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/

My moms best friend’s niece has a severe case of epilepsy. She is a twenty year old whose quality of life is ruined by her disease. She has seizures almost every day. She cannot drive, she cannot go anywhere by her self and she is constantly injuring her self from falling and seizing. My mom told me that she is getting a procedure done to cure her condition. Turns out this procedure is where they remove part of her brain. This was shocking to me. This is barbaric! How can removing part of your brain help you? You need your brain, and now they’re just going to remove part of it? I could not fathom how removing part of your brain could be beneficial. But it turns out it can be beneficial. Since the surgery, a month ago she has been seizure free.

I decided to investigate. I found a very intriguing article about a baby who have severe epilepsy and a doctor in California removed half of his brain! A baby boy, just under a year old had his brain removed. Although this sounds so crazy and irrational the decision actually makes sense. The baby’s condition was so bad that he would seize for almost half of the day. No medicines were working and there was nothing that could stop the seizing. Seizing at such a young age so severely will damage a lot of the brain. The baby would never learn to speak or walk with a condition like this. So the baby’s doctors determined which part of the brain was not functioning properly and removed the damaged part before the healthy brain would be affected. The baby’s parents claimed that potentially being blind, or potentially having a limp is a risk they are willing to take considering the very concerning state that the baby is in right now. They thought could it be any worse? The baby lived through the surgery and so far, 2 months after the procedure, the baby is doing well. He is speaking and walking and acts just like a regular healthy, seizure-free baby.

The doctor has preformed this procedure on more than 230 babies. Only one baby died during surgery. The rest all seem to be cured. Some have side affects but all are in a better state than they were previously. The doctor claims that at such a young age the brain has the ability to rewire its self and to do the tasks that the removed part of the brain was used for.

Its unsure what the future hold for the baby with half a brain. But so far he is doing a lot better. Read the full article here

So apparently your brain isn’t so important. And half of it can be removed with no immediate apparent results. Theres that myth that a person only uses 10% of your brain and the rest of it is idol. But upon doing more research on that topic I came across this very interested Ted video. This video says that previously we did not know what a lot of the brain is used for but now we do. These are things like problem solving, creativity, adaptability. So perhaps these babies can walk and talk but they will have other problems in the future that you cannot tell as a baby. The future for these babies is a complete mystery. Theres no way to measure how much creativity a 11 month year old baby has lost. The future for these babies is a mystery. But certain is a miracle you can live with half a brain, and removing a brain can be beneficial.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/baby-half-brain-removed-treat-seizures/story?id=12503272&page=2

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/04/ted-ed-percentage-brain-richard-cytowic_n_4719173.html

Finals week is coming up around the corner. Everyone is looking over their notes, everyones stressing and some are doing superstitious methods as a desperate attempt to remember all the material. One easy new tip that has been proven to help people remember their notes better is to type your notes up, and then print them out in a silly hard to read font. It is proven that silly font, or hard to read font is better remembered. Obviously, typing everything up helps you remember it. But then when reading over the printed notes, the silly font helps you remember it. This works for all subject where memorization is required.

Scientist found this out accidentally. Scientist conducted an experiment originally about font size. The experiment was to give a list of random words in different sizes to students and test which ones they remembered. The scientist had thought that the largest words would be remembered while the smaller words would be forgotten. But this was false. Larger font did not help remember the words. The scientists decided to test whether font has an impact on memory. And turns out it does! Psychologists from Princeton and Indiana University conducted a small study. There were 28 participants of both men and women. The psychologists gave the participants a reading about 3 different species of aliens, each species had seven different characteristics like “blue eyes” or “eats pollen”. Half of the participants read the information from the standard Arial font and the other half read the article in Bodoni MT. Bodoni is an unfamiliar font which is harder to read. Those who had studied in the harder-to-read fonts outperformed the others on the test, 85.5 percent to 72.8 percent, on average. (article here)

After these results were found a much larger study was conducted. “involving 222 students at a public school in Chesterland, Ohio. One group had all its supplementary study materials, in English, history and science courses, reset in an unusual font, like Monotype Corsiva. The others studied as before. After the lessons were completed, the researchers evaluated the classes’ relevant tests and found that those students who’d been squinting at the stranger typefaces did significantly better than the others in all the classes” (article here)

The theory behind this is if the font is written in a harder to read font then you cannot skim through the material. You must sit and actually read every word which makes you remember it. If you are concentrating on what each word says then you will be more likely to remember it. Although there has only been two studies. The two studies have been consistent with their findings. I know for my finals I plan on studying with silly font. Because whats to lose!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/19/health/19mind.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://lifehacker.com/5672301/hard-to-read-fonts-can-make-text-easier-to-remember

Everyone knows to put a jacket on otherwise your going to get sick. “You’ll catch a cold if you don’t bundle up” my mom always told me. Now that the weather is getting cold I was wondering  if that has any truth to it. Turns out during the winter and colder months there is a higher percentage of people who are sick (15-20%) (Mental Floss). Most typically with the common cold or the flu. But, that is just a correlation. Any doctor will tell you that people do not get sick because of the temperature of their bodies, people get sick because of viruses, bacteria or germs. Although scientist are not sure exactly why sickness spikes during these cold winter months they have theories that cold work individually or a combination.

Theory #1: One theory is in the colder months people stay indoors more often. Indoors means the air is being recycled between more people than usual. A lot of people are in schools or work and are in close contact with other people. This makes the transmission of viruses and bacteria from person to person much easier. Therefore making more people sick.

Theory #2: Another idea is that in the hot summer weather, viruses and bacteria have a harder time staying alive on surfaces like counter tops and door nobs. The colder temperature is more sustainable to these viruses which allows them to live longer and infect more people during the cold winter months.

The only diseases cold temperature can single handily cause is Hypothermia or Frost Bite. Hypothermia is when the body looses too much heat and warmth, and Frost Bite is when one region of the body loses too much heat. But being cold, will not affect whether or not you will suffer from the common cold or the flu. Hypothermia is when the body temperature drops below the temperature required for bodily functions. Symptoms of mild cases of Hypothermia are slight confusion and shivering. But if it becomes severe the persons heart could stop which would kill them. Frost Bite happens when a localize body region become too cold for proper blood flow. This most commonly happens in toes and fingers. There are different stages of Frost Bite but it can range from permanent nerve and tissue damage to temporary numbness. Both diseases are serious conditions.

There are risks to being cold and not wearing proper cold weather attire but these risks do not include catching a cold or the flu. In fact, the risks are much worse.

http://mentalfloss.com/article/30741/does-being-cold-make-you-more-susceptible-getting-cold

http://www.healthline.com/health-slideshow/does-cold-weather-make-you-sick#2

http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m4340104_Frostbite_and_Hypothermia.pdf

Beware of the Pumpkin Spice Latte. (heart breaker I know) An article claiming that Pumkin Spice Lattes cause cancer are going viral around the internet. Everyone is interested what this one crazy nutritionist has to say. Along with the article are many people saying this is just one crazy lady, and you can’t believe everything you read on the internet. Also, it seems like every day something new is causing cancer when the reality is no one knows. But either way I was interested and investigated. It all started with one nutritionist who was interested what is Starbucks beloved pumpkin spice latte. She looked around, asked employees but all they knew was expresso, pumpkin flavored sauce, whipped cream and milk. But that was not enough to satisfy the nutritionist. She emailed Starbucks head quarters multiple times before getting a reply to what is in this pumpkin sauce. Headquarters wrote her back an email that was again dissatisfying, “is of pumpkin and traditional fall spice flavors combined with espresso and steamed milk, topped with whipped cream and pumpkin pie spice.” After many back and forth angry emails the angry nutritionist finally got an answer. The fact that Starbucks is so unwilling and hesitant to tell consumers what is in their beverage is slightly disconcerting. It seems as if they are hiding something from the public. Finally she got an answer. Along with the obvious answer of the extremely utterly high amount of sugar in the sauce was a list of all other chemicals, and NO pumpkin whatsoever. But, one ingredient made this nutrients very angry. The presents of the chemical 4-MEI. This chemical is extremely controversial and may lead to cancer also it is UNNECESSARY to the drink. But once again I was skeptical due to the fact everything causes cancer and decided to look into the “cancer causing toxic” chemical.  Upon doing research, it says the results regarding this chemical is extremely controversial. Every test don’t on every animal provides a completely different result. For bunnies it causes lung cancer, for rats it cures tumors, on dog and cats it has no effect. The only semi result they can come up with is the larger the animal the lesser the danger. These animals were given 100x the amount of the chemical that an human would ever encounter, plus they are much smaller. It seems to me this is a case of DO NOT BELIEVE WHAT YOU READ ON THE INTERNET. The controversial evidence could be because of many many situations the Texas Sharp Shooter problem, a false positive, false negative or chance. More experiments are most definitely needed to conclude if this chemical is cancerous.

But the angry nutritionist does have one valid complaint. Starbucks has such a prestigious air to the cafe. You think you are high class and drinking only the best most healthy beverages. Which is completely false. The drinks have an obsurde amount of calories and sugar levels. The other valid compliant she has is Starbucks should offer customers access to the ingredients in their drink. And lastly and most importantly, their milk is made from cows raised from antibiotics and fed with GMO corn. GMO is a huge topic of debate lately in today’s healthy society. Starbucks should simply better inform their customers. Some people are very conscious and want to know exactly what they are drinking. Some people would be angry to know that GMOs are in Starbucks coffees. Overall I think chemicals are bad and people should stick to more natural options but thats another conversation!

http://www.exploringthenews.com/health/starbucks-stop-putting-toxic-chemicals-pumpkin-spice-latte

http://www.medicaldaily.com/starbucks-pumpkin-spice-latte-uses-carcinogens-its-caramel-and-gmo-laden-cow-milk-300198

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-Methylimidazole#Health_concerns

Dr. Oz asks you are you a lip balm addict? Here are the three qualifications that declare you a lip balm addict:

1. Do you apply lip balm more then 3x a day?

2. Do you carry lip balm with you where ever you go?

3. Do you have multiple locations for your lip balm (ex. bed side, purse, pocket, bathroom) ?

If you are answering yes to all these questions Dr. Oz declarers you a lip balm addict. Well, who cares if I’m an addict, lip balm isn’t going to kill you! Lip balm isn’t harmful. But I always wondered why my lips are always chapped when I apply lip balm multiple times a day, meanwhile some boys don’t even own lip balm and their lips are still not dry. Turns out lip balm does has a (minor) negative effects on your body. The skin on your lips are the fastest regenerating skin on your body. The top layer dries out and immediately there is a back up layer waiting to replace the old. When you apply lip balm you are preventing the natural process to occur. The top layer cannot leave, because the lip balm is preventing it from leaving which is signaling to your body that new layers do not need to be created. Therefore the old dry layer will remain. If new layers are not created then the old dried out layer will remain. Once you use lip balm, your body becomes depended on it to make your lips feel soft. What started making people need lip balm if you body has it all figured out. There are many natural situation that will make your lips dry. If you are in the sun without sun block on your lips the sun will dry out your lips faster than the body can keep up. Or if you are in dry cold windy air. Your lips will also dry out. But the biggest factor that creates your lips to be dry is licking your own lips. Salvia on your lips dries your lips out because the saliva evaporates fast leaving your lip irritated and unable to fulfill the regeneration process. Salvia also is acidity and is bad for your delicate lips.

So, my question is what do you do when you have chapped lips?! Chapped lips can be painful and irritating. One suggestion is to use petroleum based balms opposed to wax based. Because wax does not do a good job of heeling your lips and only does temporary gives relief while its actually suffocating your lips. The best substitution for your Bert’s Bees or your ChapStick is to apply a more natural lubricant. These include coconut oil and shea butter. These are better for your lips because they protect your lips from the weather but still allow your lips to regenerate more skin cells. Some things to look out for, if your lip balm says “seals your lips,” thats bad, you want your lips to breathe and not be suffocated.  Another sign that says your lip balm may be harming more than helping is the presents of the ingredient menthol.

So, theres a few tips on how to keep your lips moist, painless and healthy this upcoming winter!

http://www.webmd.com/beauty/lips-smile/why-your-lips-are-chapped

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/11/AR2008121103195.html

http://www.doctoroz.com/videos/are-you-addicted-lip-balm

In middle school I used to drink lot of soda. Along with every dinner and sometimes lunch I drank a Coca-Cola. For a number of reasons I broke this habit. My teeth were yellowing, I depended on caffeine and Coke high in sugar and also calories. So, I switched to juices. My particular favorite was always Cran-Rasberry juice. Just recently my mom sent me an email telling me its time to yet again switch drinks. I was shocked. Juice is made out of fruit, I thought I was being healthy! Whats wrong now. Turns out, fruit juices are filled with just as much sugar as sugar and just as many calories. When people think they are being healthy they are not! Fruit juices not a healthier low-sugar alternative to soda. Often some of the juices aren’t even made with real fruit. Fruit its self is high in sugar, but when you make fruit into a smoothie or a juice you loose the good, healthy  stuff, like the fiber, and then usually more sugar is added to the drink. Some may argue, fruit juices have vitamins so the are healthy. But the bad sugars are so bad, the minimal good vitamins do not off set the bad.

This is a huge misconception to the public. The government, my parents, everyone thinks that orange juice or cranberry juice is much better option than soda. But, thats not true whatsoever. The two drinks are essentially equal. They are both extremely high in sugar and calories. People need to look at nutrient labels and start making their own decisions for them selves. People’s intuition is lousy. Just because the name has a fruit in it, does not mean its healthy.

What about those drinks who advertise on being healthy like V8? V8 is made up of all vegetables not fruit. Turns out, vegetables themselves do not have as much sugar as fruits do, therefore vegetable juices are actually far more healthy than fruit juices. However canned vegetables are high in sodium, which is also not good. People should alternate from juice smoothies to vegetable smoothies

Not only is the concern geared toward all the sugar, another concern is most juice beverages are not made with real fruit juice. I’ve actually notice that the cranberry juice I typically drink the number one ingredient is apple juice.  They say there is little to no real cranberries in the juice. Its all artificially sweetened. Often the drinks are also diluted to make the product more cost efficient.

The biggest question I have, is what is I make my own smoothie, and I only use real fruit. I looked into it, and even though this is a healthier option than store bought juices, the smoothie still isn’t healthy. The smoothie still has all the natural sugars from the fruit, but now the fiber and antioxidants has been removed. The key point to this blog is the healthiest choice of beverages is water, and if you want to have some fruit, eat it whole.

http://news.discovery.com/human/life/sodas-evil-twin-the-dangers-of-fruit-drinks-infographic.htm

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/21/health/sugar-soda-age-faster/index.html?hpt=he_t2

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/272438.php

http://authoritynutrition.com/fruit-juice-is-just-as-bad-as-soda/

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/jan/17/how-fruit-juice-health-food-junk-food

http://www.livestrong.com/article/409207-is-v8-juice-good-for-you/

My entire life I was a dancer. I danced 16 years, competed 11 years and trained 14 hours a week. On of my ballet teachers once told us that we were all born to be dancers. I thought that was a silly comment, but I just saw an article claiming that 85% of dancers have two genes that differ from the average person. These genes “are involved in the transmission of information between nerve cells. The serotonin transporter regulates the level of serotonin, a brain transmitter that contributes to spiritual experience, among many other behavioral traits. The vasopressin receptor has been shown in many animal studies to modulate social communication and affiliative bonding behaviors.” (Science 2.0) Essentially this means that dancers are more spiritual, musical, communication based humans than other humans. The study involved testing the DNA of professional dancers and their parents, non-dancers, athletes and non-athletes and compared the genes. The study required each participant to fill out a questionaire about their personality traits, and also tested their DNA for two particular genes, the serotonin transporter (SLC6A4) and the arginine vasopressin receptor 1a (AVPR1a). These two genes are believed to affect social behavior in humans and animals. They used the data they collected to calculate each person’s TAS (Tellegen Absorption Scale), and graphed their findings below. Athletes were tested also because athletes are involved physical stamina similar to dancers. It was found that the “dancer” gene was only prominently found in the dancers, and the TAS was usually higher in dancers. It says other people may have similar characteristics as dancers but they are heighten in dancer who have the gene.

I found this article particularly interesting. Through my personal experience I have found that some people just are naturally good dancers, naturally flexible and naturally have rhythm while others must work harder.  I always thought I was a dancer because my mom put me in dance classes at a young age, but now i wonder am I a dancer because its in my genes?  Do I have the gene? If didn’t have the gene would I quit dancing and started a new sport? But more importantly, even though the study is interesting you have to question the study. The study was only done once and was a rather small study, so although this isolated group may show something it may just be from chance or a false positive.

The article says that it has been found that many musicians have a common gene and also athletes. I wonder if one day babies will be tested to see which genes they have therefore their parents can enroll them in dance or music or a sport at a young age to focus on just that activity. If people start doing this will our athletics become better? Will people no longer join a sport because of passion, but only to satisfy their genetics.

But more importantly the flaw in this particular study is who is considered a dancer? There are hundreds of different types of dancers. There are ballet dancers, hip hop dancers, tap dancers, belly dancers, ballroom dancers, African dancers, musical theatre dancers, and people who just enjoy to dance. How can all these people be categorized into one category as dancers. All these types of dancing require different skills. I trained as a ballet dancer of 16 years but I could never do hiphop or African dance. I do NOT have the same skill set as those dancers. What are the qualifications to be considered a dancer? Are you considered a dance if you only dance every once in a while? Or do you have to practice a certain amount of hours? Can you be a solo dancer? or do you have to a group dancer? Ice skaters are dancers who dance on ice, are they considered dancers? Or what about gymnasts, many gymnasts have dance training are they dancers? The topic of “dancers” is extremely broad and more research needs to be done.

The dancing genes, sociability, transcendence, and genetic flexibility

http://www.science20.com/scientific_blogging/dancers_are_genetically_different_rest_us

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/02/060213183707.htm

http://genome.wellcome.ac.uk/doc_WTX033715.html

On the news you might have heard about the new technologies that allow parents to choose all the features of their unborn baby. Parents can choose eye color, hair texture, skin color, and other genetic features. People can essentially customize their babies. The public has gone wild, rejected this new technology and declared it as unethical. Society is worried about eugenics and a further separation between the rich and poor. Also perhaps creating “super people” people who are genetically geniuses or perfect athletes. Although the social and ethical issues are non-science related, I don’t think this topic should even be in discussion as a possibility considering there has no been enough testing on the subject. How can people say this is safe when they have not tested what happens to the genetically engineered babies when they grow up and have babies of their own? The article says the babies were born healthy. Ok, that does not mean they won’t grow up to have health problems. Does their engineered DNA preform the same way that natural DNA preforms? Will these babies be able to reproduce and have their own healthy babies, what about their grand children? How can scientist say that this procedure is safe when they simply do not know. The science of genetically engineering DNA is brand new, there simply has not been enough time to research for scientist to know for sure that this procedure is safe. Scientist should not tell people its safe and mislead soon-to-be parents and potentially compromise babies futures. The article says that this has been successfully tested and perfected on monkeys, and the genetically modified monkeys are two generations old. But just because this test works on monkeys does NOT mean the procedure will be successful on humans. Also these babies are being created in labs and are essentially being born for science. These babies will be poked and pricked and will be guinea pigs for science for the rest of their lives. They will constantly be at doctors and labs with people checking every aspect of their health. They are being birthed into this world for the wrong reasons and won’t be able to live normal lives. This science is ethically wrong to test, can socially cause many problems and is not ready for humans and should be stopped immediately.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/24/opinion/genetically-modified-babies.html?_r=0

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-43767/Worlds-GM-babies-born.html

Four students from University of North Carolina have created a nail polish that changes color in the presence of Rohypnol, Xanax, and GHB which are all commonly used as Date Rape Drugs. The way the nail polish works is a female applies the colored nail polish like any other ordinary nail polish, and when they  are out they can stir their drinks with their fingers, and the nail polish will change color if those drugs are within the drink. Even though this is unsanitary, germs in your mixed drink are better than Roofy. The students are not getting the support they need because many people say finding roofy in your drink is not a solution, a solution would be to stop people from putting drugs in drinks. Although many question the sanitary and the message the nail polish is giving off, the science behind it is interesting.  Many science critics are saying that the nail polish is a fluke and reacts to other chemicals other than the date rape drugs. Even if the chemicals are not date rape drugs does not mean its a fluke. What are the chances that Sulfur will be in your mixed drink? And if there is Sulfur in your drink you shouldn’t be drinking it! Your nail polish will be helping you fight against the date rape drugs, and OTHER dangerous random drugs that are unlikely to be in your drink anyways. Another complaint that the scientific community has is the nail polish does not detect all types of date rape drugs just the 4 listed. But, still, checking for the 4 date rape drugs is better than not checking at all. The nail polish cannot guarantee you won’t get date raped but it sure will help you. The nail polish is a tool not a guaranteed savior. The nail polish is not yet on the market but it hopes to be soon, with the help of lots of investors.

Other date rape testers have been made to prevent date rape and have been quite successful. One is called the Safe Coaster. The Safe Coaster is similar, you splash a drop of your drink onto the colored dots on the coaster and the dots change color in the presents of Ketamine, and GHB. Which is only two date rape drugs meanwhile the nail polish tests for FOUR. The coaster does test for one drug that differs from the nail polish.  This coaster is given to costumers at bars to scare perpetrators away and to make their customers feel safer.  A bar in Texas provides their customers with these coaster and have helped jail a perpetrator who has drugged a woman according to this article. Perhaps the coaster and nail polish can combine intelligence to cover more of the drugs and become more reliable. Its sad our society needs preventative measures like these, but its nice to know people are concerned and doing something about it. Hopefully with this upcoming technology perpetrators will become discouraged and less likely to consider drugging people, which would solve the social issue.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/08/27/4101552/ncsu-students-developing-nail.html

http://aattp.org/nail-polish-developed-by-college-students-detects-date-rape-drugs/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/26/students-develop-nail-polish-to-detect-date-rape-drugs/

What does your printer do? It prints picture, images, documents words, etc, onto a piece of paper. Maybe your printer is also a scanner or copier or even a fax machine also. But soon in the future printer will have a whole new meaning. The technology is still new but its growing very fast. 3-d Printers. In the near future you will be able to download a blueprint off the internet of for example a toaster oven print out a fully functioning toaster oven. There will be no stores or malls or any need for that stuff. Whatever you need you will be able to print from your 3-d printer at home or local location. But even more intriguing is the thought that scientist are working on making 3-d printers that can print human organs. Thats right. A completely artificial man-made organ. People plan to use these organs to test new drugs and to use as a more suitable experimenting tool opposed to animals. But the plan in the far future is to use these organs to insert into humans whose organs are failing. Millions of people are on an organ donor list just waiting for someone to die and to donate their organ or until their organ fails.  The organ that gets donated may be rejected and have other complications. Being able to print your own customized organs creates the hope that people will not have to suffer and wait years for organs. The article from the CNN says the plan is for everyone to scan their bodies while in their prime and use that as a blueprint for any complications in the future. There are many kinks that need to be worked out. There are many questions regarding whether or not this will work. Is putting a foreign object in your body ok? Will these manufactured organs work as well as a real organ? How long will these organs last? Will they need to be replaced? Will they last a lifetime? What are the side effects and risks of having this fake organ? Will only the wealthy be able to afford it? Will there be low quality printers that print low quality products? There are very high hopes for this new technology but not many promising statistics. In the more near future doctor hope to repair organs by printing strips of tissue and cells.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/03/tech/innovation/3-d-printing-human-organs/

For as long as you can remember you have been brushing your teeth every morning and every night… well hopefully! But Dr. Oz tells us that most of us are brushing our teeth incorrectly. I wondered how can you really brush wrong. Its not that hard and we all have had plenty of practice. Brushing your teeth becomes so tedious and mindless that people do not put effort into doing a thorough job. One of the problems is everyone is becoming lazy. You are supposed to be brushing their teeth for 2 minutes a day and most people only brush their teeth for 45 seconds. The other problem is people are brushing too hard and are damaging their gums. According to Dr. Oz’s guest doctor more than 80% of Americans have gum diseases and do not even know. Healthy gums DO NOT BLEED. The doctors on Dr. Oz’s show recommend that using a power tooth brush is much more effective than a regular manual tooth brush. They compare brushing your teeth manually like sweeping the floor, and power-brushing as using a high speed floor buffer. WebMD tells us that people sometime get over obsessive and over brush, more than 3 times a day is excessive and can damage your teeth and gums. WebMD tells us long stroke are careful and it is much more effective to do small short strokes at a 45 degree angle. Also you should be flossing everyday, which everyone has heard a million times but no one actually does. Some people think that using mouth wash is an equivalent or a replacement to brushing your teeth. That is so false. Mouth wash is an extra not a substitute. Mouth wash is good for oral health and does almost nothing to remove plaque from your pearly whites.

So remember to maxmize oral health

1. Floss as often as possible

2. Use mouth wash, but also never skip brushing

3. invest in a power tooth brush

4. don’t get lazy, brush for 2 minutes

http://www.webmd.com/oral-health/healthy-teeth-14/brushing-teeth-mistakes

http://www.doctoroz.com/videos/health-shortcuts-pt-2

One day my Dr. Oz obsessed mother decided to throw away all the Gatorade in the house. I asked her why she was doing this and she just said, “Dr. Oz told me so.” I thought this sounded so ridiculous so I decided to look into it. Turns out there is an ingredient in Gatorade that is considered toxic. This ingredient is called Brominated Vegetable Oil. This chemical is unnecessary to the taste of the drink, and is only used to keep the colors and other ingredients from separating.  Some side effects of this chemical include, “thyroid issues, such as hypothyroidism, autoimmune disease and cancer.” The reason why Gatorade is able to get this product passed by regulation is because the United States FDA allows a certain amount of this chemical into your drinks. Apparently small quantities of the chemical are not toxic. The part that is the most concerning is the fact that this chemical is banned in Europe and just recently has been banned in Japan. Gatorade is such a monstrosity of a company that obviously they sell their product internationally, including Europe and Japan. How does Gatorade get this toxic, banned chemical approved in Japan and Europe? Gatorade changes the recipe. Thats right. If you purchase a Gatorade in Japan or Europe the chemical compound differs from the Gatorade you are getting in the United States. Gatorade has a suitable replacement for this toxic chemical. Why does the United States still get Gatorade products with a potentially toxic chemical? Why does the United States allow companies to put toxic chemicals into our drinking beverages? Another thing I found particularly interesting is how the FDA approval process works. Apparently there is a large loophole, or flaw in the system. As the New York Times explains, 

” A company can create a new additive, publish safety data about it on its Web site and pay a law firm or consulting firm to vet it to establish it as “generally recognized as safe” — without ever notifying the F.D.A., Mr. Neltner said.

About 10,000 chemicals are allowed to be added to foods, about 3,000 of which have never been reviewed for safety by the F.D.A., according to Pew’s research. Of those, about 1,000 never come before the F.D.A. unless someone has a problem with them; they are declared safe by a company and its handpicked advisers.”

This large loophole is extremely concerning. But this is not a science issue, just a political issue. But it seems as if this chemical is dangerous and Gatorade is taking advantage of the UNiterd States loophole and choosing to use this chemical exclusively in American drinks. So beware of your Gatorade, drink at your own risk.

Sources

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/13/business/another-look-at-a-drink-ingredient-brominated-vegetable-oil.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.doctoroz.com/article/hidden-danger-your-drinks

Everyone knows that laying in tanning bed is horrible for the health of your skin. There are laws prohibiting teenagers under the age of 18 from going tanning without the permission of their parents. Tanning causes premature wrinkles, skin blotching, skin cancer and all other symptoms. All of the stuff I mentioned is pretty common sense, things that are brainwashed into everyone’s heads via news, teachers, parents, and everyone. But something I always wondered is, why are tanning beds so bad, but the gel manicure LED lights are okay? For the males readers, if you go and get a gel manicure, the manicurist will apply a layer of polish and then place your manicured hand under a LED light for 2 mins and instantly the gel is hardened. Gel manicures last longer than regular polish and does not chip. Essentially the machine that drys the paint is a little mini tanning bed for your fingers. Why are tanning beds SO horrible, but getting your nails done weekly with the mini tanning beds okay? Are the lights not as strong? Is it just because your not getting tan and the purpose is different? What is the difference between the bad lights of a body tanning bed, and the lights that dry your little finger nails. I looked into it and I found out!  The brightness of the bulbs to dry you nails is only a fraction of the strength as tanning beds so the risk is significantly lesser, but there still is a risk. Experts recommend wearing sunscreen. But, the machines are unregulated so potentially some machines may have a more risky strength. Looking into the light is also dangerous, but the limited amount of time costumer are looking into the light is not very threatening. Manicurist who are around the light all day everyday are at a greater risk.

Something else that I thought about is the huge amount of chemicals being applied to such a small area. All those chemicals cannot be good for your little fingernails. Surprisingly nail polish paints are unregulated. Nail polish paint companies can put whatever chemical combinations they want into their paints. That paint sits on your nails, for weeks and the chemicals are unregulated and untested. I have a horrible habit of biting my nails, so I am eating unregulated chemical combinations. That just logically cannot be good for a person.

Dermatologist  Dr. Zoe Diana Draelos recommends her patients to get manicures for special occasions only, wear sunglasses when light is in use, don’t look directly into light, and to use sunscreen on hands.

Something for all you ladies to think about before spending $35 on pretty painted nails.

Sources

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/05/01/308365116/love-that-gel-nail-polish-but-know-it-doesnt-come-risk-free

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/health/blog/2013/03/05/gel-manicure-health-risks/

i. I’m taking this course because my DUS advisor told me that this would be a good class for me to fulfill my natural science Gen Ed. These topics are much more intriguing than calcualting the weight of a atom or the speed of a ball thrown down off a cliff.

ii. I’m not a science major because I struggled in Physics and Chemistry a lot in high school. Instead I’m trying to get into the Smeal School of Business and probably going to major in marketing.