I love dogs and cats. But I live in a family that is divided. My Dad likes dogs. My Mom likes cats. This issue has reared its ugly head once again in my family now that my twin brother and I have left for college. My Mom wants to get two more cats once my younger brother leaves for college. My Dad wants another dog. This ongoing argument started me thinking about the pros and cons of each and why some people choose one over the other.

Growing up, we always had three pets. Each kid got to choose. Currently, I have a rabbit. My twin brother has a cat. My younger brother has a dog. My Mom wants three cats, one to represent each of us. My Dad, on the other hand, will only agree to add another dog to the family. Who will win? Here are the arguments from both sides.

Dogs are loyal, friendly, loving, easily trainable, protective, activity inducers and unconditional lovers. On the con side, they are noisy, more expensive, need more attention, require more space and must be house trained.

Cats are independent, affectionate, live longer, litter box trainable, require little grooming and need less attention. The cons of cats include independence, sleep too much, allergy inducing and litter box cleaning.

Studies done at the University of Texas and by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) shed light on the why people lean to a dog over a cat or vice versa. Dr. Stephen Zawistowski of the ASPCA’s research claims that “research tends to fall in line with the stereotypes people have already established for themselves.” If you think you are a “dog person” then you consider yourself outgoing and agreeable. If you think you are a “cat person” then you consider yourself creative but slightly neurotic.

So how has all of this information helped to end the debate at my house? It doesn’t and it won’t. In the end, my Mom will win.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/dog-people-cat-people-pet-preference/story?id=15883844&singlePage=true 

When applying to colleges there is so much that goes into the thought of what school will be your perfect match. Will it be the school that provides all you need and beyond in academics? Will it be the school that isn’t too far away from home? Will it be the division one school with the amazing sports team? Or will it be the school known for its top party atmosphere? And although this might not be why you chose your school, thousands of students have admitted to the fact that a school was a top party school aided in their decision-making. But what they did not come to truly think about would be the long-term affects when they accepted their offers of admission?

Whether it be your best friend, your sibling, a stranger, or even you it is easy to see the short terms of drinking. Slurred speech, drowsiness, vomiting, and blackouts are common among the ones I see at Penn State. The weekend ends and we get over what happened at the weekend and go to our classes and most likely repeat last weekend the next weekend. But what happens when the four years are over and we receive our diplomas and throw our caps up? What happens when we enter the real world? Thursday to Saturday are we really thinking about how much we are damaging our bodies long-term?

Binge Drinking and continued alcohol use in large amounts are associated with many health problems. These include alcohol poisoning, high blood pressure, stroke, other heart related diseases, liver damage, nerve damage, sexual problems, permanent damage to the brain, ulcers, inflammation of stomach walls, malnutrition, and cancer of the mouth and throat. When someone drinks heavily it alters the chemistry in his or her brain. The chemical messengers that transmit the signals throughout the body control thoughts processes, behavior, and emotion. Another negative effect to the brain is memory loss. Memory loss is one of the most common symptoms associated with brain impairment due to alcohol. Some people struggle to remember things from yesterday, while some have trouble remembering skills, knowledge, or information they have learnt in the past. People with alcohol related brain impairment have trouble learning new information, focusing on conversation, retrieving information from the past, remembering recent events, and making errors when telling stories from memory. All of these negative effects would make it hard to manage a job.

So would having these symptoms make all that happened in college not worth it? If we are paying thousands to go to get a degree and then half a decade later we are not able to perform certain tasks due to the inability to understand new information and recall past skills? Maybe this weekend it is time to think of what we are truly doing to our bodies.

Sources:

http://www.drugfreeworld.org/drugfacts/alcohol/short-term-long-term-effects.html

http://studentaffairs.psu.edu/assessment/pdf/174.pdf

http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/overview-alcohol-consumption/moderate-binge-drinking

Photo courtesy of http://www.ricekrispies.com/snap-crackle-pop

I’m going to start off this post by conducting a short quiz.  I’m going to give you a part of a popular ad, and I want you to see if you can fill in the blanks.

1.) 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on ____ _________.

2.) So easy a _________ could do it.

3.) Help!  I’ve ________ and I can’t ______ up!

I would be willing to bet a large amount of money that the majority of readers could complete these statements in 30 seconds or less.  The entire point of advertising is to attract consumers to the product being sold, and what better way to get consumers to remember your product than to leave a lasting impression that they can’t forget?  With all of the items being advertised on TV today, it takes a lot for an ad to really stand out and catch a consumers attention, and researcher Andy Rogers thinks he has found the key.

Rogers’ study involved 48 participants that were exposed to 3 different commercials, each with three different levels of audio, visual alignment (Andrew).  The first level was the original piece, where the music is perfectly in sync with the visual affects. In this video interview, Rogers explains that “sync points” are the moments when the audio and visual elements align perfectly.  The second level displaces the music so that it is slightly ahead, and the third level pulls the music even further away from the picture on the screen.

The clips were randomly allocated to the participants and after each clip was viewed, a memory test was distributed.  Rogers found that the first clip provided no statistically significant results, whereas the second and third tests produced significant (p< .05) results.  These results led to the conclusion that speeding up the music in an advertisement will lead to more consumer recognition (Andrew).

I think this is a very interesting concept.  I’ve heard of the dynamic attending concept, but this is a completely new way to approach advertising.  However, I found a few things that were questionable about the study.  First of all there is always the possibility of chance.  Secondly, because of the observational nature of this study, nothing can be proven.  We also cannot assume that correlation is equal to causation.  However, reverse causation is ruled out because there is no way that someones mind could cause the advertisement to change.

One of my biggest problems with the study is the sample size.  48 participants aren’t enough to make a conclusion for the entire world.  This also happened in another country, so, there is a possibility that it could be different depending on different cultures.  There is also a problem with confounding variables.  They didn’t take a cognition test before they began allocating the videos, so some participants may have been superior to others when it came to memory.

In conclusion, I believe the concept of this study is intriguing, and could have some effects on future advertisements, but it’s just not a strong enough study for me to completely trust it yet.

Works Cited:

“Mis-synced Music Proves to Be a Powerful Enhancement for TV Ads.” Mis-synced Music Proves to Be a Powerful Enhancement for TV Ads. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Oct. 2014. <http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20140917042004.shtml>.

Andrew.rogers@hud.ac.uk. Emotional Impact of Musical/Visual Synchrony Variation in Film (n.d.): n. pag. Web.

After Tuesday`s lecture I got really intriged about cows created to much methane that is contributing to the Greenhouse effect and the global warming. I would never thought that an animal specially cows would be in a certain way harmful for the environment. But how much is that contribution?  Let`s take a look.

Agriculture is responsable for an estimated 14 percent of the world`s greenhouse gases. I significant portion of these emissions come from methane, which contributes to the global warming. The methane is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. The world`s 1.5 billion cows and billions of other grazing animals emit dozens of polluting gases including methane. Cows emit a massive amount of methane through belching, with a lesser amount through faltulence. Some experts say 100 liters to 200 liters a day ( 26-53 gallons) is the average dairy cow expels methane. A herb of cows produces more greenhouse gas in a year than a family car produces to dive 3,000 miles. Dr. Andy Thorpe of Porthsmouth University said that 200 cows expel an annual amount of methane equivalent to the carbon dioxide emissions of a car burning 21,400 litres of petrol. Between 55 percent and 70 percent of methan produced from man-made sources, mostly farming of animals such as cows,sheep and goats, which have an additional stomach and produce large amounts of methane as they digest food.

So, how is possible for a cow to expel that amount of methane? Cows, goats, sheep and several other animals belong to a class of animals called ruminants. The class of animals have 4 stomachs and digest food in their stomachs instead of in their intestines, as humans do. Ruminants eat food, regirgitate it as cu and eat it againg. The stomachs are filled with bacteria that aid in digestion, but also produc methane. What we can do to reduce the amount of methane expel by ruminants? A thre-year study, begun in April 2007 by Welsh scientists, is examining if adding garlic to the cow feed can reduce their methane production. The suty is still in process, but early results indicate that garlic cuts cows flatulence in half by attacking methane-producing microbes living in cows`stomachs. By changing the feeding of the cows, researchers are also looking to see if the addition of garlic affects the quality of the meat or milk produced.

With milliosn of ruminants in Britain, including 10 millions cows, a strong push is underway to curb methane emissions there. Cows contribute 3 percent Britain`s overall greenhouse gas emissions and 25 to 30 percent is methane. In New Zealand, where cattle and sheep farming are major industries, 34 percent of greanhouse gases come from livestock.

What if gobla warming is creating that amount of methane production in ruminants? The experimental study cannot rule out the possiblity of reverse causation. A third variable cannot be ruled out, either. BY changing the diet we can find a link whethever if the grass is what is causing the larg amount of production of methane in ruminants. Further questions: what would happen to the meat economy of there is a significant change in the quality of milk and meat by adding garlic to cows`diet? If we kill all the cows, how much increase of fish and cereal demand would be? Without the cows, could be reverse the greenhouse effect?

http://animals.howstuffworks.com/mammals/methane-cow.htm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1079354/Herd-200-cows-produces-greenhouse-gas-family-car-driven-3-000-miles.html

In the past it was commonly suggested that while during pregnancy, women should just rest for the protection of themselves and their babies. There was even a set of guidelines published in 1985 by the American Congress of Obstetricians, which stated that pregnant women should keep strenuous activity to fifteen minutes or less.

Since then there has been a dramatic change in how doctors and scientists perceive exercise during pregnancy. Exercise is now thought to be great for the mother and the unborn child. Researchers are also now starting to look even more closely at how exercise can influence a baby’s health in the womb and how these effects might translate into protection from future health problems.”

One reason why women should exercise during pregnancy is due to hearth health. In 2010, a woman by the name of Linda May along with some of her colleagues gathered a group of 26 pregnant women. These women reported that they had been consistently exercising for three times a week for 30 minutes each. When the women reached 36 weeks they brought them into the lab and studied their and their babies’ heart rates. They noticed that compared to moms who were not regular exercises, these moms and their babies has lower heart rates.

The benefits of exercising while pregnant also last into a child’s life after birth. May and her colleagues also discovered “higher heart rate variability if they had exercised along with their moms in utero(Walker).”  These benefits can lead into healthier childhood years, in which they have more efficiently pumping hearts.

May suggests that a mix of aerobics and strength training during pregnancy is a good plan to keep yourself and your baby healthy during pregnancy.

Walker, Cameron. “Exercise During Pregnancy Benefits Mom—And Baby, Too.” Discovery Magazine: n. pag. Web. 22 Oct. 2014. <http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2014/05/08/exercise-during-pregnancy-benefits-mom-and-baby-too/#.VEpH2VXF_1U>.

Whether I’m texting, listening to music or just scrolling through Facebook, I always seem to fall asleep with my phone near me. It’s the perfect spot for me to be able to hear my alarm, and it’s within arms reach in case of emergencies. But is the convenience of having your cell phone near you while you’re sleeping worth its’ harmful effects? ABC News reports that there are three main reasons why a person should not be sleeping with their cell phone in their bed.

First, your pillow could be set on fire. A teenager in Texas recently said that she was woken up to a burning smell, which was caused by her cell phone being underneath her pillow. The phone had melted, and it burned her sheets and mattress. Another reason to avoid sleeping with your phone is that you could keep yourself awake. For someone like me, who already has so much trouble falling asleep, this could be a huge problem. Cell phones reduce sleeping time because they emit blue light. This light hinders with the production of our sleep-inducing hormone melatonin, and interferes with our nightly slumber. The blue light releases wavelengths that are much like daylight, fooling our bodies to believe that it’s daytime. In order to fall asleep easily and without distraction, studies show that you must turn off any electronics two hours before you go to bed. Lastly, there is talk of possible health risks that come as a result of sleeping next to your phone. There’s no research yet that proves that cell phones can cause cancer, but cell phones do emit little amounts of electromagnetic radiation. This is the same radiation that X-rays and microwaves give off, that could lead to tumor growth if received in large quantities. Nevertheless, the World Health Organization alerts us that cell phone usage could have the possibility to cause cancer.

According to the Pew Internet Project, 44% of cell phone owners have slept with their phone next to their bed in order to make ensure that they didn’t miss any important calls or texts. Although we live in a world that’s now obsessed with cell phones and social media, it’s time to start putting our health first. Sleeping without a phone can avoid numerous problems.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/reasons-sleep-phone-bed/story?id=24839804#

A study published in the British Journal of Psychology, by a group of French scientists, shows that the more drunk you are the more awesome you perceive yourself. In the first study they conducted, they had drinkers at a bar rate how attractive they are. The more alcohol a person ingested the higher they rated themselves in awesomeness.

The second experiment consisted of a staged “taste test”, in which participants were given cocktails with alcohol and some without. Half of the group was told that they were given alcohol, while the other half was told that they were given a “mocktail.” The volunteers then wrote and delivered speeches in which they rated how bright, funny, and original, they considered themselves to be as orators. The team along with 22 university students compared the ratings, and the results were saddening. Apparently, “according to the independent evaluations (Carpenter)” none of them were actually drunk. However, just thinking they were drunk caused them to consider themselves more attractive.

I really did not agree with this experiment. Yes, their results are consistent with their hypothesis; however, because the experiment was so small, the results could be due to pure chance. In my opinion they could make the experiment better by expanding the number of participants and the length. Then they might have a clear conclusion that shows how the independent variable(the alcohol) positively affects the dependent variable(self-esteem).

Carpenter, Meridith, and Lilian Fritz-Laylin. “Drunken Attraction Is Put to the Test.” Discovery Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2014. <http://discovermagazine.com/2014/jan-feb/drunken-attraction-is-put-to-the-test>.

Most people avoid “fat” at all costs. The word has a negative connotation and elicits bad feelings. It makes sense then that people would be afraid to eat fat in fear of gaining fat. However, fat is an essential element of our diet and, the right kind in the right amount, proves extremely beneficial to our diet and overall health.

Fats and lipids offer many benefits such as energy and insulation. However, in order to gain these health benefits, you need to be consuming the right kinds of fats. One should avoid saturated fats and trans fats and replace them in favor of monounsaturated fats and polyunsaturated fats instead.

Saturated fats and trans fats are a risk factor for heart disease. The reason these two types of fat are bad is because they increase LDL or “bad” cholesterol. LDL is bad because it brings cholesterol to the body’s cells. HDL is “good” cholesterol because it carries cholesterol to the liver. Saturated fats are bad because they increase LDL but they do also increase HDL. Trans fats are even worse than saturated fats because they increase LDL and decrease HDL simultaneously. Saturated fats can be found in butter, meats and milk. Trans fats are found in a lot of pre-packaged foods such as fried foods, baked goods, etc.

There are many substitutes for these “bad” fats. It is best to exchange these fats for monounsaturated fats and polyunsaturated fats. Examples of monounsaturated fats are avocados, some types of oils and some types of nuts. Examples of polyunsaturated fats are vegetable oils, nuts and seeds.

Overall, fats should make up 20-35% of our daily intake of calories. This amount is essential for proper body functioning. By choosing these “good” fats we can best help reduce our risk for cardiovascular disease and other diseases as well. Consequently, we will not get fat from eating fats if we eat the right kind of fats and eat them in the right amounts.

Works Cited

“Fats and Cholesterol: Out with the Bad, In with the Good.” Harvard School of Public Health. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Oct. 2014. <http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fats-full-story/>.

Understanding Nutrition. 13th ed. N.p.: Cengage, n.d. Print.

We have all been through it. We watch a sad movie, we get into an argument, or we go through a bad break up; then we try to alleviate our pain with comfort foods. For some reason it is a universal belief that by indulging in your favorite foods you can relieve some of your anxiety. However, this may be just a myth. After much research scientists found that this so-called comfort food makes you feel just as good as regular food would.

To find this conclusion they CONDUCTED AN EXPERIMENT OF COURSE! They had participants watch sad movies. After the viewing the sad films they had the volunteers eat “either a comfort food, an “equally liked non comfort food,” a neutral food, or no food and then measured how their moods changed.”

In another study they had to complete and online survey, in which they indicated their comfort food and a variety of “comparison foods.” About a week prior of taking the questionnaire, the participants watched negative films to induce bad mood. After, they were split into two different sessions. In one of the sessions the volunteers were served their comfort foods. The next session was broken into 4 groups. The first group was served regular food; the second group was served a neutral food; the last two groups were not given any food at all.

In both studies, the results showed that the comfort food does help in changing moods, but just as much as other foods or no foods. They concluded with the idea that people seek out their own foods while in negative moods and they continue to stand by this. When in reality it does not. So the next time you are feeling bad instead of stuffing your face with a whole pint of Ben and Jerry’s try eating something a bit healthier.

The independent variable in this study was a bit weak. I do not agree with them inducing negative moods, by films. I think the experiment would have been successful if it were more personalized.

“Accordng to Science, there’s no such thing as comfort food.” Discover Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2014. <http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/seriouslyscience/2014/10/14/comfort-food-actually-comforting-food/#.VEpDRFXF_1U>.

Usually after a hot day in the sun or a long work out session most people are going to tend to grab an ice cold drink to help them cool down.  I know I personally enjoy cold water after a hot day but sometimes it feels like it does nothing to help cool me down.  Is this because drinking a hot drink can actually help cool us down more effectively than a cold drink?  A neuroscientist from the University of Cambridge, Peter McNaughton, explains that we have nerve receptors in our mouths and tongues which receive signals from different things.  Surprisingly enough our tongues have an abundance of this special receptor called TRPV 1which responds to heat (Palca).  So naturally if you are going to drink something hot, these receptors are going to send a signal to your brain.  Your brain will then know that the sensation your tongue is feeling is hot.  Once the brain gets this signal, it turns on our cooling mechanism to cause us to sweat more (Palca).  If you think about it, this makes a lot of sense.  We want our bodies to cool down faster and usually sweat is the best way to do so.  If we want to sweat more, then why wouldn’t we do something to cause that?

from graytcoffeehouse.com

I think this was a very interesting way to look at how we can have misconceptions about things in our bodies.  People all around the world drink tea and coffee even if it is hot outside.  It is probably a good idea that they do because it just be might be helping them to cool down.  It would be really compelling if we could do a study with two groups of people, one who drinks cold drinks after feeling hot, and the other who drinks hot drinks after feeling hot.  The subjects could then record how long it took for them to cool down.  It would have to be a well designed study to get the right results.  But, there still could be some questions, such as does this work in every situation or is this helpful for every person?  So, next time you are really hot, try drinking a hot drink instead and see if this actually helps cool down more than a cold drink.

Works Cited

Palca, Joe. “Cool Down With A Hot Drink? It’s Not As Crazy As You Think.” NPR. NPR, 11 Jan. 2012. Web. 24 Oct. 2014. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/07/11/156378713/cool-down-with-a-hot-drink-its-not-as-crazy-as-you-think>.

I felt this article was relevant to write because now being a student in college, there are more unhealthy foods surrounding me than healthy. I’ve encountered a few small break outs at school that have never happened to me at home.  Everyone says that greasy and a variety of junk foods can cause break outs. I wanted to know if this was true or if it was just a myth.

In order for acne to occur, your pores and open hair follicles become clogged with various things such as oil, bacteria, and dead skin cells. Our faces are one of the few parts of the body the body with the most oil glands, therefore break outs tend to occur here more often. Acne is known as a bacterial reaction to those pores clogging up. Mayo Clinic wrote an article describing  acne, how it forms, symptoms, and causes for acne. After their studies they wrote in this article that greasy foods and chocolate are NOT causes of acne, but certain foods which increase blood sugar are. Some of the foods they’ve listed that can trigger acne are bread, bagels, chips, and various products that are rich in dairy and carbs.

On Acne.org, people post about their encounters with acne and experiment they have conducted to attempt to make their acne go away. Jo, a user on this site, posted about her dietary experiment to sustain from dairy, sugar, grain, and most processed foods. Jo would eat more vegetables and healthier products hoping it would make her skin clear up. She posted that a week into this diet, her skin still looked the same. She only started seeing a difference in her skin after taking certain vitamins and medicines for acne and to decrease the oil production on her skin.

After examining this information and Jo’s diet experiment, you can conclude that the greasy food causing acne statement is a myth. Changes in hormones, certain medications, make up products, fascial cleansers, and grain/ dairy products are what can be causing an individual to get acne.

Sources

1.) http://www.acne.org/messageboard/blog/4070/entry-26139-diet-experiment-for-oily-skin/

2.) http://www.acne.org/messageboard/blog/4070/entry-26139-diet-experiment-for-oily-skin/

When I was young, still living in a house with my parents and not a dormitory, I was forced to do chores. I believe that the majority of the kids around my age were also told to take out the trash, clean your room, wash the dishes and even dust the living room. I was told to do the latter a lot, but mostly because my mom was sensitive to dust. She would start to uncontrollably sneeze, and she would immediately have to stop dusting. I always wondered why this was. Why was my mother so sensitive to dust, while I was almost immune to its sneeze causing powers?

Apparently, dust is not just one thing. It is the combination of a million things. The range of dust could go from dead skin cells, dead hair, or even space rocks. Does that mean my mother could be potentially allergic to space rocks? Some scientists have researched the idea of these space rocks being harmful. However, the only thing that they’ve found is that most space rocks contain an amazing amount of organic material.

Therefore, it’s extremely unlikely that my mom is allergic to the teeny tiny space rocks that could possibly be found in house dust. Although it would be cool to think that you are allergic to materials that fall millions of miles to our Earth and wind up on our living room floor. Sadly, my mom is most likely sensitive to the hair particles or dead skin cells that she would inhale while dusting off the table in the living room.

Next time you decide it’s a chore to dust your house, think about all of the potential dead skin and space dust that you could encounter!

http://www.space.com/24720-space-dust-life-building-blocks.html

http://www.highlightskids.com/science-questions/what-dust-made

Ever heard of a no-carb diet? Ever tried it? A lot of people think that a quick way to lose weight is to cut carbohydrates out of their diet. One such popular version of this diet is the Atkins diet, in which you initially cut out carbohydrates and then slowly, over time, add them back in. Sure this diet may work in the short-term, but it is not sustainable in the long run. Most people do not even realize the dangers of cutting carbohydrates or the consequences of doing so.

Carbohydrates are the body’s main source of energy. They provide energy that promotes both, proper brain and muscle function. They also provide an important source of dietary fiber and play an important role in our diet.

Consequently, carbohydrates are essential to a healthy diet. In order to prevent our bodies from turning to our muscles for energy, we must consume enough carbohydrates in a process known as protein-sparing. When we consume too little amounts of carbohydrates, our body begins to convert the amino acids from the protein we consume into glucose, and thus changing the proteins original function. When protein is sacrificed for energy a process known as deamination occurs. Essentially, we need carbohydrates in our diet so that, when we do eat protein, that protein can be used for its actual function rather than as a means for energy.

There are what are considered to be “good” carbohydrates and then there are those considered to be “bad.” Good carbohydrates are those found in whole fruits, vegetables, whole grains and legumes. By eating these good grains, you can keep your body healthy and ultimately prevent disease. However, “bad” carbohydrates are those found in refined foods and can take a serious toll on one’s weight-loss journey.

Overall, if looking to lose weight, there is no need to cut out carbohydrates completely! This will only hurt your body as it will force it to use muscles for energy. Instead, substitute those “bad” carbohydrates for “good” ones to keep your body strong, healthy and ultimately help you in your weight-loss journey!

Works Cited

“Low-carb diet: Can it help you lose weight?” Mayo Clinic. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Oct. 2014. <http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/weight-loss/in-depth/low-carb-diet/art-20045831>.

Understanding Nutrition. 13th ed. N.p.: Cengage, n.d. Print.

I was searching through Discovery Magazine and I read this interesting experiment titled, “Sleeping Brains Understand words.” The experiment was conducted by a group of French neuroscientists. In the experiment “Volunteers were asked to perform a word categorization task: spoken words were played to them and they had to press a button with their left hand (say) if the word was a kind of animal, or press a button with their right hand if it was an object (Neuroskeptic).”
The twist to this experiment was that it was conducted in a quiet, dark room, so it could help the participants fall asleep. To actively continue the task while the participants were sleeping they had been connected to EEG machines “to record brain electrical activity” before the experiment commenced. Because of the EEG data they recorded while awake, neuroscientists were able to track whether they were using the right side of their brain or the left side. (This is important to know because the left hand is controlled with the left side of the brain and vice versa).
The awesome thing to note is that the sleeping brains produced the “correct responses to the stimuli”, or how an awake and active brain would respond. This led to the conclusion that the brain can perform a high- level language task while asleep.
After reading this article, I was utterly astounded. I started to wonder what other activities one may be able to purse while asleep. I wondered if listening to languages while asleep could affectively help someone learn a language. I also wondered if this could be an affective studying technique in general. If this turned out to be an effective strategy it could probably increase retention rates incredibly.
Neuroskeptic. “Sleeping Brains Understand Words.” Discovery Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2014. <http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2014/10/03/sleeping-brains-understand-words/#.VEnXxFXF_1U>.

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.

Sunny D(ioxins)

I remember my best friend’s mother yelling at me one day for trying to drink a water bottle I left in the car. The water bottle was only sitting in the car for about an hour, and I was thirsty. Her claim was that the sun’s rays gave my water cancer. It seemed ridiculous, and I was still thirsty. Now that I’m older, I constantly wonder if the sun’s rays shining into my water bottle really can induce cancer.

Most online sites say this is a myth. The original claim is that the sun’s warmth react with chemicals, such as dioxins and BPA’s, in the plastic of the water bottle, which then leak into the water, so when you drink the water you drink the cancer-inducing chemicals. According to Michael Trush, PhD, and Prevention: “Plastics do not contain dioxins, and the sun’s rays are not strong enough to create them.” However, Prevention also states that BPA’s in plastic might have estrogenic effects which can cause cancer. Most water bottles are BPA-free, though. And even if you are not drinking out of a BPA-free water bottle, it is still only a theory.

At this point it seems like this claim is completely false. Like I said before, most websites agree. However, there is not any evidence that says leaving a water bottle in your car does not cause cancer. In theory, it does not, but there is no actual evidence against it. There is research currently being done to either prove or disprove the theory, but these are not publish yet and may not even be well-designed. Since there is no evidence completely ruling out that cancer can be caused by drinking from a hot water bottle, I think we should still take precautions. There are still many variables that have not been considered and several questions we cannot answer.

Dr. Ravi Patel from the Comprehensive Blood and Cancer Center touches upon this. He explains that there are many types of plastic which can contain Dioxins and BPA but can also be completely safe. His advice is, “don’t want to wait for all the evidence to show you it causes cancer. There’s enough evidence right now that it can be carcinogens. So if it’s easy and simple to avoid the product in your life, you should try to avoid it.” I think this is good advice overall. Unless you’re dying of thirst, there’s no reason to drink water that you left in a car. Also, you could use an aluminum container or glass instead. The sun’s rays into the water are not causing cancer, but it is the reaction of the heat and the plastic that might cause the cancer-inducing molecules to get into your water. It’s a simple precaution. If you want to reduce your risk of cancer, don’t drink out of plastic water bottles that are hot until further evidence implies that it is completely safe.

Can drinking red wine help us live longer?

I think the Neil Diamond, Bob Marley, and the UB40 put it best when they sing “Red, red wine. Stay close to me.” But is aiding a person with getting over their ex all red wine is good for? (That and a terrible hangover the next day is probably what you 21 and overs are thinking right now.) But it is possible that the consumption of red wine helps you live longer too?

According to U.K.’s Mail Online, reservatrol, which is a polyphenol found in grapes and red wine, can increase the lifespan of people by up to 60%. The benefits of reservatrol were tested on animals such as worms. When it was tested on worms, it was found that there lifespan was increased by up to 80%. Women’s Day also believes that reservatrol is a miracle ingredient in red wine. The article states that it has “anti-aging… [and] anti-inflammatory properties.” At this point, I was pretty excited about Red Wine. I continued clicking the citations given in these articles, so I could look deeper into this phenomenon. What I found was very disappointing to say the least.

The link cited by Women’s Day completely contradicted the article. According to the researcher Heather Hausenblas at the University of Florida, “[d]espite numerous clinical studies on resveratrol’s tonic effects on animals, there is little evidence that it benefits human health.” This is because humans and animals, although genetically similar, are very different.

Reservatrol’s claim to fame is that it can reduce the risk of cancer and heart disease, and have anti-inflammatory benefits. A study by Richard D. Semba and colleagues disproves these claims. The Johns Hopkins researchers conducted a test on humans and found that drinking red wine did not help their subjects live longer. The study lasted for 9 years and tested 783 65-year-old women in the Chianti area. Reservatrol levels found in urine had no impact on the subjects’ risks of cancer, cardiovascular disease, or inflammation.

In my opinion, the studies supporting both sides of the issue aren’t too great. The studies claiming that red wine is beneficial for our health only have small tests conducted on animals and word-of-mouth as their evidence. Animals cannot prove that red wine is healthy for humans, because humans have longer lifespans and have the risk of getting many other diseases. These studies do not account for any of these confounding variables. The study by Semba and associates only contained women above the age of 65. These people also lived in the same area. It does not answer these basic questions: could red wine help people if they drank it their entire life? Does red wine help men more than it helps women? Is there an environmental factor prohibiting Reservatrol from working?

There needs to be more research on both ends of the issue in order to come to a valid conclusion. What I got out of this is that if I want to drink a glass or two of red wine when I’m 21, I’m going to! It certainly won’t kill me, it looks really classy, and it could possibly help me live longer. Seems like a win.

As I was engaged in one of my many YouTube marathons, I came upon a video that talked about skin lightening. Apparently a while back, Nigerian pop star, Dencia, had her skin bleached or lightened, and is now the face and owner of a skin correcting cream named “Whitenicious.”

After seeing this video I was utterly baffled As I searched more and more, I found that using skin lighting treatments is actually a common practice. Some of the most famous celebrities such as Nicki Minaj, Tamar Braxton, and Rihanna have had skin lighting treatments performed on themselves. One celebrity named Vera Sidika said she had her skin bleached, because “her body is her business, and she knows that she would make more money light skinned rather than dark skinned.”

Not only is it popular among famous people, but in India and Africa many woman partake in this process. “According to a report published by the World Health Organization (WHO) in June 2012, 77% of women in Nigeria use skin-lightening products.(Economist).” Since then these rates have continued to increase. This is such a common practice; because there is a belief that the fairer you are the more likely you are to succeed in economic, social, and business endeavors. For example in an article I read it said, “about 7 out of 10 men are most likely to pick up a light shaded girl compared to a dark shaded girl, if both of them stand the chance of being equally beautiful (Bemah).”

The agenda of most skin lightening treatments is to decrease the level of melanin that the body produces. For those who do not know melanin is a pigment produced by cells called melanocytes. Melanin is also a very useful protective agent that protects against the harmful rays of the sun. The more melanin you have the darker your skin is. Skin lighteners or bleachers contain active ingredients that reduce the amount of melanin in the skin (WebMd).

I think that if the rate in which more people are using these products does not slow down, then we will see an extensive increase of different skin diseases in the darker population. Also, since some of these creams use harmful products such as mercury, there will be increased levels of mercury poisoning (webmd).

“Beauty in Nigeria: Lighter Shades of Skin.” Economist. N.p., 28 Sept. 2012. Web. 9 Oct. 2014. <http://www.economist.com/blogs/baobab/2012/09/beauty-nigeria>.
Bemah, Abenah. “Why do Black women bleach.” Afroeuro. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Oct. 201.4. <http://afroeuro.org/magazine/?p=3199>.
“Skin Lightening Products.” WebMd. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Oct. 2014. <http://www.webmd.com/beauty/face/skin-lightening-products>.

Source: wvuafm.ua.edu

Have you ever spent money on an incredible experience, such as an unforgettable concert or a travel vacation? Hopefully, the answer to this question is yes. I have often heard that spending money on experiences is much more beneficial than spending money on possessions. However, I have always wondered… Is this really the case? After doing some research, I found that studies do indeed prove this to be true.

In a study designed by Ryan Howell of San Francisco State University, 154 university students were examined. The subjects were asked to answer questions about a purchase “they personally made in the last three months with the intention of making themselves happy.” After answering these questions, it was clear that those who spent money on an experience rather than a new possession demonstrated greater satisfaction and higher levels of long-term happiness.

One reason for this is that the “joy” of acquiring a possession will quickly fade. Often, the most exciting part of a new purchase is the fact that it is new. For example, when one purchases a new car, they are initially thrilled. Ultimately, however, you will see the car each day, and as its newness fades, it will become much less exciting. As expressed by countless psychologists, this is not the case with experiences. Not only do they provide the opportunity for learning valuable lessons, but they also allow for the development of long-lasting memories. This will have an incredibly powerful impact on long-term happiness.

It is also important to note that experiences are typically shared with other individuals, whether it be family members, friends, or a significant other. By purchasing an experience, we are making a valuable investment in relationships, which will make us much happier than any new possession ever could.

This video featuring Harvard Business School Professor Michael Norton explores the question further:

It is clear that experiences often make us emotionally healthier, having a true impact on our long-term happiness. They even have the power to open our minds and shape who we are as a person. These experiences can be even more powerful when they are shared with others. Therefore, if you soon find yourself with a little bit of extra money to spend… Consider an experience!

Most people have most likely heard the rumor that listening to classical music as an infant can make your baby smarter, but is it true? I know for a fact that I did not listen to classical music as an infant, however, I am attending a world class university. Some studies say yes, that for some reason when you are an infant listening to classical music will make you smarter, others say no way.

The initial tests were done by people at University of California Irvine in 1993 and 1995 regarding classical music listened to by college students for a few minutes before a test, they found that that would help students perform better on exams, but what if those students were primed to perform better on their exams anyway just because they happen to get better grades in school or possibly studied many more hours than the people who did not listen to music, in this case, correlation may have not equaled causation.

At Appalachian State University they also did a study on whether or not listening to classical music helps people before an exam and they found that the answer was no, as they were unable to replicate the results.

The question was also asked whether or not playing classical music for unborn babies could help make them smarter. I do not feel that putting headphones to a woman’s fetus could help the intelligence of the unborn child whose ears only recently exist. Neither do studies, studies do show however it may allow the unborn baby to become closer with the mother and maybe allow them to appreciate classical music more than others growing up, but if moms are looking for better grades in college, they may have to look elsewhere.

Unfortunately for parents the results of whether or not listening to Vivaldi, Mozart and Bach can help your kid, but studies don’t show that it hurts the child’s mental growth. So moms are going to keep trying this method regardless of the result because who knows, maybe it does work and science just hasn’t figured it out yet.

http://www.babycenter.com/0_the-mozart-effect-classical-music-and-your-babys-brain_9308.bc

http://www.whattoexpect.com/pregnancy/ask-heidi/week-20/influences-on-the-womb.aspx

http://www.educationoasis.com/resources/Articles/building_babys_brain.htm