Monthly Archives: October 2013

Autism: How Does It Really Develop?

I don’t know about any of you, but I was fascinated after hearing Andrew speak about people thinking they cured their child of autism. Think about it, all of our lives we’ve thought this disease was incurable; yet there are parents who have no medical history claiming they’ve done the impossible. So, since I couldn’t seem to understand how parents could believe such a thing, I decided to do some more research on it. In an article I found, it focuses around one family who believes they’ve rehabilitated their son from autism. Notice the key word “rehabilitated.” This family understands that autism can’t be cured, and they believe that if a parent was to think their child was cured, then they never really had autism in the first place. So right off the bat, it seems this family is a little more legitimate than the examples we talked about in class. The family paid for a program called Applied Behavior Analysis or ABA. This program helps teach the kids how to learn and how behave in a positive manner. The program uses rewards and repetition to help the kids learn. Through this, the family believes their son improved greatly.

Not only did they use ABA, but they also had their son tested for levels of mercury.  As we had also discussed in class, mercury in vaccines were found to potentially cause autism. Jamie, the son in the article, had six times the amount of mercury in his body. The doctors gave him medicine to reduce the mercury levels, and Jamie’s parents claim it made a huge difference. This story kinda reminded me of the girl in the video we watched in class who suffered from a neuro disease after a flu shot. Definitely a powerful story, but I’m not entirely sure how realistic it is. So despite the fact that this family knows they can’t cure autism, their story still isn’t completely reliable.

I’m one of those people who will only believe it once I see it, so I tried to look up some more on whether or not mercury caused autism. I came across a study found on Forbes. They took an island around Madagascar and studied the women there for years. They chose this area because it has a much larger fish intake than most of the world, and fish contains mercury. Like all studies, there are confounding variables and other circumstances, but what the study found was that there is no negative developmental effects despite the huge mercury levels. This is just one study, done in one area of the world, on one large group of pregnant women, but I already am more convinced by this than the stories we heard in class or by Jamie’s story. It’s definitely a topic that will always be highly discussed, but do you believe the power of anecdotes, or do you need science to be there to back up your beliefs?

Photo courtesy of http://www.topnews.in

Screen Shot 2013-10-26 at 2.20.32 PM.png

Religious People Less Intelligent than Atheists

According to an analysis of scores of over 63 scientific studies stretching back over decades, the conclusion has been made that religious people tend to be less intelligent than people who are not. An analysis conducted by the University of Rochester found a very convincing negative correlation between religion and smarts. He found that 53 of 63 studies responded in this way.

This must very shocking news to somebody practicing their faith, but religion is always debatable when it comes to scientific topics. It has been proven that even during early childhood development, the more intelligent a child is, the more of a chance there is for that child to be non-religious. This inference can be dated back to old age. 
One of the studies conducted a life-long record of 1,500 children with IQs over 135. It began in 1921 and still continues to this day, recording data about the kids. 
The definition of “intelligence” the scientists came up with based on the study was “ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience.” Other factors, such as gender or amount of education, didn’t influence anything in the studies conducted.
According to the scientists, intelligent people, who are also less religious, tend to do better in school, and naturally exceed in higher paying jobs. The inference I am getting at this correlation is that less religious people have more open minded ideas towards everything in life when belief isn’t there to take place of it. They are naturally more curious and question more ideas, which is beneficial school wise and increases knowledge. In the same matter, less religious children may focus on school more and have more quality time to study.
im-praying-for-you-really.jpg

New Diet Plan: Chili Peppers and Living in Alaska

A new study shows that consuming chili peppers and being in cold temperatures may aid in weight loss.

Brown fat cells apparently burn energy rather than store it, in opposition to white fat cells. Takeshi Yoneshiro from Hokkaido University claims that brown fat cell activity can be induced in people who have no brown fat cells, and the study is the first to prove this information. There is huge debate over brown fat cells because they can be manipulated to create anti-obesity drugs.
In the study, the scientists exposed eight people with little/no brown fat cells to moderately low temperatures, ranging to around 17 degrees Celsius, for 2 hours over a 2 week span, and people who went about their daily lives. By the end of the study, the exposed group had 5% less body fat and happened to burn more energy when in the cold in further situations. 
The same type of experiment occurred with chili peppers, and the exposed group burned more energy, but did not lose any body fat. The experiment might suggest that capsinoids, which are found in the chili pepper, might have white fat cell burning traits.

Other studies done in the past reveal information that people who eat capsinoids have a faster breakdown of fat levels. Talks about it being turned into a drug will show effects such as keeping healthy slim, rather than making obese people lose weight.  

In my opinion, I feel like spicy foods have metabolism-boosting effects, so it makes sense that chili peppers can help burn fat. As far as cold temperatures go, I would never assume that 17 degrees Celsius can help people lose weight so drastically. Based off the title, I assumed that you would need to constantly live in below freezing temperatures to see any effect. I also thought that people who tend to live in hotter temperatures would be more prone to losing weight, seeing as they are always sweating and moving around, burning more energy. It’s interesting to see how assumptions can be proven wrong through simple scientific studies.

With this new information, will you be eating any chili peppers today?

red-green-chili-peppers1.jpg

Are you afraid?

Have you been terrified of snakes your whole life? is it a fear unexplainable but terrifying nonetheless? Well, genetics may be to blame for your fear of these reptiles. A new study is showing that the human brain may actually be programmed to be afraid of snakes!This study says that ALL humans may have this genetic fear of snakes due to our long evolutionary history that involved snakes preying on us humans.

Unknown.jpeg
The study comes from a tribe called the Agta 
Negritos in the Philippines. The author of the 
study, an anthropologist from Southern Methodist University, spent over 20 years with the tribe and was able to document their rivalry with the local pythons in their area. He uses his knowledge of the area to describe the history of humans and snakes. The study found that this fear is universal among humans but also a different type of fear compared to that fear gained when a robber holds a gun up to us. 
So next time you think its illogical for you to be afraid of snakes remember that it isn’t! Because of evolution, history, and genetics none of us can help it we are all afraid of snakes. 

Kangaroos, Emus, and Koalas… Oh My

red-kangaroo.jpgred-kangaroo.jpg

When people think of Australia a lot of times the first thing that comes to mind are kangaroos, but kangaroos aren’t the only strange animal that call Australia home. This article does a good job explaining that because Australia is an island, it has no immigration of animals from other parts of the world which is why it has animals unseen anywhere else. Before Australia became an island though, it was part of Asia before continental drift and rising sea levels caused Australia to break off into its own continent. The animals that were in a way stuck on the island had to adapt or die, which is what the animals did. 

The kangaroos have a very strong tail as well as hind legs that help them hop long distances on the flat desert plains on hot days. The kangaroos hopping takes less energy than walking. The wombat is another unusual animal living in Australia. They were able to adapt to the heat that Australia provides by becoming nocturnal. Koalas have a diet of mostly eucalyptus leaves and their strong claw-like paws help them cling to the trees. While the leaves are poisonous for a lot of other animals, the koala’s digestive system has adapted to it. Emus aren’t able to fly or run fast but they were given strong legs to be able to deliver a powerful kick to any animal that tries to attack them. Their feathers resemble matted hair which allows them to handle the extreme changes in the weather. Platypus have adapted to be able to swim as well as dig with their flattened body, strong limbs, and waterproof fur. 

Australia is also host to some of the most dangerous animals in the world. The box jellyfish, also known as the sea wasp, lives in Northern and North Eastern Australia and can be found near the coast of the Great Barrier Reef. Their tentacles have a strong toxin that delivers what its few survivors call an electrical shock as opposed to a burn. It is necessary that a victim gets medical attention as soon as they are stung or else they will most likely die always die. The salt water crocodile is another dangerous animal living in Australia. They are typically around seven meters long and will usually attack anything that moves. Salt water crocodiles swim on the bottom which makes it uneasy to spot them and they have an extremely powerful bite. Unsurprisingly, sharks are everywhere inhabiting all Australian coastal waters. Although they don’t kill humans too often, they still most definitely have the ability to. Shocking to most, the great white shark is not the most dangerous shark in Australia. Bull sharks have killed more humans than any other shark combined. Out of the ten most dangerous snakes in the world, eight of them are Australian. The most dangerous snake in the world can kill a hundred adults with a single bite. The brown snake, also from Australia, is capable of killing many as well. It is extremely dangerous, especially in the summer, to visit the Coast line and walk on the hills over the grass. 

http://www.sciences360.com/index.php/why-does-australia-have-so-many-unusual-animals-2-20658/

http://www.portaloceania.com/au-diverses-dangerous-ing.htm

Kangaroos, Emus, and Koalas… Oh My

red-kangaroo.jpg

When people think of Australia a lot of times the first thing that comes to mind are kangaroos, but kangaroos aren’t the only strange animal that call Australia home. This article does a good job explaining that because Australia is an island, it has no immigration of animals from other parts of the world which is why it has animals unseen anywhere else. Before Australia became an island though, it was part of Asia before continental drift and rising sea levels caused Australia to break off into its own continent. The animals that were in a way stuck on the island had to adapt or die, which is what the animals did. 

The kangaroos have a very strong tail as well as hind legs that help them hop long distances on the flat desert plains on hot days. The kangaroos hopping takes less energy than walking. The wombat is another unusual animal living in Australia. They were able to adapt to the heat that Australia provides by becoming nocturnal. Koalas have a diet of mostly eucalyptus leaves and their strong claw-like paws help them cling to the trees. While the leaves are poisonous for a lot of other animals, the koala’s digestive system has adapted to it. Emus aren’t able to fly or run fast but they were given strong legs to be able to deliver a powerful kick to any animal that tries to attack them. Their feathers resemble matted hair which allows them to handle the extreme changes in the weather. Platypus have adapted to be able to swim as well as dig with their flattened body, strong limbs, and waterproof fur. 

Australia is also host to some of the most dangerous animals in the world. The box jellyfish, also known as the sea wasp, lives in Northern and North Eastern Australia and can be found near the coast of the Great Barrier Reef. Their tentacles have a strong toxin that delivers what its few survivors call an electrical shock as opposed to a burn. It is necessary that a victim gets medical attention as soon as they are stung or else they will most likely die always die. The salt water crocodile is another dangerous animal living in Australia. They are typically around seven meters long and will usually attack anything that moves. Salt water crocodiles swim on the bottom which makes it uneasy to spot them and they have an extremely powerful bite. Unsurprisingly, sharks are everywhere inhabiting all Australian coastal waters. Although they don’t kill humans too often, they still most definitely have the ability to. Shocking to most, the great white shark is not the most dangerous shark in Australia. Bull sharks have killed more humans than any other shark combined. Out of the ten most dangerous snakes in the world, eight of them are Australian. The most dangerous snake in the world can kill a hundred adults with a single bite. The brown snake, also from Australia, is capable of killing many as well. It is extremely dangerous, especially in the summer, to visit the Coast line and walk on the hills over the grass. 

http://www.sciences360.com/index.php/why-does-australia-have-so-many-unusual-animals-2-20658/

http://www.portaloceania.com/au-diverses-dangerous-ing.htm

Which ad do you prefer?

   Every one of us has seen a video advertisement online, whether we have to watch 15 seconds of it before watching our youtube.com video (called youtube pre-roll advertising) or have to wait until the video stops playing to get back to our Words With Friends game. Online/digital video advertising is clearly growing in popularity…but how effective is it?

 
   The University of Massachusettes at Amherst hoped to solve this. The primary scientific challenge in understanding video ads is the large number of conflicting factors that could influence viewer behavior,” said Sitaraman, lead researcher in the project. The problem was the isolation of all the different factors and most importantly, they found, was how the video was watched.

   Some of their conclusions make logical sense. They found that people who frequented the same site over and over were more likely to watch and entire video ad, which is logical because frequent users are more often engaged users. Other results were more surprising, however. It’s been much thought that the more relaxed people are in their environment, the greater likelihood the entire video gets watched, and for the advertisers perspective their message gets absorbed. However, the research begged to differ. The found no real environment variations in ad completion rates.

   What does this mean for us, the end users and valuable minds for advertisers to get their message to? I would guess that we will continue to see more and more video ads…until the next new advertising venture starts. A video ad every time you turn on your phone or start up your computer perhaps? Hard to admit, but as long as retail $$ are to be had, advertisers will always be looking for the next, newest and most efficient way to get their message across!

hulu-ads.png

NaTuRaL sEleCtIoN: Men vs Women

gender.jpegA woman typically images the ideal mate as a partner with a taller height than her, however that is not always a possible case. The battle over height can be explained by the genes of men and women, tied to sexual conflict built in our DNA. 

Dr. Gert Stulp researched the competitiveness occurring between men and women height. His research describes how despite our technological advances, natural selection is a never ending mechanism for humans. To support, Stulp found evidence of sexual conflict currently storming the DNA of the human race. He explains the reasons these tensions arise are because men and women are subject to different selection pressures. 
Before reading the article, I had never known shorter women are more fit to reproduce as are tall men more fit to reproduce. This difference in selection pressure for human height between the genders for a better, more successful reproducing family is the bottom line to creating the sexual conflict. Short parents tend to produce short daughters and sons. This is only beneficial to the daughters (short females produce more children). However, the ultimate combination of reproduction, a short female and an average size male have the most children their genes are passed on the most. 
To conclude, this finding could create the correlation that 
  1. shorter families are more successful at reproducing because of the females
  2. families of average height are more successful at reproducing because of the males
This occurs because a particular trait (being short or average height) acts as both an advantage to one sex and a disadvantage when presented to the other.
When dealing with genes and DNA, experiments are random as can be. If only we could modify our gene make up to create the perfect offspring. (But then this wouldn’t be life!)

NaTuRaL sEleCtIoN: Men vs Women

gender.jpegA woman typically images the ideal mate as a partner with a taller height than her, however that is not always a possible case. The battle over height can be explained by the genes of men and women, tied to sexual conflict built in our DNA. 

Dr. Gert Stulp researched the competitiveness occurring between men and women height. His research describes how despite our technological advances, natural selection is a never ending mechanism for humans. To support, Stulp found evidence of sexual conflict currently storming the DNA of the human race. He explains the reasons these tensions arise are because men and women are subject to different selection pressures. 
Before reading the article, I had never known shorter women are more fit to reproduce as are tall men more fit to reproduce. This difference in selection pressure for human height between the genders for a better, more successful reproducing family is the bottom line to creating the sexual conflict. Short parents tend to produce short daughters and sons. This is only beneficial to the daughters (short females produce more children). However, the ultimate combination of reproduction, a short female and an average size male have the most children their genes are passed on the most. 
To conclude, this finding could create the correlation that 
  1. shorter families are more successful at reproducing because of the females
  2. families of average height are more successful at reproducing because of the males
This occurs because a particular trait (being short or average height) acts as both an advantage to one sex and a disadvantage when presented to the other.
When dealing with genes and DNA, experiments are random as can be. If only we could modify our gene make up to create the perfect offspring. (But then this wouldn’t be life!)

NaTuRaL sEleCtIoN: Men vs Women

gender.jpegA woman typically images the ideal mate as a partner with a taller height than her, however that is not always a possible case. The battle over height can be explained by the genes of men and women, tied to sexual conflict built in our DNA. 

Dr. Gert Stulp researched the competitiveness occurring between men and women height. His research describes how despite our technological advances, natural selection is a never ending mechanism for humans. To support, Stulp found evidence of sexual conflict currently storming the DNA of the human race. He explains the reasons these tensions arise are because men and women are subject to different selection pressures. 
Before reading the article, I had never known shorter women are more fit to reproduce as are tall men more fit to reproduce. This difference in selection pressure for human height between the genders for a better, more successful reproducing family is the bottom line to creating the sexual conflict. Short parents tend to produce short daughters and sons. This is only beneficial to the daughters (short females produce more children). However, the ultimate combination of reproduction, a short female and an average size male have the most children their genes are passed on the most. 
To conclude, this finding could create the correlation that 
  1. shorter families are more successful at reproducing because of the females
  2. families of average height are more successful at reproducing because of the males
This occurs because a particular trait (being short or average height) acts as both an advantage to one sex and a disadvantage when presented to the other.
When dealing with genes and DNA, experiments are random as can be. If only we could modify our gene make up to create the perfect offspring. (But then this wouldn’t be life!)