Are you hung over and regret your decisions from the night before? Is your freshman 15 starting to form itself into a beer belly and contemplate whether you’re an alcoholic? Well, you just may be a fan of beer (if you’re of age of course)!!

Beer isn’t as bad for you as you may think! This article explains the health benefits of beer. Drinking in excess is obviously very bad for you, but might not drinking at all could also be bad for you. Drinking beer helps people (of age) drink in moderation because of its lower alcohol content. Beer is also fairly natural and free of additives and preservatives due to its natural preservatives. This beverage also can improve your cholesterol, and drinking it regularly can boost your HDL levels by 4%. Some beer may even have high levels of vitamin B and contains folic acid, which can help prevent heart attacks. Beer has many positive health benefits, but a recent study suggests that it may even be good for your brain!

The Behavioral Brain Research did a study on an ingredient in beer that can improve cognitive functions. The ingredient is xanthohumol, and the researches used this to see how it impacts the brain. When injected into younger mice, it made the mice smarter over time. The mice were given a high dosage of xanthohumol, which is equivalent to 2,000 liters of beer daily. Xanthohumol didn’t affect the older mice in the same way; therefore it only works on brains that are still developing.

This correlational study did prove that xanthohumol makes younger mice smarter, but is this applicable to humans? Also the amount of alcohol it would take for a human to be smarter would also kill the human. The study also mentioned that this is only effective on mice whose brains are still developing, so it is irrelevant to those whose brains are done developing. This was a very interesting study, but it failed to prove that xanthohumol would affect a human’s cognitive function. I think that an experimental study that administrates xanthohumol at a more moderate level on a person and then monitor its effects on the cognitive functions would be more rational.

E-cigarettes have become the latest fad amongst the youth. We’ve all seen people obnoxiously smoking them everywhere such as restaurants, buses, movie theaters, and so forth. The e-cigarettes smell is far less potent than cigarettes, and the smoke advertised as harmless water vapor so it is much safer for bystanders than actual cigarettes. E-cigarettes are known to help smokers kick their addiction, but do they aid smokers in their fight to quit?

A recent study suggests that e-cigarettes are not the magical cure smokers are looking for. E-cigarettes contain nicotine, but not all the carcinogens that normal cigarettes are chalked full of. Some studies suggest that they are more effective than other products, such as nicotine patches and gum. But another recent study objects that claiming e-cigarette smokers are just as likely to quit smoking as normal smokers. The study looked at 1,100 cancer patients that were in a smoking cessation program for the duration of 2012-2013. A smoking cessation program is simply a program that helps smokers quit. During the study the popularity of e-cigs increased by 27.5%. At the beginning of the study, patients who used e-cigs as a substitute for cigarettes were more dependent on nicotine than the patients who did not use them. Researches had also discovered that those who smoked e-cigs were just as likely to quit than those who didn’t. Of the patients, many of them were still regular smokers. Nearly 44.4% resisted the temptation to smoke for a full week, whereas those using the e-cigarettes 43.1% resisted smoking. The conclusion of this study was that e-cigarette users were actually just as likely to quit than regular smokers, and they tried to quit more frequently than non-smokers.

This study was a large observational study that proved a strong correlation between e-cigarette users and their likelihood of quitting smoking. I thought that the population sampled in the study were great participants due to the fact that cancer patients in the smoking cessation program are going to be the smokers who are most committed to smoking. The difference of data in the smokers who resisted for a week was 1.3%, which is small enough of a percentage to attribute to chance. I feel that the study did an adequate job in proving that e-cigarettes aren’t as effective as they claim to be.

It took scientists nearly one hundred years to conclude that smoking is bad for you, how long would it take for evidence of e-cigarettes to surface? In the US (http://www.lung.org/stop-smoking/) nearly 400,00 people die yearly from tobacco use. An additional 50,000 lose their lives to secondhand smoke. So how dangerous is the e-cigarette? This article suggests that e-cigarettes are dangerous for you. The e-cigs may encourage younger people to try the e-cig since they are the latest fad and are seemingly harmless. These young e-cig smokers could then later obtain a nicotine addiction and begin smoking cigarettes. The FDA also received various complaints from people who have had trouble breathing, headache, cough, dizziness, sore throat, nose bleeds, chest pains, and even allergic reactions. There have been other complaints of people unable to breathe around someone who is vigorously smoking an e-cig. Many e-cigarette users have claimed that e-cig overheats and the smoke can alter the users taste buds. None of symptoms seem to be too serious, but is there a greater health risk that we’re not affiliating with e-cigs? Such as when doctors didn’t affiliate smoking with lung cancer.

We’ve all experienced sleep deprivation throughout our time as a student and if you’re like me, you’ve experienced this quite a bit. When I don’t get enough sleep I find myself in a groggy state of mind that impacts my entire day. I would have never guessed that losing sleep could potentially dramatically impact my health.

A recent study suggests that sleep can impact your heart health. Researchers first began their study by looking at data from another study. This study had more than 4,000 ninth graders complete a survey asking about the participant’s sleep duration, quality, disturbances, sleepiness during the day, drugs to help them aid them in sleeping, physical activity, and computer/TV time. The participants also had their height, weight, waist circumferences, cholesterol, and blood pressure measures. The survey found those students on average slept 7.9 hours on school nights, and 9.4 on weekends, in comparison to the recommended 9 hours of sleep. Nearly 20% of participants reported their school night sleep habits as poor, 10% slept poorly on the weekend, and 6% use medicine to help them sleep. The same students that sleep poorly also claimed to consume more soft drinks, fried food, sweets, and caffeine. Sleep deprived students also exercised less. The conclusion of the study was that poor sleep can make your daily life less qualitative.

I thought that the study was well conducted. There were nearly 4,000 participants in the study, which meant that the study was large enough to where students previous health predispositions were randomized enough. The surveys also proved that students amount of sleep directly correlates with their lifestyle quality that next day. Although, there could have been researcher biased in the surveys. Another possibility could be the school’s choices of food, and their lifestyle at home. They did not eliminate many confounding variables. Reverse causation could be at hand in this study as well. Are students not sleeping because they’re not eating a well and exercising? I think that there should be an experimental study. It may be difficult, but have some students get their full nine hours, while another sleep for a nearly 7.9. This way you can fully monitor their lifestyle habits for the next day in comparison to the students that sleep more.

Have you ever wondered why some couples have ten children while others are struggling to have even one? A couple’s ability to have children is based solely on their fertility. Both males and females can both be infertile! What causes fertility? In women, fertility can be dependent on your age and genes. Whereas in men, what they consume can largely impact their fertility, claims New York Post.

New York Post published an article that claims beer can increase fertility in men. Massachusetts General Hospital did a study that found that beer can increase men’s fertility, and coffee can decrease men’s fertility. The study had nearly 100 men participants who’s partners were undergoing vitro fertilization. The study found that men who consumed a minimum of a pint and a half daily were twice as fertile than those who did not drink. The study also found that the participants who consumed two or more cups of coffee daily were to reduce their chances of having children by 20%. Experts say that men who have a few drinks of alcohol can reduce a person’s stress level, which can impact fertility.

After reading this article, I personally wouldn’t tell my partner to put down the coffee and pick up the beer. With this being an observational study, I personally think that an experimental study should be conducted on this subject. There should be more participants set into groups that should drink beer while others are placed into a control group and must remain sober. There should also be a separate study conducted with the effects of caffeine on fertility. I believe that there was a correlation between men who drink beer and their fertility, but correlation doesn’t mean causation. The article states “Dudes who downed at least a pint and a half each day were more than twice as likely to have children through IVF than those who stayed stone-cold sober.” This statement doesn’t rule out any confounding variable or reverse causation. Men who drink more could also be more likely to conceive, as well as many other potential confounding variables that weren’t considered in this study. This study, in my personal belief, was a false positive. Consumption of beer could be completely irrelevant to fertility, but the researches decision was that it does increase fertility.

It is common knowledge that broccoli is good for you, but recent studies suggest that it may even help with autism symptoms. Broccoli is known for it’s high vitamin D, and fiber, but could it be capable of helping with autism?

Autism speaks defines autism as “Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and autism are both general terms for a group of complex disorders of brain development. These disorders are characterized, in varying degrees, by difficulties in social interaction, verbal and nonverbal communication and repetitive behaviors.” Autism can generally impair motor skills, sleeping, visual skills, music, math, art, and attention. Nearly 1 in every 68 children are born each year in the US with autism, nearly affecting 3 million Americans. The cause of autism is still unknown, but recently it has been known to be associated with rare or mutated genes. A lot exogenous factors such as the child’s environment have been known to increase children’s risk as well. Both the cause and the cure are unknown.

Fox News reported a study that sulfraphane, a photochemical that can be found in broccoli, cauliflower, and other vegetables, can help with the symptoms of Autism. The study was conducted with 44 younger men with autism ranging from ages 13-30. Each participant was placed into one of three groups, two received a sulforaphane and another received a placebo. The study was a double-blind placebo, the caretakers for the participant were unaware which drug they were receiving. For the duration of the study, two surveys were completed with each participant weekly. One of the surveys was given to the subject’s caregiver and assessed their child’s behavior. The other survey was given to the caregiver on their child’s physical behavior. Throughout the study, the subjects given the sulforaphane improved their behavior 17-34%. An end of the study another survey was conducted and those that took the sulforaphane improved their social behavior 46%, aberrant behavior 54%, and verbal communication 42%. On the other hand, the control group saw no improvement. The researches followed up with the 22 participants that took the sulforaphane four weeks after they had stopped taking the sulforaphane, and the improvement had since stopped. The researchers also claimed that the subjects took concentrated sulforaphane, one would have to consume very large amounts of broccoli to obtain the amount that the participants were given.

Overall, I thought that the study was well conducted. It being a double blind placebo, that eliminated any biased results. I thought that study also ruled out any reverse causations and confounding variables. Although sulforaphane isn’t a direct cure for autism, it is a definite step in the right direction.

We all know soda isn’t comparable to green tea in terms of health benefits, but would you go as far to say that they’re as terrible for your body as cigarettes? A recent study has shown that drinking soda has been proven to take years off of your life through harming the immune system, and accelerates the aging process. Why exactly is soda so bad for your body?

Soda consists of many harmful chemical and substances that are known to harm your body, and should be avoided as Reader’s Digest explains. Soda can deplete your calcium and magnesium due to its high levels of phosphoric acid. And in case if you weren’t aware, calcium and magnesium are known to give your immune system a boost. High-fructose corn syrup is known to damage tissue, aid in the development of diabetes, as well as diabetic complications. Most sodas contain a lot of high-fructose corn syrup. Bottled beverages (including water!) contain BPA, which is found in the plastic. The BPA from the plastic can get into your beverage, then into your body. BPA has been proved to harm the immune system as well. Wellness Mama has also made the claim to stay away from soda. Most sodas contain caffeine. Caffeine can be linked to cancer, irregular heartbeat, high blood pressure, and other complications. We’ve all had that disgusting feeling on our teeth after drinking soda, this is because soda can cause plaque build up on your teeth. Plaque buildup can impact your gums and may even cause cavities! Wellness Mama also mentions that soda companies simply use tap water. Tap water alone can potentially contain chlorine, fluoride, and traces of metal. With all of that being said, soda contains a lot of chemicals and substances that can and will harm your body.

Although it is known that soda can harm your body, does it mean that soda could potentially take years off of your life? Time explains how soda can, and will, take year off of your life. Telomeres are the caps at the end of every chromosome, which is in every single cell. The study conducted looked at the telomeres from the white blood cells. Telomeres that are shorter are linked to stress, cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, and even a shorter life span. There was a study ((())) conducted to link soda with shorter telomeres. In the study 5,309 adults that drank soda regularly over fourteen years were found to have shorter telomeres. On average, each participant would drink twelve ounces on average, wrote Fox News. The study found that drinking nearly 8-ounces (one can) of soda daily can age you up to nearly 2 years. Some participants drank 20-ounces (a bottle!) daily, which was linked to 4.6 years of aging. Drinking 30-ounces of soda daily is the exact associate in telomere length as smoking.

Personally, I think that the study was conducted well. They had 5,309 participants in the study so I’m assuming that the population was well randomized. They also did the study over a span of fourteen years, which allows the harmful of effects of soda to impact the telomeres significantly. The study also eliminated chance and reverse causation as well. Although the study was conducted well, I would have like to have seen how this compares to people who do not consume soda regularly, and people who do not consume soda at all. A control group would have shown the comparison. The study failed to rule out the option of a confounding variable. Could it be that the participants drank the soda with a cheeseburger or other unhealthy foods? Could the shorter telomeres potentially be due to obesity?

I’ve concluded, for obvious reasons, that soda is bad for you! But, I wouldn’t go as far to say that it is as harmful as cigarettes. The average person probably does not drink 20 ounces daily, therefore soda wouldn’t impact their telomeres as much as cigarettes. Drinking soda in excess may have substantial health consequences though. Either way, maybe it’s time to put down the soda and pick up a water.

At some point in your life you’ve felt rejection, pain, heartache, betrayal, and so forth. The inexplicable pain derived from such feelings can cause an actual heart condition known as the broken heart syndrome. Broken heart syndrome isn’t caused by getting dropped by the sorority you wanted or breaking up with your boyfriend of two weeks, but is inflicted by those who have experienced an extremely emotional event.

Women have been found to have this disease more than men. This disease isn’t just for people who have had previous heart conditions, but for people in good health as well. This disease is relatively similar to a heart attack with its intense chest pain induced by stress hormones. In fact the only difference between broken heart syndrome and a heart attack is that there aren’t any blocked arteries with a broken heart. Part of the heart enlarges while the rest continues to contract normally, therefore causing symptoms of a broken heart (“Is Broken Heart Syndrome Real?”). 

Although broken heart syndrome is a very severe illness, it amazes me how powerful the mind is. To feel such emotion pain can actually take a serious toll on your body and inflict a serious heart condition.

Works Cited

“Is Broken Heart Syndrome Real?” American Heart Association. N.p., 15 Apr. 2013. Web. 18 Sept. 2014.

To go along with Andrew’s discussion in class today, this article  I found coincided with the subject of supernatural beings. In Christianity, it is believed that you can acquire the “gift of tongues”  through calling upon the “Holy Spirit.” To the outsider it sounds like a mere gibberish, but it is not them who is talking.

The University of Pennsylvania did a study and monitored five women’s brain waves who were speaking in tongues. They found that the part of the brain that controls what you do, the frontal lobe, was pretty inactive. The language center of their brain was inactive as well, even though they were speaking (Carey, 2006). Although the women had inactive frontal lobes and language centers, their thalamus activity increased, so they were fully conscious“Speaking in Tongues: Medical Study Proves It’s the Holy Spirit Praying.”).  In addition to this, the left caudate which is responsible for positive emotions has been shown to be less active. Which, is another mystery (Carey, 2006). 

It has also been hypothesised that people who speak in tongues are mentally unstable. But, a study done in England of over 1000 Christians who spoke in tongues proved that they are more stable than those who did not. (Carey, 2006)

Although in the scientific community it isn’t allowed to explain something as supernatural, this study has been determined as unknown and it has been concluded that more studies should be done to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon.

Works Cited

Carey, Benedict. “A Neuroscientific Look at Speaking in Tongues.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 06 Nov. 2006. Web. 18 Sept. 2014.

Do you think you’ve experienced love? It could have been the best friend who you realized you loved all along, or the pretty girl who lives on the floor below you. Maybe, if you’re feeling a little dramatic, it could have been love at first sight for you. The love you feel for your partner is a feeling like none else, and you know the chemistry you feel with each other is unexplainable. Love impacts you both emotionally and physically, and what causes this? Actual biochemicals!

It’s your first date with the dreamy guy you had just met, before he comes to pick you up you find your palms to be embarrassingly sweaty and your heart pounding through your chest. Well you can blame this on the release of norepinephrine, or PEA for short (Helmenstine). But, why did you chose the dreamy guy you met on the elevator? Your selection could have been due to dopamine. A study done on dopamine, a neurochemical, was conducted by Emory University using voles proved the female rodents selected their mate based on dopamine release (Helmenstine). For men who constantly find themselves in the friend zone, it could possibly be due to dopamine. Although we aren’t voles, therefore we aren’t sure if this affects humans or not.

Dopamine coincides with oxytocin. When dopamine is released so is oxytocin. This is hormone has been nicknamed the “cuddle hormone.”  Not only is oxytocin a romantic love hormone, but is released during labor and breast feeding (Helmenstine). Oxytocin can be found in both genders, as well as testosterone. Testosterone is correlated with lust (Helmenstine).

These chemicals can be overpowering, but they eventually subside and endorphins begin to become more prominent. After the classic honeymoon stage has reached its end, and your body has built a tolerance to the love stimulants, endorphins are there to keep the relationship strong. Endorphins can be described as “feelings of attachment and comfort. Endorphins are like opiates. They calm anxiety, relieve pain and reduce stress” (Helmenstine). 

Whether it’s from the first date, or ten years into the relationship biochemicals will continue to play a factor in your love life.

Works Cited 

Helmenstine, Anne M. “What Chemicals Are Involved in Feeling in Love?” About Education. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Sept. 2014.

Most people know the pure excitement and joy they feel when first getting a puppy, no matter how old you are. When I was five years old I got a Leonberger (type of dog) puppy. We named her Nittany and she was the cutest thing I had ever laid eyes on. I had been in love with her since day one. She grew very quickly, and before we knew it she was at a mere 130 pounds. Although she was a little overweight, she was in good health. Eight years later Nittany was diagnosed with cancer. The only thing we could do was have her leg amputated, but it didn’t go as planned and she passed away a few days later. If you have never lost a furry best friend, it’s easily one of the hardest things you’ll have to go through. Why was it fair that my big loving dog had lived to be 8, where my neighbors dog was nearly 16 years old before it passed?

My assumption that big dogs live longer was concluded from one single observation, therefore it’s not real data. It has been found that the average smaller dog has a life expectancy of around 12-14 years, where the larger dogs have 8-10 years, and the huge dogs live 5-8 years (Soniak, 2014). But, there are many different breeds of dogs, this age range isn’t found to be true for all. Like most things, it is unknown why this is.

There was a study that dogs die quickly because they age fast. The researchers studied veterinary data of 50,000 from 74 breeds, and concluded that because dogs grow so fast their health deteriorates just as fast. Another explanation offers that because these dogs grow so fast, they’re more prone to disease (Soniak, 2014).

There is a correlation between the rate of growth and lifespan, but that doesn’t mean that dogs die because they grow fast. There could be many other contributing factors that weren’t measured in the study, therefore the reason where as to why larger dogs have a shorter lifespan is completely unknown. Personally, even though large dogs don’t live as long I would still love to cuddle up to a giant teddy bear than a rat sized dog.

Works Cited

Matt, Soniak. “Why Don’t Big Dogs Live As Long As Small Dogs.” Mental Floss. N.p., 19 Mar. 2013. Web. 16 Sept. 2014.

When you think of fall you think of hoodies, bonfires, college football, the change of leafs, and of course the Pumpkin Spice Latte. The one and only. If you’re like me, you look forward to the release of this magnificent drink every year, and go through withdraws once it leaves the menu. These Pumpkin Spice Lattes on average have about 380  calories, so obviously they can’t be too healthy. But would you go so far as to say they can cause cancer?

Recently, a popular blogger, Food Babe, found that Pumpkin Spice Latte’s carmel coloring contains 4-Mel. This agent has been identified as a “possible human carcinogen” by the International Agency for Research on Caner. They did a study that has proven that this agent causes cancer in mice. But does that mean it is harmful to humans?

Coke and Pepsi beverages use a similar carmel coloring in their products as well, and their products have been accused of causing cancer. Both their beverages and the PSL have the 4-Mel substance in their ammonia-sulfite carmel coloring. The Center for Science and Public Interest have found that the 4-Mel substance found in the carmel coloring in soft beverages put seven in one million at a risk for cancer. The FDA only allows products that pose a threat to one in a million, yet soda companies use seven times the allotted amount.

So does this mean that Pumpkin Spice Lattes cause cancer? Could the experiments done by the International Agency for Research on Cancer scientifically prove that ammonia-sulfite causes cancer in Starbucks consumers? Personally, I think there are a lot of factors that attribute to one getting cancer. It is unknown why people become ill with cancer. There has been no study conducted over time proving that Pumpkin Spice Latte consumers are diagnosed with cancer more frequently than those who do not consumer the beverage. Said experiment couldn’t be accurately conducted due to all the confounding variables. It is true that the 4-Mel found in the ammonia-sulfite coloring has caused cancer in mice, but is that applicable to humans?

Could it be that people who are more prone to caner happen to drink Pumpkin Spice Lattes? Or that consumers of the PSL are generally more wealthier than those who cannot afford the PSL, therefore their general lifestyle exposes them to more carcinogens? In conclusion, if I were to stop drinking the PSL it would be due to the 380 calories, not because of the artificial carmel coloring. 

Hello everyone! I’m Casey Leuenberger and I’m from Roswell, Georgia. I am currently undecided, but I plan on going into business. I needed to take a science course, and this class is the only one to interest me. Science isn’t one of my strong suites and I would be content if I never had to recite  the photosynthesis equation or the periodic table for the rest of my life.