a-healthy-breakfast/

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/10/why-eating-the-right-breakfast-is-so-important/index.htm

During the one of the very first days of class, Andrew asked us what we thought the most important scientific question of the age was, and what is the most interesting scientific question you would like answered? To not much surprise, most of the responses from the class, including myself, had to do with something along the lines of extra-terrestrial life. Personally, the vast unknown that is space fascinates me. Recently, a new discovery has brought us closer to our goal of discovering life on other planets.

Research done at the University of Sweden, located in Zurich, has found out that DNA

can survive flight through space, and also survive re-entry into Earth’s atmosphere. This is significant because they also discovered that DNA can still pass on genetic information after this. It demonstrates how DNA can survive the harsh conditions of space, as well as re-entry into Earth’s dense atmosphere. But why is this all so significant? Here’s why—it means that we have another way to detect for other forms of life. Numerous scientists believe that DNA from outer space could reach Earth, as Earth is not insulated. Furthermore, about 100 tons of extraterrestrial dust and meteorites hits Earth each day, and since DNA has been proven to survive these conditions, we have plenty of opportunities to unearth surviving DNA from other planets.

Evidently, we now have the knowledge that DNA from outside of Earth has a possibility of making into our atmosphere. Just think about how unbelievable that would be, if we found traces of extraterrestrial DNA on a meteorite that landed on Earth. What is amazing is that DNA could come from anywhere. It is possible that it could come from somewhere in our solar system, or somewhere in space that is countless light-years away. It is hard to understand how immensely large space is, but this helps put it into perspective. Just imagine if we found the genetic information of something somewhere out in space. It would prove that life on other planets does actually exist. Because of this, we could begin our quest to find the other life form, and to see if we could even possibly communicate with them. Of course, it would be such a stretch for this to happen, as we don’t know if all other life forms even have DNA. Regardless, this was a huge discovery that puts us one step closer to finding extraterrestrial life.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141126144150.htm

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0112979

While everyone has nightmares, some are more traumatic and vivid than others. They’re not only where you see monsters and ghosts, but also where you see occurrences from the past, or even the future. Depending on experiences and memories, they can become reoccurring and make us anxious about potential dangers.

Diedre barrett, a psychologist at Harvard university says that a nightmare acts as a reminder that there is an issue to be addressed. Past studies also show that nightmares are aspects of events that will happen in the future.

One reoccurring nightmare I had as a child continued one for about two to three years. The scene every time would open up with me in a maze, running away from a Witch that was trying to kill my family. As a 7 year old, nightmares like that were pretty terrifying, especially when they don’t stop for two years.

Although the nightmares did not effect how I went about my day or made me fearful of going to sleep, for many people , such as those who suffer from Post traumatic Stress Disorder, it does. This most often happens to those who have served in the war and have seen both enemies and those they love die, leaving them with extreme anxiety.

A study by Elizabeth Mohkamsing-den Boer recorded the nightmares had by members of the Surinamese and Australian tribes. This study showed the correlation between the nightmares they had and events that were currently happening, or were waiting to happen in their lives.

What she concluded is that nightmares are “transitional dreams” and most often occur during a time when one is conflicted or unsure about something.

While nightmares only happen while we are asleep, there are still strategies we can use to train our subconscious and get a peaceful nights sleep.

One way, is to come up with an alternative ending and rehearse it before the dream occurs again. By doing this you are training the brain , telling it hat you want the nightmare to end how you want. If you do this before bed, it may be able to either end your nightmare differently, or make it not happen at all.

http://www.livescience.com/32730-why-do-we-have-nightmares.html

Prevention.com

I just recently had a breast cancer scare over the summer and before I went to the specialists to find out if it was cancer or not, I started reading anything about breast cancer. When reading about any medical illnesses you find so many things that aren’t true. But when I heard about bras maybe being one of the causes of breast cancer I was freaking out. So this is my chance to really find out, do bras cause cancer?

They say that the idea that bras cause cancer was first introduced in 1995 by a book. The book stated that women who wore tight fitting bras all day every day were at a higher risk of getting breast cancer than women who went without one most of the time. The authors claimed this, “…by inhibiting lymphatic drainage, bras trapped toxins in the breast tissue, which caused cancer.” But according to research this theory has not been proven by sufficient evidence. As stated here, “Scientists say the research of the authors of the book failed to exclude confounding variables such as the presence in some women of known risk factors for breast cancer. Thus, the notion of a correlation between wearing a bra and breast cancer does not appear to hold up.” Many risk factors for breast cancer have to do with hormones and gene mutations not if you wear a bra or not. In this article it talks more about the bra wearing studies that were done and if there was a correlation between the cancer and bra wearing. Many controls were set and factors accounted for to get the most accurate information possible.

In conclusion there is not enough evidence to show that wearing tight fitting bras or bras at all increase the risk or cause breast cancer. Throughout all the studies that they have done there has been no correlation between the two things and reverse causation cannot be a factor here. When reading these articles and these studies I was definitely relieved to find out that there is no connection between the two!

Sources: http://ww5.komen.org/BreastCancer/FactorsThatDoNotIncreaseRisk.html

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-underwire-bras-cause-cancer/

One more time: No, wearing a bra does not cause breast cancer

http://www.uamshealth.com/?id=12311&sid=1

I am too old to know if lifting weights has stunted my growth. I have been going to the gym for a few years, but would very rarely lift weights when I was young and not fully developed. If I want my future child to become a professional athlete (preferably a boy), will I be helping or hurting his future as an athlete by making him lift weights. I had always heard that lifting weights before being fully developed stunts growth, but figured it was a class wives tale because I am yet to see proof. I chose not to lift weights until I significantly grew up to be safe, but many people lift weights while they are prepubescent. I am friends with multiple guys who have lifted their whole lives and grew up to be full grown men, which does not help the wives tale’s cause.

Truthfully, I was not surprised to learn that a study was done that concluded weight lifting does not stunt growth. Dr. Avery Feigenbaum, Leonard Zaichkowsky, and others conducted a study to determine if weight lifting stunts a child’s growth. The experiment entailed 25 kids (17 boys, 8 girls) doing 3 sets of 10 to 15 reps of 5 different workouts twice a week, for eight weeks. There were two groups of kids and their mean ages were 10.8 years (11 boys, 4 girls) and 9.9 years (6 boys, 4 girls). The level of significant change in the subjects was set at p < 0.05. After the two groups participated in the exercises that tested strength, motor performance, flexibility, body composition, resting blood pressure, it was found that the kids benefitted in the short-term from the strength workouts. The kids that did strength training had increased vertical jumps by 13.8%, while the control group that did no strength training the entire time saw an increase in vertical jumping ability by 7.7%. The gains in strength did not translate to body motor performance and flexibility. Since no injuries occurred during the training, even while the majority of the kids were playing sports outside of the experiment, the conditioning was positive for the well-being of the kids.

http://www.themichelicenter.com/publications/media/Ref64a[1].pdf

http://www.livestrong.com/article/430166-can-lifting-weights-when-young-stunt-your-growth/

Video games have always been an outlet for me to just relax, waste some free time, and have some fun. My parents used to always tell me how bad video games can be if I play them too much. They would constantly try to get me away from playing but I never saw the harm in it. Mature rated games for people 18 years old and up can often be too violent or inappropriate for kids; but that is why they are meant for more mature people. Many adults think that video games can harm your brain and therefore effect their kids performance in school. From personal experience and with some evidence from research, I can inform you that this is not true.

A study was done to test the effects of video games on adults  between the 60 and 80 year old range. A relatively simple video game called NeuroRacer involves driving a car on a road while having to read road signs. After six months of these older adults practicing the game, they became more proficient than untrained adults in their 20’s. The brain wave activity of the 60 to 80 year old participants after playing the game for six months compares with the brain wave activity of the 20’s. The older adults also performed better at memory and attention tests outside of the video game.

Another study was done that suggested that video games increase teenagers left Dorsal Lateral Prefrontal Cortex and Frontal Eye Fields the more they play. This helps the teenagers working memory, decision making, and eye movements. After two months of the subjects playing 30 minutes of Super Mario 64, the results suggest that the game causes growth in the right hippocampus, the left Dorsal Lateral Prefrontal Cortex, and cerebellum.

Video games can actually enhance brain productivity in people between the ages of 14 and 80. If not abused, short periods of playing video games can be helpful to the development of the human brain.

http://psychneuro.wordpress.com/2014/04/13/do-video-games-really-rot-your-brain-nope/

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/technology/a-multitasking-video-game-makes-old-brains-act-younger.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=3&

Whether brushing up on the chapter or cramming all of your notes into your head the night before a test, we all have different methods for studying. Some people need to isolate themselves from all noise/distraction in order to study. Some just don’t do it to begin with. Some people, like me, like to listen to music when they study.

According to the article “Music While You Work,” by Adrian Furnham and Anna Bradley, “Music reduces the tension and boredom that are highly correlated with routine work but acts as a distracter for complex mental work.” Sarah Ransdell conducted a study in which 45 students wrote essays as fast as they could with and without music playing in the background. She found that the music caused students to finish their essays about 60 words per hour slower than without. Joseph Cardillo argues that music can be helpful in studying and stating that “The trick is to be able to access your state of mind at a specific moment and figure out which way you need to go (up or down) to hit your brain’s sweet spot of calm, energized flow as you work on your goals. Using music makes sense because it is natural and has no side effect(s).” (Equinox)

I like listening to music while I study. I feel that it helps me to zone in on my work and focus. In order to successfully study with music, I have to get my mind to a point where the music becomes a background noise and it cancels out any other outside distractions while I’m doing my work. I need to play the right kind of music also. It needs to be something with a more mellow vibe to it. For example, I would have difficulty staying focused if I tried to study while listening to “turn up” music.

I believe that music can definitely help with studying, however, I will admit that it can also be distracting. Everyone reacts differently to music and different types of music. Find a genre that works for you and maybe it will help you concentrate too.

http://keene-equinox.com/2012/09/studies-show-that-music-affects-your-study-habits-and-grades/

Adderall is commonly used and sometimes even abused on college campuses everywhere. One may not be aware of the fact that initially Adderall was more commonly used for appetite control and weight loss because the chemicals in the consumers brain that are released suppress appetite. The real question is, does it work for those who do not have ADHD? Another commonly asked question is, are students imagining they are smarter and more focused because they are convinced that is what taking Adderall does?

Adderall belongs to the drug classes of Amphetamines and Dextroamphetamines. It is a stimulant for the central nervous system. When one takes Adderall, chemicals that were previously stored in the brain are released. The chemicals that are released are serotonin, dopamine, and adrenaline. All of these chemicals have an effect on the consumers mood and amount of energy. Addreall is prescribed to those who suffer from attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or those who have the sleeping disorder Narcolepsy. When one takes this drug, they are shown to have an increased ability to focus and pay attention. This is helpful for students who struggle with ADHD because it is a simple solution that can help them to behave and be successful in a school environment. When being used correctly, Adderall can be one of the most beneficial things to a child or an adult who has been diagnosed with a disorder because it has the ability to allow them to conduct a normal life.

The problem with Adderall comes when it is being abused or taken by people who do not have prescriptions. Because it is so commonly prescribed, not only is it easy for one to illegally obtain but it also isn’t taken as seriously as it should be. There is a common misconception that Adderall is safe because it is given by doctors. Just like any other drugs on college campuses, Adderall can be abused and overdosed on. Most people do not know that Adderall has a high risk potential for a consumer to become addicted.

The appeal of Adderall is quite simple. It has the ability to eliminate any distractions whether they are big or small and chemically force ones’ brain to focus. The way it is described, this drug seems to ideal for any college student that believes they need a little extra push while studying for their exams or completing an assignment. The non-medical use of Adderall is a problem that is becoming increasingly prevalent on college campuses. A study completed throughout the years of 2006-2007 reports that, “Full-time college students aged 18 to 22 were twice as likely as their counterparts who were not full-time college students to have used Adderall nonmedically in the past year.” Although many could have guessed that teenagers not in school would not be trying to get their hands on Adderall, i think it is very important to realize that there is a dependency on drugs by college students to do something as simple as studying for a test. I understand that some people truly need Adderall to focus, but in this case the students who are twice as likely to use over the non students are using the drug non medically. This means they do not have a prescription to the drug. This new found dependency on study drugs such as Adderall is something that needs to be more closely researched and ultimately controlled.

A study was conducted at the University of Pennsylvania which tested the performance of forty seven participants on various cognitive tests. Every participant was tested on two types of pills which was either Adderall or a placebo. Of course the participants did not know which they were taking for the tests. Because the subjects were not aware of what pill they were taking, this can be seen as a blind study. The purpose of giving all of the participants pills each test was to eliminate any bias. If some people didn’t take a pill and others did, it would cause those who took the pill to work harder during the tests. Those who didn’t take a pill wouldn’t expect anything to different to happen so they could end up being unmotivated while being tested. I believe giving everyone a pill was a great way to ensure the validity of the outcome. None of the forty seven people tested were prescribed Adderall. After testing, those who took Adderall reported that they had done better on the test due to the pill even if in fact they have not. This can be due to the fact that the chemicals that Adderall causes to release in the brain puts the user in a better state of mind. So even if the Adderall has little to no effect on ones performance, their brain can be convincing them otherwise.

I agree with what the study has found. I always have believed that Adderall or the effect it has on a person is determined mainly by the way the consumer thinks it is going to effect them especially for those who are not diagnosed with ADHD. Personally, I believe that a humans’ mind is an incredibly powerful tool and undeniably has the ability to focus if one is convincing themselves that they just took a drug that was going to chemically change their brain for a period of time.

Sources:

http://www.businessinsider.com/effects-of-adderall-on-the-human-body-2012-9#it-releases-your-sense-of-euphoria–chemicals-called-serotonin-dopamine-and-adrenaline-1

http://www.self.com/life/health/2013/03/adderall-the-get-ahead-drug/

http://www.livescience.com/41013-adderall.html

http://healthland.time.com/2010/12/21/adderall-may-not-make-you-smarter-but-it-makes-you-think-you-are/

If you have not heard the stereotype that white men can’t jump, you must be living under a rock. If you turned on a random NBA, NFL, MLB, or Track and Field competition, you will likely notice there are way more black men and women than white. What could cause this correlation? Since correlation does not equal causation, there might not be a biological difference between white people and other races that leads to the extreme ratio of black to white athletes, but there is a causing factor.

In a study conducted by two University of Arizona and two Princeton University researchers, the guiding hypothesis was “many people who participate in sports hold negative racial stereotypes about athletes, and when these stereotypes become salient in a performance context, they may threaten the self-worth of those to whom they apply.”

The experiment tested 40 men and 40 women on four athletic categories. Black and white participants were tested on their knowledge of golf through a questionnaire then all played 10 holes of golf and were later asked to rate their performance. The results of the experiment were fairly consistent with the hypothesis. The black participants played slightly better than the white participants on the golf course, which proves there was no advantage nor disadvantage in golf– a game that is professionally dominated by white athletes. In the post-golf diagnostic questionnaire, white and black participants believed the test was biased towards white peoples’ athletic strengths. When the black participants were told they were being observed on their sports intelligence they performed significantly worse than when they were told the test was framed as a diagnostic for natural athletic ability, which is a stereotype of black athletes. Also, white participants played worse golf when they believed the frame of the test was on natural athletic ability; many did not think the test was fair. These results show that when people were threatened with a negative stereotype, anxiety affected performance most of the time. Therefore, when an athletes self-worth is threatened by a negative stereotype, they will be affected and perform worse, thus confirming the stereotype.

http://www.u.arizona.edu/~jeffs/golf1.pdf

There’s nothing better than coming back from class and taking a nice power nap to make up for missed sleep. Sleep is usually something I don’t get enough of, especially now in college with all of the social activity, extracurricular activities, and studying. I take naps consistently about 3 days a week. These naps may feel wonderful but some studies are showing that these naps may be detrimental to your health.

A study in the American Journal of Epidemiology said that regular daytime napping may actually be bad for you. The study followed 16,374 volunteers in Britain, where napping is uncommon. The study found that those who reported napping less than an hour a day had a 14 percent increased risk of dying and if they reported napping for more than an hour, the risk went up by 32 percent. The study is interesting, however, the risk is not actually as large as it seems and many experts say that the nap itself isn’t what causes the increase and that its what makes them nap that leads to the increase. Dr. Steven Feinsilver said there’s a reason they needed to nap that it may perhaps be because of a sleep disease such as sleep apnea, which is associated with an increased risk of cardiac disease, stroke, and death.

Although that study seemed interesting, it was not the strongest of experiments to base a conclusion off of. There are many more studies that show positive effects of napping. A study done by researchers at the Weill Cornell Medical College that showed that napping increased individuals’ total sleep time and provided measurable cognitive benefits. Along with the supporting data from many studies, the popular opinion of experts is that napping is a good way to make sure your body is getting enough sleep and can be beneficial.

http://www.health.harvard.edu/healthbeat/the-benefits-of-napping
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/04/14/study-suggests-naps-could-be-hazardous-to-your-health/

Every sport requires a unique set of skills that become more advanced as the sport reaches different levels. A majority of the American youth population participates in some sort of sport, whether it is organized sports or just playing at recess. This is the time when the basics of sports are taught. Once kids get into their teenage years, sports start to become a major part of their life. This is the time to mature and acquire skills in sports. High school years are when the athletes start to separate themselves from the pack.  The next level is college, then amateurs, then professionals. Each step of the way your brain is learning to use the skills that you’ve acquired over the years faster.

Professional athletes, amateur athletes, and non-athletes  were part of a study in which each group was put through visual tasks. One task was to track virtual balls to represent players moving in a three-dimensional space on a computer screen. This task simulates being able to track multiple things at once.  It comes as no surprise that the professional athletes excelled at this task compared to the other two groups. After a little bit of practice, the amateur athletes started to break away from the non-athletes.

The athletes showed that they are far superior than the non-athletes at tracking the movement of people. Among other things, athletes excelled with creativity and working memory. For someone to compete at the highest level of any sport, that athlete has been through rigorous training that non-athletes are not experienced with.

I believe that this does not necessarily make athletes smarter than non-athletes, it just shows that athletes can think faster because sports move so quickly. The athletes are used to thinking fast and being creative and that gives them an advantage with this study.

http://www.mensfitness.com/life/sports/can-playing-sports-make-you-smarter

http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/130129/srep01154/full/srep01154.html

http://www.worldcrunch.com/culture-society/do-sports-make-you-smarter-study-finds-athletes-039-brains-have-more-gray-matter/gray-matter-athlete-neurons-bochum-/c3s11034/#.VIGZbDHF-Op

Over the past 50 years, the number of cigarette smokers has steadily decreased. This is due to a number of factors such as awareness of the dangers of cigarettes, the literal and social price of a cigarette addiction, and cigarettes are not viewed as “cool” by the majority of young people. This is good for the overall wellness of our country and the planet. However, hookah has recently replaced as the go to choice of “smoke” among many people. I used the word smoke in quotes because hookah does not always involve actual smoke like cigarettes. Hookah pipes are used by heating up flavored tobacco (Shisha), then pulling the smoke through a hose. A hookah pipe is typically large and not easy to move, which is the reason people use hookah pens. Hookah pens produce flavored water vapor as an alternative to smoking cigarettes, but they are not necessarily healthier than cigarettes.

Typical Hookah pipe

There is a misconception that hookah pens are a safe alternative to cigarettes because they don’t smell like cigarettes and its health risks are not widely known. What people do not know about Hookah smoke is that when they smoke hookah they typically inhale more smoke than cigarettes as the volume of tobacco is increased significantly. In Dr. Michael Weitzman’s study he claims cigarette use is down 33% in the past decade, while hookah and alternative tobacco use has increased 123%. Hookah and Shisha companies have done a good job of creating an image of a healthier smoking alternative, but both cigarettes and hookah have many carcinogens.

Proving the causal relationship between cigarette smoke and cancer, disease, or death is a nearly impossible task; proving a direct relationship between smoking hookah and cancer is equally challenging. However, hookah smokers have been linked to lung cancer, mouth cancer, heart disease, and smoking dependance. There is no reason to assume smoking hookah is beneficial in any way as a substitute for cigarettes since both have dangerous amounts of tar, carbon monoxide, and heavy metal. Furthermore, the rising popularity of Hookah bars does not help the claim it’s a safe alternative. Since smoking hookah has become a social thing, the risk of spreading infectious diseases has risen. You never seen a bar for people to pass around cigarettes. There is no way to say which one is worse than the other, for now.

Works Cited

Palermo, By Elizabeth. “Hookah Smoking: Teen Trend, or Cigarettes of the Century?” LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 11 July 2014. Web. 05 Dec. 2014.

“Quit Smoking.” Hookah Smoking: Is It Safer than Cigarettes? N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Dec. 2014.

In my eighteen years on this world, I don’t believe I have yet to meet a person who doesn’t like to eat Oreos. But to my dismay, a fairly new study claims that the very popular cookie snack can be as addicting as the drug Cocaine.

This study I am referring to was recently conducted in Connecticut College using lab rats as the subjects. The researchers tested their theory by creating a maze for the rats to utilize. On one side of the maze, the rat obtained an Oreo when it was completed. But on the opposite side, the rat was given a rice cake when it made it to the end. The amount of time that each rat spent with either the Oreo cookie or rice cake was measured and it seems almost obvious to me that the rats spent more time on the Oreo side as opposed to the bland tasting rice cake side. Perhaps, I feel this way because I have a sweet tooth. The experiment was now repeated but the rewards on both sides of the maze changed. Finishing one side of the resulted in a shot or Cocaine or Morphine. The other side concluded with a shot of saline. This time around it was observed that the lab rats spent more time on the side of the maze that ended with Cocaine/Morphine as opposed to the Saline shot. The brains of the lab rats shown more production of a protein called c-Fos which means there was an increase in cell activity in the rats’ brain. It was observed that more c-Fos was produced when the lab rat was eating an Oreo than when it was given Cocaine or Morphine.

I would have to disagree with the conclusion that was drawn from this study and after reading various articles, I have seen I am not the only one who has some opposition. First of all, I would like to say that for me it is frightening to see headlines that claim such a popular snack is
‘as addicting’ as a hard core drug! I think that whoever is creating these headlines are clearly aiming to get a readers attention (which clearly cause me to stop and read) but at the same time, I truly believe that the correlation between addictiveness of cocaine and Oreos is a bit of a stretch. I feel as if the word addictive is being misused simply because the lab rats chose to stay near the Oreo longer than they remained near the drug. Just because they are receiving pleasure from the consumption of a cookie does not by any means guarantee an addiction. Personally, I do not believe that one can be addicted to any type of food. They may enjoy eating it and then in turn say they are ‘addicted’ but using that term in that sense isn’t at all correct. Many components combined make up a legitimate addiction and those components can be different for anyone. One thing that universally is used to characterize an addiction is the inability to think clearly. A person who has an addiction is willing to do anything they have to do in order to obtain what they need or are craving. They also do not consider negative consequences they may face due to the fact that their mind is so consumed with the object they are addicted too. I have never heard of a person committing murder or robbing a bank because they simply needed to consume an Oreo. Although I do not believe it is possible to have a legitimate harmful addiction to a certain food, I do however believe that compulsive or excessive eating can be used to cope with problems that others may seek an actual addictions to cope with. What I mean is if a girl gets broken up with by her long time boy friend, she may eat galloons of ice cream or binge eat Chinese food. Where as an alcoholic would turn to alcohol ins order to cope with the pain of a break up. To me, occasionally emotional or binge eating to deal with a problem has no comparison to a person drinking or using drugs to deal with the same problem. I would say that this study does definitely show eating Oreos is a pleasurable thing to do whether the consumer is a human or a lab rat.

A huge fault that I read about in this experiment was that during the two trials the mice either had an addictive drug such as Morphine or Saline. The other trial lead in either Oreos or rice cake. In order to complete this study and show that Oreos would have been chosen other the Morphine would have been conducting a third trial. Many are skeptical with the findings due to the fact that the lab rats never had the opportunity to chose between the two most important things in the study! Once that was pointed out to me in an article, I was very shocked. It seems almost foolish in science to compare two things that were never actually tested together. I think it is safe to say that until this study is re-modeled or until food addiction is a legitimate thing, no consumer should be fearful of a serious and intense addiction to Oreo cookies.

Sources:

http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2013/oct/21/oreos-addictive-cocaine

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/10/18/rats-find-oreos-as-addictive-as-cocaine-an-unusual-college-research-project/

Oreos May Be As Addictive As Cocaine

http://www.livescience.com/40488-oreos-addictive-cocaine.html

Gym class. For most, it was the best class of the school day. Children competed, champions were born. Gym class, in contention with only lunch, was the class I looked forward to the most.

Its recommended that we get at least 60 minutes a day of exercise for good health. However, many schools are dropping gym and physical education for more academic class time. As academic demand increases and financial budget lessens, schools are getting rid of gym and recess. Some believe that this is a good thing and that more time in the classroom will be beneficial to the students. Almost all studies on school-based physical activity and academic performance showed either a positive or no impact. I have yet to see one with a negative impact. A publication by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services stated that ” Overall, increased time in physical education appears to have a positive relationship or no relationship with academic achievement.” It also examined 14 studies on physical education in school and found 79 associations between school based physical activity and academic achievement outcomes, only 1 of which was negative.

For me, physical education class was a nice relief during the school day. It was a class I looked forward to during the day and provided a period where I could have fun and exercise. It was a pick me up when I was feeling tired in school and I believe that it helped me academically. Many studies show that there are many positive impacts of school based physical activity and few to no negative impacts. With this supporting evidence, schools should keep gym class for the good of their students.

http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/health_and_academics/pdf/pa-pe_paper.pdf

Winter is sneaking up on us and it is the time to crank the heat up in the house. This time of year makes it much harder for me to stay in shape because I like to play sports outdoors and the weather does not cooperate with ideal conditions. Although the heat is much more comforting than the cold, lower temperatures seem to help with weight loss and reduced body fat.

In a recent study, eight people with little to no brown fat cells were exposed to 63 degree Fahrenheit temperatures for two hours a day for six weeks while a control group would go about their everyday lives. The group that was exposed to the lower temperatures had 5% less body fat at the end of the six weeks than the control group.

At first I was surprised by the results of this study. Because it is harder for me to go for a run outside or play basketball at the park, I’ve always thought that winter is the lazy season where people gain weight. This study explained that when the temperature is colder outside, your body has to use more energy to keep warm and it was something that I have always overlooked. Obviously this study will be more accurate with a larger sample size, but the results seem like they would continue this pattern.

A person should not put themselves in freezing temperatures with minimal clothing to lose weight. This study suggests that sometimes it is good to expose ourselves to cooler temperatures to make our bodies adjust to stay warm.

http://www.livescience.com/42764-temperature-training-lose-fat.html

http://www.weather.com/health/news/cold-weather-torches-body-fat-study-shows-20131017

There’s been an ongoing debate on the impact that video games have on children. People question whether or not video games have an impact on child behavior, academic performance, social development, etc. These question have become more frequently asked as video games have continued to rise in popularity over the years. I myself am a fan of video games and play a decent amount.

A study done in Britain studied around 11,000 children as young as 5 years old. The study used surveys of mothers in a massive millennial survey to track behavior over time. They were looking to draw a connection between the time children spent playing video games and watching TV and behavioral problems. The study found that video games had no effect on behavioral and emotional issues. The study did find however, that watching 3 or more hours of television at age 5 did lead to a small increase in behavioral problems at ages 5-7. Contrary to this study, a study done by Dr. Craig A. Anderson of Iowa State University showed that there was a connection between violent behavior in children and violence in video games. The study observed a large number of kids ranging from 9-15 in the U.S. and Japan. It was found that the kids who played violent video games became more aggressive in the months after.

As someone who enjoys playing video games in my free time, the debate is interesting and both sides have backing data. I think that video games can have an effect on child behavior and development but in moderation i believe that they are harmless.

Game Play Has No Negative Impact on Kids, UK Study Finds

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/family/11/03/healthmag.violent.video.kids/index.html?_s=PM:HEALTH

I’m almost positive that you have heard it said before that all blondes girls are stupid. It is a stereotype which is a stranger to none. Having lighter hair, this is something that obviously I take offense too. But there is good new, scientific studies have recently proved that such a common stereotype is nothing but a myth.

Physically speaking, a persons hair color is determined by pigments called Eumelanin and Phenomelanin. Eumelanin is the pigment which is responsible for depicting black hair. Phenomelanin is linked to red or yellow colored pigment. The colors that show are dependent on the amounts of pigment which are present and how close together the Eumelanin and Phenomelanin are placed. Genetically speaking, parents have a role in determining what color hair their offspring possesses. These types of genes are neither recessive or dominant, which explains why a child may have a different color hair than there parents do. The genes are additive which I believe can be a little confusing. Blonde or red hair, which is produced with Phenomelanin, is given to offspring as an allele gene. Not to my surprise, only European Americans are able to possess the allele which would cause someone to have blonde hair. If you are curious about how hair color is created, black hair is depicted when the Eumelanin pigment is very tightly and closely packed. To be born with red hair, one must have a large amount of loosely packed Phenomelanin. Blonde hair has the least amount of pigment which would mean the fragments are very spaced out.

A study that was conducted in Standford University, California shows that having blonde hair is completely dependent on letters in our genetic coding. A blonde posses a guanine on their twelfth chromosome rather than an adenine. The twelfth chromosome only is able to effect ones hair follicle. Which in turn means that despite the popular belief, these letters have seemingly no effect on any other genetic traits. The study that was conducted used mice as their participants because this type of genetic testing would not be ethical on human beings. The researchers were able to predict the exact genetic difference in a blonde and use that information to test their hypothesis out on the mice. Because the researchers were able to alter the color of mice fur from dark brown to blonde with the simple switch of one letter on the Kit ligand gene and everything about the mice were able to remain unchanged it can be concluded that this gene has no correlation to any other traits one may posses which includes intelligence.

I believe that this is an example of a experimental study because only one outcome was being tested and observed. The researchers genetically altered the mice and than observed the effect this change had on the color of their fur. Although I do not agree with animal testing, I believe that this study was logical and ethical to do because the researchers did not instill any harm amongst the mice. The simply altered the color of their fur.

Besides the brains that a blonde girl has, this study also debunks other stereotypes which are often targeted towards blondes. For example, all blondes have blue eyes. Because this genetic trait comes unpaired, a blonde is not guaranteed to possess blue eyes.

In conclusion, blonde hair is NOT at all linked to any other genetic trait. With that said, I think it is time to apologize to any friend who has been targeted by dumb blonde jokes because now it has been proven that simply because one has blonde hair, it does not automatically mean that they are unintelligent.

Sources:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2014/06/02/science-shatters-the-blondes-are-dumb-stereotype/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2645779/Blondes-not-dumb-Scientists-disprove-negative-stereotype-proving-hair-colour-completely-unrelated-traits.html

http://www.boston.com/life/2014/06/04/scientific-proof-that-your-dumb-blonde-jokes-are-wrong/GEngjFhBzH09S8nP5u1F8L/story.html

http://www.livestrong.com/article/76290-hair-color-determined/

The post-workout nutrition market is enormous and seems to only be growing. Millions of dollars are spent on powders, shakes, and snacks that are to be taken within 30 minutes to 2 hours after a workout. Nutrition is vital to obtaining results from lifting weights, but the timing may not be as relevant to results as the consensus says. During a workout, especially one which involves heavy weight lifting and resistance strength training, the body’s reserve of Glycogen and amino acids are depleted. It is one of the main fuels for muscle contraction and it shows itself through muscle fatigue. In a report in the Journal of theInternational Society of Sports Nutrition by Alan Albert Aragon and Brad Jon Schoenfeld, the importance of the post-workout nutrition window is shown to be minimal. In this essay, they analyze results from seven published experiments on the results of post-workout meals and supplements on a variety of men and women of different ages. There is no definitive evidence that shows a causal link between consuming protein and/or carbohydrates in the two-hour window and desired results in somebody’s appearance, athleticism, strength, and physique.

Interestingly, the essay plays with the idea that pre-workout nutrition is more important than what is put in the body after a workout. When a man or woman exercises without proper nutrition or no nutrition at all, muscle protein breakdown increases even after the workout is finished. It’s amazing to think that I could have wasted dozens of workouts in my life because I did not eat before. Even though a workout promotes muscle synthesis and strengthening, a person who had not eaten before the workout would not get the benefits of the muscle synthesis before the proteins would continue to deplete. It is estimated that the anabolic results of a meal last between 5-6 hours– more than enough time to get a workout in. This secondhand account of the effectiveness of that highly recommended protein shake right after a workout does not eliminate enough factors to disprove the causal relationship between the post-workout supplement and results. It also doesn’t prove that the window after a workout to refuel one’s amino acids and glycogen is as important as pre-workout nutrition. Furthermore, the experiments reviewed in the essay could suffer from the affect of a confounding variable as well as the File Drawer problem. It would be very easy to not publish an unwanted result because of the length of time of the observation/experiments.

Works Cited

Aragon, Alan Albert, and Brad Jon Schoenfeld. “Nutrient Timing Revisited: Is There a Post-exercise Anabolic Window?” Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 10.1 (2013): 5. Web.