As you know, smartphones and mobile devices are widely used and quickly changing the way we can access information, reach audiences, and impact the mobility space.

I found this article particularly interesting because apparently when comparing an iphone 5 to an iphone 6, or even an iphone 6 to an iphone 6 plus, if there were advertisements displayed on both, the iphone 6 plus user will be more likely to be persuaded to purchase the product than the iphone 6. We can infer from the study, that people who viewed video ads on larger screens tended to experience feelings of trust. This study sheds some light on how people may be processing information on slightly larger screens and in fact, people who viewed video advertisements on slightly larger screens had the “feeling of immersion” as if they were inside actually experiencing this virtual reality. As the researcher stated, “If you feel like you’re there, you may be more inclined to trust things more, You feel like you’re almost in the environment, so it must be real.”

The researchers who released their findings in an issue of Human Communication Research, explained how the study suggests consumers want to reflect on how the screen sizes and types of media are affecting them before they buy a product or sign up for a service. Essentially this could be the reason why companies like AT&T, Verizon and Sprint continue to push new (larger) phones on customers when they are in the store.

Researchers recruited 120 undergraduate students in Korea assigning one group an Android smartphone with a 3.7-inch screen and another group an Android smartphone with a 5.3-inch screen. These participants used the smartphones to view a bus schedule, and had to watch an advertisement before shown the bus schedule on the mobile devices. Once the session was finished, participants had to fill out a questionnaire that determined the depth of information processing, the level of trust, and buying intentions.

This article i believe would be considered an experimental study, because out of the 120 recruited undergraduate students in Korea that were used for this study, researchers assigned one group an Android smartphone with a 3.7-inch screen and another group with an Android smartphone with a 5.3-inch screen. The researchers then measured the way people process information/ads on the two different sized smartphones to figure out if buying intentions varied depending on size of mobile device.

The putative causal variable measured in this study would be how people may be processing information on these slightly larger smartphone screens. The putative response variable measured would be the change in buying behavior, and those with the larger screen devices becoming more inclined to purchase a product than those with the smaller screen devices. I found this very interesting and intriguing. Next time you purchase a new larger phone possibly for the holidays, think about the science that goes into the way we process information and the different depths of thinking and the effect it may have from looking at an advertisement.

Works Cited:

http://news.psu.edu/story/382346/2015/11/24/research/bigger-smartphone-screens-can-change-customers-buying-intentions

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/nIG_DAGHJQ4/maxresdefault.jpg

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mar.20080/abstract?systemMessage=Wiley+Online+Library+will+have+be+unavailable+on+Saturday+5th+December+from+10%3A00-14%3A00+GMT+%2F+05%3A00-09%3A00+EST+%2F+18%3A00-22%3A00+SGT+for+essential+maintenance.+Apologies+for+the+inconvenience.

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378720606000899

googleimages.com

June 24^th, 2075.

Imagine you walk into a store, but instead of “Build-a-Bear”, its “Build-a-Baby”.

Cute, right? You get to build your own little baby doll, adorable! It’ll be the perfect little doll you always dreamed of, with curly brown hair, light blue eyes and freckles. Maybe you can actually have a conversation with it, maybe it has real tears… maybe a… real heart?

That’s the questions of the century. Could parents actually choose to genetically modify their baby? The idea is slowly becoming a reality, known as a designer baby.

A designer baby is known as a baby whose genetic makeup has been artificially selected, according to this website.

Today, the science is limited to allowing parents and doctors to screen embryos and genetic disorders and select health embryos, according to Bionet. This science, though sometimes controversial, could reduce the chance that a child is born with a genetic disorder. According to the article, the only two legal processes of advanced reproduction are choosing the sperm to fertilize an egg which in turn determines the sex and genes of the baby, and Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD), which screens embryos for genetic diseases.

However, the future fear is that scientists and doctors will be able to genetically modify the embryo to decide certain “desirable trains or cosmetic characteristics,” in essence a designer baby. Scientists, specifically Dr. Steinberg have recently made rapid advancements in the knowledge of our human genome, as well as the ability to modify and change genes.

Scientists are also developing a method known as Germ Line Therapy, which is though to be able to cure diseases such as Cystic Fibrosis but replacing the certain sects of DNA. Currently, it is illegal to do on humans.

This topic is very common and very controversial. Personally, I believe that this new science goes against the ethics of science, as we’ve commonly discussed in class.

Being able to test the health of a child is a wonderful technological advancement. Being able to prepare parents for the possibility of an underdeveloped or special needs child before they arrive is also great. What is not great is the possibility that a parents could choose the specific traits of their child, including intelligence and athletic abilities. Not only is this unethical, it also poses many questions, such as the limits to this science and where and when this should be allowed. According to an article posted on Livescience, this technology is not too far in the future.

A company known as 23andme and recently awarded a patent to test the ability to choose hair color, athletic aptitude, according to the article (read more about the company here.) This does not change the fact that a child’s personal identity is not dependent on their physical traits. A child could be cloned as a supermodel, and their individual characteristic leads them to be a technician instead.

There are endless pros and cons to this touchy subject. Some pros include: reduced risk of genetic disease, mental conditions, etc., increased life span, prevent future generations from inheriting harmful genes/diseased. The cons include: termination of embryos, a genetic “gap” in society due to lack of diversity, damage gene pool, disregard baby’s choice, loss of individuality.

I am pleased with this research; however, would like these studies to further elaborate on the future regulations that could be posed on this developing science. It is undeniable that our world is ever-changing and that science will continue to pose questions of ethics and morals, but this topic is one that could potentially impact the entire world. I would like to know what the government is doing to work with scientists to develop this new technology, and how the government plans to regulate it. Also, it would be important to note which countries allow for genetic screening, and which are simply opposed to the idea all together. Also, could the future and safety of our children be at risk?

For now, I’m going to continue my life knowing I am 50% my mother, 50% my father and 0% science, even if that means I’m 5’2” with a medium build, frizzy hair and oily skin.

I am the youngest of the three children in my family, or as my mom refers to me as “the baby,” the last one in the household to grow up. I love being the youngest in my family, but then it got me thinking what would it be like to be the middle child.

Middle Child Syndrome

•  The middle child syndrome is a condition in which children born in the middle experience feelings of emptiness, inadequacy, and/or jealousy. Many types of therapists and behaviorists have studied two main causes of this, which is identity crisis and lack of emotional support. It is a big issue when you are the middle child because the child has no idea where he or she fits in. “‘the middle child often feels left out and a sense of, ‘well. I’m not the oldest. I’m not the youngest. Who am I?’ says therapist Meri Wallace .”  Dr. Georgia Michalopoulou claims middle children tend to feel invisible and receive less attention in comparison to the older and younger children. The older children gain the benefits of all the “firsts” that they accomplish, and the younger children are usually spoiled because they are the “baby” of the family. In the grand scheme of things they wonder were they belong because they feel unimportant when growing up. Middle children may even grow resentful when the parents turn their attention to the oldest and the baby. Dr. Alfred Alder first brought the effect of birth order to life, suggesting that birth order has a strong affect on a child’s character.

Sibling Rivalry

Since the middle child in general has to fight for their parent’s attention, they tend to become jealous of their siblings. Dr. Sam Von Reiche has studied the sibling rivalry a middle child feels. The middle child wont get the same type of attention from his or her parents that his other siblings receive for their accomplishments. When he or she “learns to jump rope or hit a baseball, his parents aren’t as excited as they were the first time around with the older child.” There is a point where the middle child will just start to resent the other siblings and the feeling of invisibility will build up and make the middle child lash out in anger.

Personality traits

A mom Holly Schrock says her middle child Maggie is an “attention getter with a mildly rebellious streak.” Middle children tend to be “rebels” compared to their other siblings, an example being Charles Darwin, who was in fact a middle child. Other studies (http://www.everydayfamily.com/the-middle-child-syndrome/?pg=2&internallink=the-middle-child-syndrome#post-1968) look more into personality traits of a middle child. Middle children are usually more outgoing than the older and younger siblings. One theory about this is middle children learn from a young age they need to more vocal in order to get the attention turned onto them. Dr. Sam Von Reiche also states the middle child will probably end up having a well-developed social life and participate in more extra curricular in order to find a place to fit in.

Solutions to stop the Middle Child Syndrome

Obviously, not every single middle child feels this way, but there are enough studies to assume if the parents don’t put in effort a middle child might not feel he or she is getting the attention they deserve. Parents obviously do not mean to be unsupportive towards a child, but it may just happen that way. To fix this problem, the parents must be aware of it, and making sure they give the middle child extra attention to ensure they know that they feel loved. As the youngest, I have never had to suffer or feel this “syndrome” but it makes me wonder if my sister feels that way, and if my parents can do anything to stop it.

Sleep and I have a love-hate relationship. I love to sleep, but I hate it when I oversleep. I love to be well-rested, but I hate when I have to go to sleep just as I begin to get some work done. May the reasons for my sleep issues lie with the traditional sleep cycle that I was taught as a child? Could there be a better way to sleep other than the singular 8-hour sleep that I’ve used all my life?

To start, there are three main types of sleep cycles: monophasic, biphasic, and polyphasic. Monophasic sleepers usually sleep between 7-9 hours a day during their one sleep. Biphasic sleepers usually sleep around 6-8 hours, having two 3-4 hour sleeps a day. Finally, and most controversially, polyphasic sleepers can, allegedly, sleep as little as 2-4 hours a day on certain sleep cycles that require several separate naps. Of course, you are probably wondering how such a promise could be kept. The theory about polyphasic sleep cycles is based on the idea that taking short naps can trick our brains into entering REM sleep faster than it would with one long sleep. REM sleep is the most important part of sleeping, so to reduce the other parts of sleep, we might be able to condense the entire process into a much shorter amount of time with no problems, in theory. This infographic from Dreams, a United Kingdom bed retailer and manufacturer, does a great job of spelling it all out but is too large to put in this blog.

The two most popular examples of polyphasic sleep cycles are the Uberman, a cycle that requires six 20-30 minute naps a day; and the Everyman, which requires one long “core” sleep along with 3-5 shorter naps a day. These two polyphasic cycles have been given quite of bite of attention online due to their promise of an increase in waking hours with no adverse side-effects, and if you go on Youtube and search for either you are sure to find videos documenting many peoples’ attempts to try and make these sleep cycles work. The key word is “attempts.” People who attempt to switch to a polyphasic sleep cycle often have a two week period of struggle known to the internet community as the “adaptation period.” Many, such as this poor bloke, fail to apply either the Uberman or the Everyman past this period and end up returning to monophasic.

Some, though, do make it through to the other side and these people could not be happier. This go-getter, whose YouTube channel is suitably called BeYourPotential, is just the type of motivated, young person who might want to make something like polyphasic sleep work. He did, in fact, make it work for thirty days, but eventually fell off the boat once he accidentally drank some caffeine and missed a nap, throwing off his entire sleep schedule. Many others online say that they made polyphasic sleep work for them, but could not continue due to the contrast between their schedules and the rest of the world. Even if polyphasic is more efficient, it certainly is not realistic.

But could a polyphasic sleep cycle be more natural for humans than monophasis or biphasic? Many animals are polyphasic, and even human babies sleep with a polyphasic cycle before they eventually conform to the rest of the world. But how could it be more natural when so many on the internet have such a difficult time adapting to it? Surely our bodies would be quicker to reform if our current monophasic cycles were really that bad for us. Scientist and researcher Thomas Wehr authored a paper on an experiment in which subjects were exposed to sixteen and ten hours of light a day. Wehr found that as the amount of light was reduced, subjects began to sleep in biphasic cycles with about one to three hours in between the sleeps. Could the true, natural sleep cycle for humans be the less controversial biphasic sleep cycle instead of the Uberman or the Everyman? Some Hispanic countries have even made biphasic sleep a part of their culture, incorporating a daily siesta after a mid-day meal. Interestingly, a resource from the Division of Sleep Medicine at Harvard Medical School tells us that “Afternoon naptime typically coincides with a brief lag in the body’s internal alerting signal.” This signal helps to offset the body’s drive for sleep, and its sudden drop off may be a sign from our body telling us that we need a rest.

Some people, known as short-sleepers, do not need and afternoon nap and barely even need sleep at all. According to Ying-Hui Fu, a professor at the University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, these short-sleepers need only about six hours a sleep a day and tend to be much more ambitious and energetic than the average person. A paper published in Science in 2009 by Fu revealed that people you are qualify as short-sleepers have a mutation in the gene known as DEC2 that makes them require less sleep than the rest of us. Making up about one-percent of the population, these super-humans could probably pull of polyphasic sleep better than the average person because of the decreased effects of sleep deprivation that they would experience. I’m pretty jealous.

The worst part about this is that we don’t really have a chance to try out the more complex sleep cycles because we, as college students, have hectic schedules that are constantly changing. When taking on something like the Uberman, one missed nap can completely ruin everything. Regardless, it is known that a large number of the world’s greatest geniuses have tried polyphasic sleep at one time or another. Somehow the likes of Nikola Tesla and Leonardo Da Vinci made such rigorous schedules work for them. Just know that before you try any of this for yourself, you should talk to your doctor about the risks and dangers that sleep deprivation can cause to you. If you are not in peak physical condition there is a large chance that the consequences may be much worse than being a little sleepy. Stay safe, and thanks for reading.

In our current world of technology, someone will say something impossible, like “I bet we can’t turn sugar into electricity”. However, it seems that time and time again, technology and science prove us humans wrong. The concept of MFC, or microbial fuel cells, is nothing too new, however, we are making strides in this field, and in the future, MFC can be the answer to renewable energy and pollution.

Microbial fuel cells create electricity by using bacteria, and the process mainly involves feeding bacteria, and then imitating bacterial behavior and its metabolic processes, which in turn create electricity. Almost any microbe can be used to convert chemical energy into currents, and was first developed using platinum electrodes and E.coli cultures in 1910 by Potter. This early work did not generate much interest into the field until the 1980s, when it was discovered that mediators could be used to greatly enhance electrical output. Since renewable has become one of the primary concerns of our world, MFC has seen has a surge in experiments done and the field has made great strides in development.

MFC has numerous benefits over normal fuel. Because MFC uses microorganisms, operation of the fuel cells is quite flexible. Because microbial organisms “can derive energy from many different types of fuel”, these fuel cells can be used and are convenient for situations where refined fuels like petroleum are not available. Using metabolic processes as catalysts to produce energy also negates the production of any harmful byproducts, like carbon monoxide. This makes it useful and much safer to experiment with this type of fuel.

A lot of experiments have seen MFC used in various situations. A primary use for MFC is wastewater management, and has begun to make their way to municipal levels. MFC have also been used to power low-power networks of sensors, which was demonstrated in the operation of a gastrobot, which works by feeding it sugar. Another interesting proposal for the use of MFC is the powering of rural communities, with no ready access to electricity. If this application comes to be true, rural communities in developing could have ready access to electricity, which has countless uses, and can develop our world even further.

A recent development in the field is the work of Chinese students, which used a variety of modified bacteria to produce 80 hours of electrical output. This is a large leap in terms of science, as this MFC experiment is the first to use a combination of microbes to power the fuel cell, and is reported to be more stable than wind and solar power. The team hopes to continue their work, and is working to make their MFC smaller and more efficient, both in terms of electrical capacity and electrical output time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGg3jKiqZ9o

What impossible task will science achieve next?

Photo #1

Have you even had to think about it? Do you think the certain style has affected you in any sort of way? Well there’s a chance it has. Different parenting styles whether its strict or easy have been shown to effect kids behavior and especially there performance in school. I wanted to see if there were differences between parenting styles and compare them against the performance of their kids.

In one research done they surveyed 148 high schools across demographics and races. The grade level of the students also varied from 10th-12th graders. They tested the students with a questionnaire to measure the students’ perception of their parents parenting style and The Intrinsic and Extrinsic Orientation scale was used to measure the students’ motivation. The conclusions were that different parenting styles correlate but are not a causation of the academic achievement of a student.  Just as we learned in class on correlation, the researchers found that the parenting styles that were motivating and positive resulted in their kids have higher academic success. These kids also set higher goals for themselves and had more self-confidence. 

So, here is a little psych100 background for everyone. There are three categories of parenting styles that psychologists have put parents under. Authoritarian, where parents impose rules and expect strict obedience. It stems from the “because I said so” line. Authoritative parenting is where the parents are demanding but also responsive and rewarding to there kids. They compromise and listen. Permissive parenting submits to the child’s demands.  So how does this relate to academic performance/success? In this research done they tested kids from with parents from each of these categories. They found that authoritarian and permissive parenting styles negatively affected kids grades and were associated with those bad grades. Families with the authoritative parenting style have the average of the highest grades while the other families with the other parenting styles had the lowest. This really shows how much parenting can affect a kid’s grade.

The relationship with the parent and also the style can have a negative effect on a kid along with a positive. In this study  it showed that the authoritarian (strict and unengaged) and permissive (adolescent decides) parenting styles led to the kids being the least well adjusted, having depressive symptoms and acting out.

It is pretty evident that there is a correlation between parenting styles and students’ academic pressure. One article states, “When children consider their parents to be legitimate authority figures, they trust the parent and feel they have an obligation to do what their parents tell them to do.” This makes sense compared to the previous studies. Children feel more responsibility to their parents when they act like a combination of all three parenting styles, A little demanding, a little giving into the children’s demand, and a little rewarding. This is proven to be the best method for parents. Parents who tend to act like this have children who respect them more and feel more responsible for doing well in school than feeling pressured.

Some questions one should be thinking about after reading this blog are what is your parent’s parenting type? Are they more Authoritarian, Permissive, or Authoritative? Do you feel pressured to do well in school? Or do you feel that you owe it to your parent’s to do well in school?

I know today that modern gaming has become so advanced that it almost looks real with the advances in technology. Although video game addiction has not been proven as an actual illness the signs and symptoms of a person who is allegedly addicted to video games have many correlations with the symptoms of someone addicted to drugs.

What exactly is addiction? According to a medical dictionary, addiction is a persistent, compulsive dependence on a behavior or substance. Addiction is a neurological disorder that affects the dopamine intake and uptake within the brain. When someone engages in a pleasurable acts, the brain then activates dopamine producing neurons which travel from the ventral tegmental area (VTA), which is located mid brain and is rich in dopamine and serotonin neurons. Dopamine then travels to the synaptic space, the space between neurons. Then dopamine molecules travel to the dopamine receptors on the receiving neuron. After then dopamine travels back through the synaptic space through a protein named dopamine transporter and back to the transmitting neuron.

In the case of a person addicted to drugs, the drug indirectly triggers a dopamine release in the VTA that is much more powerful and releases more molecules then it would naturally. Addictive drugs such as heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine, or MDMA blocks the dopamine transporter so when dopamine travels back through the synaptic space the transmitting neuron can not retain the dopamine molecules that was releases from the VTA.

The National Center for Biotechnology Information took 19 healthy males, ages 18-23. All of which were pre-screened, had medical examinations, and underwent MRI scans in case anything happened to them. They were asked to play an online computer game for 60 minutes a day for 10 days for a total of 600 minutes. Six of the men played the game for over 900 minutes. The results from the MRI scan show that of the six men who played the game for 900 minutes or more, all of them had increased brain activity significantly in six clusters of the brain compared to the general population. Of those six clusters, three of them are directly related to craving or desire. These areas of the brain are also active in a person who addicted to drugs. This is just a correlation though and doesn’t answer if the brain is just reacting to the computer game or if the game actually changes the brain to spark addiction.

Some of the side effects also correlate with that of a someone addicted to drugs such as migraines, disturb sleeping patterns, restlessness, eating irregularities, and fatigue. Although that may not seem like many the graph below shows a group that played violent video games extensively for two weeks and another group who didn’t play any video games. You can see that there is little to no brain activity going on while trying to control behavior compared to those that played no video games. I think this could be a possible correlation with drug addiction when there is a block in the dopamine transporter and the brain is flooded with dopamine with no way to uptake the dopamine molecules back through the neuron to the VTA that it was transmitted from.

Works Cited:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3039876/

http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/addiction

Video Game Addiction Symptoms, Causes and Effects

http://www.acadianaaddiction.com/addiction/cocaine/symptoms-signs-effects

Music is an amazing thing. It can make you dance, sing, or even feel. In this blog post, I will investigate the last of those three, and see if there is any scientific evidence that shows how music affects our emotions.

According to a study done at the University of London, Music can affect how we see images, and the emotions that we correlate with them.

In the experiment, 30 subjects were presented with a series of happy or sad musical excerpts. After listening to the snippets, the subjects were shown a photograph of a face. Some people were shown a happy face – the person was smiling – while others were exposed to a sad or neutral facial expression. The participants were then asked to rate the emotional content of the face on a 7-point scale, where 1 mean extremely sad and 7 extremely happy.

The researchers found that music powerfully influenced the emotional ratings of the faces. Happy music made happy faces seem even happier while sad music exaggerated the melancholy of a frown.

This study was done on a group of 30 people, 15 male and 15 female, with an average age of 26.1, who were a part of this experiment with no cash incentive at all. I believe this group is a good example of a random sample, and there is little possibility of bias here. This experiment shows that there is in fact, an impact that music has on us, but it offers no sort of mechanism. While this study is useful to this blog, it is far from the end of my research.

One Professor Daniel Levitin believes that he has the solution to this issue. Professor Levitin is both a neuroscientist and a composer, so he has expertise on both ends of the spectrum necessary in this blog, so I am more than inclined to believe him. Levitin believes that the fact that the parts of the brain that control language, emotion, and memory are all linked, and work together to process music.

In this study, 834 participants were given a list of 129 functions of music, and rated them. The results of this study were as follows:

“People listen to music to regulate arousal and mood, to achieve self-awareness, and as an expression of social relatedness. The first and second dimensions were judged to be much more important than the third—a result that contrasts with the idea that music has evolved primarily as a means for social cohesion and communication.”

This study was done on a group of volunteers who had the chance to win a tablet computer, but there is little room for bias because the tablet was awarded based on a random drawing, and the responses of the volunteers had nothing to do with their chances. The group of volunteers ranged from ages 8 to 85, and was 57% female, which is a pretty representative sample of the population as a whole. Once again, mood was measured as one of the most important functions of music, which further proves that music has a large impact on one’s mood, but still the mechanics of this remain a mystery to me.

This scientific journal, however provides at least an elementary explanation. Apparently, the tempo of the music is often what causes a shift in mood. When one is listening to music, they usually breathe in time with the music, whether they notice it or not, says the study. Because respiration and the cardiovascular system are so closely linked, this affects the heart rate as well. All of this together results in “an impact on a variety of neurophysiological systems in many ways similar to emotion-induced physiological changes.” This provides ample explanation that music is able to change our mood, and finally provides some sort of mechanism.

After researching extensively, I have found that music does affect our mood, and I have come across a process in which it does so. I would consider this blog to be a success due to this, and I hope it provides some insight into you music and mood choices. Happy listening!

I have a habit: eating too fast. I never notice that how long it takes to eat my meal but I am always the first one to finish my meal. It is common that my stomach feel so heavy because of eating too fast. And sometimes I eat so fast that I even feel a little headache and unable to think. I know it must be a bad habit which will must do harm to my health in a long run. So today I want to learn more about the harm of eating too fast and how to change it.

picture is found here

First, I found a study which presents eating more quickly may be a factor in the development of Type 2 diabetes.The study is held in 2012 in Florence, Italy. Lithuanian researchers, including Lina Radzeviciene, MD, PhD, an endocrinologist asked subjects to fill out a questionnaire about how quickly they ate compared with those around them (their choices were faster, the same and slower). And what they discovered is that “participants who said that they ate “faster” were 2.5 times as likely to have type 2 diabetes as those who said that they ate “slower.”” There are 234 adults with diabetes and 468 without.

It is an observational study which shows the correlation between eating too fast and diabetes.But in this study, we may not rule out the third variables since the study is neither large enough nor randomly, the data did not consider gender, age. The subjects are all only picked in a European country and the conclusion is rely on their own answer which lacks scientific mechanism for measuring eating speed. Reverse causation seems to be impossible, but “it could be that some underlying trait, such as some hormonal effect, leads independently to both a ravenous appetite and diabetes.”

Although this study might have a lot of limitations, I found a mechanism may explain how eating too fast causes diabetes. After meals, blood sugar levels go up. If it is too high that may injure blood vessels and nerves, which will cause diabetes. And people need enough insulin to manage the carbohydrates they eat, so that it can make blood sugar in a normal level. The fast you eat,the faster sugars will get into your blood because body’s insulin do not have enough time to catch up. And it will become a negative feedback loop, which finally may cause the type2 diabetes. But as mentioned in class, mechanism is not always crucial to know and the insulin produced may be influenced by the third variables but not only the speed you eat.

 picture is found here

Except the potential correlation between eating too fast and diabetes, there are other negative effect of eating too fast. For instance, you might eat too much because your brain need time to recognize that you had enough food. Overeat causes obesity, which has long been recognized as one of the main causes of the illnesses.  So, it is time to change your eating habit, if you always found you are the first one finish meals on the table like me, maybe you should think about slowing down. Enjoy your time having delicious food and the time spent with your friends and families.

If you want to learn more about why you shouldn’t eat too fast:

You want it, and –even worse- you can’t have it. As we all begin to get sick with viruses such as the flu, we don’t think too much about it because we presume we will be fine to just go down to University Health Services and get antibiotics! But, that’s not the case.

At the presentation Andrew had us go to for extra credit, Pete Hudson talked to us for a majority of it about how the overuse of prescription antibiotics by doctors is out of control. He along with many others are trying to get physicians to stop giving out such an abundance of antibiotics to children and even more so students. His example was about our own University Health Services and how 50% of the time, a student leaves with antibiotics when in all reality, the antibiotics aren’t going to help them with their virus, and it’s something they must just overcome through sleep and hydration.

So the other day, it occurred to me, can we really be getting prescribed too many antibiotics, what’s harm of too many antibiotics, and why are doctors over prescribing them if so?

According to the BMJ, study researchers conducted an observational study on the efficiency of both hospital and general practitioners’ records of current drug treatment in consecutive patients who attended a general medical clinic. They found either the hospital or general practitioner’s records (which were obtained in a questionnaire), or both, were inaccurate for over 70% of 59 patients interviewed with their medicine. Most of the errors were due to patients taking drugs in addition to the one’s shown on their medical records, some of them being taken inappropriately, and seemed unnecessary for the condition they had. It appeared to the study researchers that neither the hospital doctors nor general practitioners were fully aware of the drugs their patients were taking, and this meant overprescribing. This study shows that people everywhere are being overprescribed medicine. While 70% is a significant percent, this is observational, which as we know from class isn’t as strong as experimental, and the study has a low sample size. It would be interesting to conduct an experiment to test our doctors, and see their reasoning behind the medicine they prescribe. Additionally, there doesn’t seem to be a known mechanism behind why doctors are overprescribing, and as Pete Hudson mentioned to us it is out of control. It comes as a risk to many if doctors don’t know patient history, because if the patient has pre-existing medical conditions, prescribing the patient with the medication could hurt them.

Study 2, done by Donald R. Miller, and Avron Spiro III, evaluated 1,648 in a longitudinal study of male veterans. The study was an analysis of self-reported questionnaire data. The participants listed each of their medications with indication, missed doses, adverse reactions, and whether their amount of medication was “too much, the right amount, or too little.” The questionnaire also included questions about medication adherence, problems with medications, common symptoms, and screening questions for a number of chronic conditions. Of the 1,256 participants and their responses, 80% of them had taken medication within 4 weeks and 40% of them state they were taking too much. This study concluded patient perception of overmedication does in fact correlate with the self-report of decreased compliance. This meaning overall, these veterans were being prescribed too much medicine, and for all we know they could have been prescribed the wrong medicine as well. Additionally, as we talked about in class, we must consider whether this is generalizable to the public at large.

Moreover, as we continue to get prescribed antibiotics when not needed, our body starts to build a resistance to them, time and time again. Our physician thinks we need the antibiotic to make our sickness go away but in all reality the antibiotic doesn’t get rid of the virus. According to the CDC, antibiotic resistance occurs when germs outsmart drugs. The CDC has also found that widespread overuse and incorrect prescribing practices are a significant part of what is fueling this antibiotic resistance. The CDC recommends healthcare providers similar to UHS to prescribe antibiotics correctly and what they mean by this is get cultures, start the right drug at the right dose for the right duration for the patient. They also recommend that healthcare providers stay aware of antibiotic resistance patterns in their own facilities. The want for the drug in the patient doesn’t necessarily express the need for it by the physician, and this is important.

Lastly, the risk of overuse of a drug isn’t worth the cost. According to the American College of Physicians, studies in hospitals show that more than half of the antibiotics inappropriately used account for 19-34% of the hospitals overall pharmacy budget. Therefore, to be giving out these drugs when they aren’t needed, it seems risky for not only the patient but the hospital too.

Overall, it is important as college students for us to understand that we don’t need antibiotics every time we come down with a cold, because the fact of the matter is, most of the time antibiotics won’t cure the virus like Pete Hudson said, and our body will only continue to build resistance to it. So Next time you go to University Health Services, take a step back and think about it when your doctor tells you, you don’t need medicine. Because as much as you want it~ you can’t have it~ and you don’t need it.

When thinking of the toughest animal in the world many people tend to think of rhinos, wild boars, or bears.  But people often forget that size isn’t what makes animals tough.  According to Google Dictionary the definition of tough is “strong enough to withstand adverse conditions or rough or careless handling; able to endure hardship or pain; physically robust.”  The animal that fits that definition perfectly is the tardigrade.

Picture taken from howitworksdaily.com

The tardigrade is an animal that is only about .5mm-1.5mm in length.  They are a phylum of small invertebrates that were discovered in 1773 by Johann August Ephrain Goeze, a German pastor.  According to Smithsonian.com most tardigrades live “out their days on a moist piece of moss or in the sediment at the bottom of a lake and feeding on bacteria or plant life” (Smithsonian).  However this is not the case for all tardigrades.  Some tardigrades live in much more extreme environments.  Tardigrades have been found living in freezing conditions under layers of ice.  However, they are also found living in the boiling springs of Japan (BBC).  They can survive in temperatures as low as -328 degrees Fahrenheit and as high as 304 degrees Fahrenheit.  They can live without water or oxygen for decades, and withstand x-ray radiation levels that are 1000 times the dose that is lethal for humans.  Tardigrades can also survive the low pressure of a vacuum and pressures that are 6 times higher than the deepest part of the ocean (SERC).  They can also survive a number of other extreme conditions that other animals cannot.  With their ability to survive in such hostile conditions, it is almost unsurprising that tardigrades have even survived a journey through space.  According to BBC, “In 2007, thousands of tardigrades were attached to a satellite and blasted into space.”  Many of those tardigrades survived the trip, and some females even laid eggs that hatched and survived in space.

The way that they survive all these crazy conditions is through a process called cryptobiosis.  “Cryptobiosis is defined as a state in which metabolic activities come to a reversible standstill” (SERC).  This means that tardigrades can go into a death like state where they do not consume any energy.  There are several types of cryptobiosis for different extreme conditions: if there is a lack of water, they undergo anhydrobiosis; if there is an extremely low temperature, they undergo cryobiosis; if there is an increased solute concentration, they undergo osmobiosis; and if there is a lack of oxygen they undergo anoxybiosis (SERC).  The most important part is that they can come out of those states.  For example, a tardigrade can undergo anhydrobiosis and become dehydrated, then they can be revived by being put back into water.

Now it is obvious that the tardigrade is the definition of tough because of its extreme ability to fight through adverse situations despite its tiny size.

Works Cited

Bordenstein, Sarah. “Tardigrades.” Tardigrade. SERC, 23 June 2014. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.

Fox-Skelly, Jasmin. “Tardigrades Return from the Dead.” BBC. BBC, 13 Mar. 2015. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.

MacDonald, Fiona. “The Tardigrade Genome Has Been Sequenced, and It Has the Most Foreign DNA of Any Animal.” ScienceAlert. N.p., 25 Nov. 2015. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.

Stromberg, Joseph. “How Does the Tiny Waterbear Survive in Outer Space?” Smithsonian.com. Smithsonian, 11 Sept. 2012. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.

Shopping can be someone’s outlet of stress or how they cope with problems. Is this actually a form of therapy or do some use it just as an excuse? A recent study shows that a large number of americans have reported shopping to cheer themselves up or used it as a form of celebration. People find it therapeutic to shop and buy thing appealing to them that make them happy. While buying these things, one may be imagining how they will use their new purchase, where they will wear it, or what people will think when they see it. Retail therapy can also be a form of motivation, buying a suit for a new job or having enough money to make something happen. One man described his retail therapy as an “if I build it she will come.” By doing this he mean that he would shop for what he thought his future wife would want and want him to look like. Many may also look at shopping as preparation, easing anxiety. This could be preparation for a baby, a holiday, or even marriage. The more someone feels prepared, the less anxious they will be. So, in a way, shopping is healthy.

However, just as anything can become too much, retail therapy can go too far also. Someone can become addicted to shopping just as they can to drugs or alcohol, making things dangerous. People will become so obsessed with the satisfied feeling or high that they might get from shopping that they need to keep on doing it. Things cost money and when shopping is someones only form of stress relief, they can be spending too much. This can become an issue with credit and can even ruin relationships. This in turn can help nothing meaning the person may end up right where they left off. Maybe retail therapy is not the best kind of therapy.

Recently scientists made a discovery that reveals new information about the ancestry of modern Europeans.  Previously, scientists had believed the genetic make-up of modern Europeans was formed from three different tribes.  However new information reveals that a fourth group contributed to the current European gene pool.

Geneticists had previously been aware of three different groups that influenced the genetic make up of Europe today: Middle Eastern farmers, indigenous hunters, and herders knows as the Yamnaya.  The hunters moved to Europe before the invention of agriculture and primarily lived in Southern Europe during the Ice Age, and then moved to the north after the Ice Age ended.  The farmers arrived some time after hunting group had.  While the farmers who moved to Europe from the Middle East have typically been portrayed as dark skinned, while in actuality they had lighter skin than their European counterparts.  The farmers contributed to the European genome  by providing genetic material that made Europeans taller.

Not much is known about the Yamnaya, a group of herders who originated in Russia and Ukraine.  However the discovery of a new group of European ancestors sheds more light upon their origins.  Scientists had previously been unaware of the ancestry of the Yamnaya, however the discovery of the Caucasus hunter gathers helps to fill in those gaps.  Towards the end of the last Ice Age the Caucasus hunter gathers joined the Yamnaya, contributing their distinctive genetic makeup (the Caucasus hunter gathers were isolated due to the ice age, which led to their unique DNA) to the Yamnaya’s genome.  Eventually the Yamnaya would move into Europe where they would bring their metal working skills and the family of Indo-European languages that would eventually lead to the languages spoken in Europe today.  As much as half of the genetic material of Central and Northern Europeans can be traced back to the Yamnaya.  Because of the location of the Caucasus region, the people living in that area where well suited to influence populations in both Europe and Asia as many people moved through the region to migrate to other places.  Scientists such as Ron Pinhasi from University College Dublin claims that the discovery of this fourth population will continue to influence the fields of paleogeneomics and human evolution in both Europe and Asia.  Hopefully

http://time.com/4114604/human-ancestry-europe-fourth-strand/

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29213892

http://news.sciencemag.org/archaeology/2015/06/nomadic-herders-left-strong-genetic-mark-europeans-and-asians

http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/11/16/Researchers-reveal-Europeans-fourth-ancestral-tribe/9831447685649/

A recent study published by the Proceedings of the Royal Society B on household dust has unearthed some interesting results. This study, the most extensive of its kind, examined the microbiology of household dust from 1,200 people’s homes across the United States. The study used high-tech DNA sequencing technology to discover the number and types of micro-organisms living in the dust. To clarify, the amount of dust in your home is irrelevant, it is the variety of micro-organisms and bacteria living within your household dust that matters. No preferential treatment was given to those with more anal cleaning practices.What researchers found is that the fungi in your home is often closely coordinated to your location. Dust can identify the climate, topography, geology, and geography of the home. Additionally, data taken from the dust can be used to determine whether the house is occupied by males, females, or both. How so?

Dust is comprised of millions and millions of fungi and bacteria. Certain specific bacteria are unique to men, to women, to certain areas, or certain types of landscapes. By mapping the DNA of the dust, researchers are able to identify the many varieties of micro-organisms, which helps them to identify who or what brought those fungi into the house. For instance, men shed more fecal and skin related bacteria, women tend to shed heavy amounts of vaginal bacteria.

How can researchers use this data and these advances to our benefit? For starters. police and investigators plan to use this technology in order to profile suspects with nothing more than a spec of dust. Additionally, Dr. Jonathan Eisen from the University of California at Davis believes dust can be “a reservoir for genes involved in resistance to antibiotics, and much more.” With these encouraging reactions, it appears more studies of this kind will be conducted in the future.

In summation, the millions and millions of micro-organisms found in dust show many indicators of the homes inhabitants. Dust can determine sex, whether the owner has pets, what kinds of pets, how many pets, what the geology of their home looks like, where their home is, and more. As to which sex is dirtier, researchers confirmed that men do in fact shed more bacteria than women. This doesn’t necessarily mean men are dirtier, besides in the bedroom of course. Rachel Adams, a scientist at the University of California at Berkeley had this to say on bacteria being ‘dirty’,

“Recent studies are showing that the buildings where we spend most of our time contain great assemblages of microorganisms that you cannot see, and for the most part, those ‘cohabitants’ of our homes are just along for the ride, neither harmful or offering much benefit.”

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/men-and-women-alter-a-home-s-bacteria-differently/

http://news.discovery.com/human/health/bacteria-in-household-dust-reflect-who-lives-there-150825.htm

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/282/1820?current-issue=y

You likely learned in elementary school that the dinosaurs went extinct because of a huge asteroid hitting the earth. While the impact theory is the most widely accepted theory today, the theory is a bit more complicated than a massive impact killing everything. The impact theory is also still just a theory, and not proven to be fact. This is still a debated topic and there are many other plausible theories circling around the scientific community.

One theory attributes the extinction to climate change. During the dinosaur’s time, scientists believe that the planet slowly became cooler and less humid. This change may have led to the change in vegetation, killing much of the food for the herbivores. When herbivores died out, their carnivorous predators would also follow. The change in vegetation and climate may not have been adaptable for the cold-blooded dinosaurs and caused many of them to die over time. It also makes sense that many species of mammals survived and thrived after the extinction of the dinosaurs. Warm-blooded mammals would able to regulate their internal temperatures and adapt to climate change.

Another theory points to disease. Sea levels had fallen at the end of the Cretaceous period, and land bridges between continents had surfaced, allowing dinosaurs to travel to new continents. Diseases had been present in all regions of life, but in their native areas, dinosaurs had adapted immunity to these diseases. But when the dinosaurs brought these diseases to new areas, the inhabitants of these areas did not have immunity, and were vulnerable to being killed by these diseases. Smaller animals’ survival is explained by the fact that these animals were less capable of making these long intercontinental journeys, and thus did not spread their diseases as much. Blood-sucking insects were also becoming more prevalent during this time. These insects increased the spread of malaria and other pathogens.

Another widely known theory  is that a series of volcanic eruptions caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. Scientists have found lava flows in India that provide evidence of volcanic activity greater than humans have ever seen. Volcanic eruptions would have sent dust and ash into the atmosphere. This debris can stay in the atmosphere for several years. If enough debris collected in the atmosphere during a period of time, sunlight may not have been able to reach the surface of earth. A lack of sunlight would explain the extinction of many plant species. This lack of food would again also cause many herbivores to starve, followed by the carnivores. Blocked sunlight would also cause the climate to be very cold, which again would make it difficult for cold-blooded dinosaurs to survive.

This brings us to the most widely accepted theory, the impact theory. This theory says that the extinction of the dinosaurs was brought on by the collision of a massive meteor with the earth. This theory was first formulated when Luis and Walter Alvarez discovered a thin layer of iridium-rich clay in Italy in 1981. Iridium is an element that is very rare on earth, but if much more common in space. From this, the Alvarezes published the theory that this iridium was brought to earth because a meteor collided with the earth and killed all of the dinosaurs. In 1991, a giant crater with a diameter of 110 miles was found in the Yucatan Peninsula. Scientists believed that the meteor that must have caused this crater would have been 6 miles in diameter. This meteor would have collided with the earth at 40,000 miles per hour, and it would have been 2 million times more powerful than the most powerful nuclear bomb. The intense heat would have caused wildfires across the world, sending ash and dust into the atmosphere, causing similar effects to what the volcano theory describes.

But, there is a newer theory. In October of this year, the journal Science published a study that claims that the extinction of the dinosaurs was caused by a massive meteor and a series of volcanic eruptions at the same time. The scientist in charge, Paul Renne of UC Berkeley says that the impact of the meteor sped up volcanic eruptions worldwide. He says that volcanic activity doubles in the 50,000 years following the impact of the meteor, and that the dinosaurs became extinct within this 50,000 year period. Since this theory claims that the effects of both the impact and the series of volcanic eruptions happened at the same time, the catastrophic circumstances of both theories would be included. The meteor would have had a powerful impact, shaking the earth, creating extreme heat and fires, and sending large amounts of debris into the atmosphere. Many volcanoes would then start erupting worldwide, sending even more debris into the atmosphere. Sunlight would then be blocked from reaching the earth’s surface. The lack of sunlight would kill plants and cause a cold climate that would kill dinosaurs unable to adapt and it would eliminate the food for herbivores, and then carnivores.

The extinction of the dinosaurs is a debate that has gone on in the field of paleontology for hundreds of years. Although we still don’t have a definite answer, we find more and more evidence over time. Someday maybe us humans will face a threat of mass extinction by way of climate change, volcanic eruptions, or meteor impact. Knowing more about the past may help prepare humankind for the future.

After receiving many children patients with healthy bodies but the same cold like symptoms at Nemours Children’s Hospital in Orlando, Florida, Dr. Julie Wei knew something was wrong. Children would come in to her office with cold-like symptoms like a runny and stuffy nose, cough, sore throat, fatigue, and constipation. She received many of these cases, so she decided to look further into each child’s health.

After interviewing the child and parent(s), Dr. Wei found that these children all had a large amount of dairy and sugar consumption daily, mainly before bed. This overabundance of dairy and sugar caused the children to have this sickness, so Dr. Wei decided to call it the “milk and cookie disease.”

Since this disease is just a nickname for the link between high dairy and sugar diets and cold-like symptoms, it was hard for Wei to diagnose at first. She would prescribe medication to the children in hopes that it would solve the problem. The method she used was sort of like the Texas Sharp Shooter problem in that she kept trying different medications until she realized the problem and the solution. According to a FAQ about this illness given by the University of Kansas Hospital, “Milk and Cookie disease causes symptoms that mimic other illnesses.” These illnesses include gastroesophageal reflux and laryngopharyngeal reflux. These ilnesses are caused by late night snacking and cause reflux. The reflux causes pain in the throat which is similar to Milk and Cookies disease.

Dr. Wei predicts that around 50 to 75 percent of children have this disease. A case study on a five year old named Jonathan was done to get a better look at this disease. Jonathan has difficulty sleeping because of his naturally enlarged tonsils, but when researchers found that he was late night snacking and eating foods that were easy on his throat that happened to be mostly dairy products, they concluded that the reflux that he was experiencing and the lack of sleep he was getting was probably more than just his inflamed tonsils. After seeing Dr. Wei, Jonathan’s parents limited his late night snacking and gave him more water, and within 3 weeks everyone noticed a difference.

This disease is very hard to find because the symptoms are similar to those of other sicknesses, but it is there and if it is not addressed, it can lead to unhealthy lifestyles that will lead to more sicknesses. Fox news provided a list of things to do if a parent thing his/her child has Milk and Cookie disease. They wrote, “keep a food journal, stop bedtime snacking, avoid or minimize dairy and sugar in the evening, offer healthy snacks, and treat constipation.” These things can help attack this disease and make you child even healthier. So watch out for those Christmas cookies!

It is common for many people to watch TV or play on their phone before they go to sleep. I am guilty of doing this. I think I have become addicted to watch an episode of One Tree Hill or some other of my favorite shows on Netflix while playing on my phone before bed. I do not know why I do it or how it started, but now I cannot stop. After researching, I have come to the conclusion that the use of electronics before bed is bad for one’s sleep as well as their brain.

I discovered multiple experiments and studies that support the hypothesis that electronics before bed is bad for an individual.

One study performed by researchers from Brigham and Women’s Hospital randomly split up 12 participants into two groups. The first group read a book on an I-Pad four hours before they went to sleep. The second group read the same book but a printed out version. After 5 days, the two groups switched and the people who originally read from an I-Pad were now reading from a print out version. Not surprisingly, the group who read from the I-Pad had a much more difficult time falling asleep. Also, the I-Pad users secreted less melatonin. Melatonin is the hormone that should rise at night and cause sleepiness. Since they had a decreased level of melatonin caused by the bright light of the I-Pad, it took them approximately an hour longer to fall asleep at night. 

Another source, CBSNEWS, states that “ kids ages 11 to 13 slept significantly less when they frequently communicated on a cell phone, surfed the Internet, played video games, watched television, or if they used a computer to study.” This same study found a correlation between sleep deprivation and obesity, depression, difficulty regulating emotions and lower grades. This studied contained 738 students and the researchers asked them about their sleep and technology habits. The results were no surprise. Similar to the previous study, this one also supports my hypothesis. This cannot be a coincidence that multiple studies show the same results. It is important to note that just like in every experiment, third variables can play an important role. These variables could include gender, how old the person is, how long they watch TV for, and if it is an everyday thing.

Lastly, in a survey of 1,508 people, 63 % of them said they are not getting enough sleep at night and 95% of those surveyed said that they used an electronic device within the hour before bed.

It is important to note that the one area that all of these studies agree is that the use of electronics delays the time one needs to fall asleep and that the light from an electronic or television makes the individual less tired. This is because the light from the device makes the body think that it is still daytime. These studies did not address the quality of the sleep. Once asleep, did the individual have a restful sleep? Did this use of electronics impact this as well?

The one point that was proven was that if you wish to fall asleep quickly, , do not use electronics within the hour before bed. More studies need to be performed to see if there are any long-term effects but the facts prove that the light from use of electronics stimulates the brain and makes it more difficult to fall asleep. I know it will be hard to try and not use your phone right before you go to sleep, but I am sure you will fall asleep earlier and get a much better sleep. I am going to try this as well and see what happens. Good-Night!

Mycoprotein has been around since the 70s, and has been increasingly popular across the world as a healthy alternative to foods we currently have in the world since. Proposed as a meat-substitute, Mycoprotein may be the future in terms of healthy eating. Since the 1960s, concerns about food shortages for the world’s ever growing population had already started to sprout in several countries, and investigations began into “the feasibility of creating a process that turned starch into protein using fermentation”. The goal was to find a food source that was sustainable, nutritious, and was tasty. The Rank Hovis McDougall group took it upon themselves to investigate this matter, and in 1967, they discovered an organism called Fusarium venenatum in a garden in Buckinghamshire, England. In 1974, this was renamed to Mycoprotein.

Technically, Mycoprotein is a blend of minerals and Fusarium venenatum, a member of the fungi family. This blend of ingredients comes together to create a product that is supposedly “a source of excellent high quality protein”. Mycoprotein boasts other qualities such as possibly being able to maintain cholesterol levels and also being low in sodium. From these claims, it is simple to see that Mycoprotein could be the new big super food, and could be the answer to the long unsolved question of how to create a meat-substitute that can be healthy and satisfy meat eaters.

Imagine being able to eat a sustainable plant that could be a healthy alternative to meat, which would benefit the individual consuming the Mycoprotein, and also to the environment, as in 2012, it was discovered that all processes involved with cattle (burning fuel for fertilizer to grow feed, creating consumable meat, and also transport, as well as cow “emissions”) were accounting for an increasing amount of greenhouse gas contribution to the world. Mycoprotein could be the answer to cutting meat consumption, which will benefit the world in more ways than one.

But as with all revolutionary foods, Mycoprotein has come under scientific scrutiny. Two studies done in 1993 and 2002 produced results that suggested Mycoprotein had potential negative effects on certain subjects with allergies to mould. The 2002 study, conducted by S J Katona and E R Kaminski, investigated the effects of Mycoprotein consumption on subjects that had an allergy to mould. As Mycoprotein is essentially a fungus, it would make sense that people allergic to mould, which is also fungi, would see an allergic reaction. The patient in question, a 27-year-old civil servant, saw an episode of allergic reactions after eating a Quorn burger. Skin-prick tests revealed she had hypersensitivities to Quorn, however, samples of mould were also found at her home. Her symptoms were alleviated with the changing of her home windows and also long-acting antihistamines.

The 1993 study found that Mycoprotein had “similar allergenic determinants with Aspergillus fumigatus and Cladosporium herbarum and some with Alternaria alternata”, which all are different forms of fungi. To test the hypothesis, Mycoprotein production workers were monitored over a 2-year period. 2 of 10 patients who were admitted to the hospital because of Mycoprotein ingestion had skin prick tests, but none had a significantly raised RAST. These results suggest that Mycoprotein in fact may not be as serious an allergen as other fungal pathogens, and therefore bodes well for widespread Mycoprotein consumption.

With our ever-advancing technology, further and more thorough studies can be done in the realm of Mycoprotein, to hopefully one day guarantee safety for the world’s population.

Photo #1

Photo #2

It’s visible. It’s bright. We can see it move from one place to another and entirely consume or transform an object. We can feel it, and we can feel its effects, but we can’t touch it. Even if we were immune to any sense (specifically temperature and heat), we still wouldn’t be able to touch it tangibly. It’s a paradox, and a burning one at that. But most people call it fire. Few wonder or stop to ask what it actually is- why one actually starts, what state of matter fire is classified as, what it consists of, and why it looks the way it does.

Fire, by definition, is defined as “combustion or burning, in which substances combine chemically with oxygen from the air and typically give out bright light, heat, and smoke.” But this definition offers us little by the way of answers. It does not tell us what flames actually are- how they start, what they consist of, or what type of matter they are.

So to put it simply: the main cause of fire is an increase in friction; say, for example, one piece of wood rubbing over another. In the case of this wood, when the material reaches three hundred degrees farenheit, the intense heat begins to decompose some of the cellulose material within the wood. This material promptly becomes a gas, immediately above the object.

Some of these gases, though, are volatile. And when the volatile gases become hot enough, or around five hundred degrees in the case of wood…the molecules making up the gases break apart. These free atoms now recombine with others, whether it be oxygen to form water, or carbon dioxide, or anything else of the sort. And as we know from our high school chemistry class, a resulting effect is inherently light, or heat.

So now we know (or are reminded) how a fire begins. But still, we’re left with the question of what state a fire exists in. Is it a solid? Or a liquid? Or is it a gas? Well, sadly, even the engineers at MIT don’t have a solidified answer. A vast amount of unknowns are present in the absence of this information.

But what do flames consist of? Mostly, they are made of either carbon dioxide, water vapor, oxygen, and nitrogen- even if their state of matter isn’t fully understood. The reason they appear the way they do, through the bright flame, is said to be because of the rapid speed in which the atoms are moving.

And as for what dictates the color of flame? Not just the temperature, but the chemical content of what’s burning: different chlorides, or borates, or sulfates, for example, all make for a different colored flame. Cupric chloride burns blue. Strontium chloride burns red. Cupric sulfate burns green. Borax, or sodium borate, burns orange. Potassium chloride burns purple, and so on. Many of these chemicals allow for beautiful displays of fireworks.

So the next time a question about flame is sparked, hopefully this blog has done enough to illuminate the answer.

Growing up with fare skin, my mom has always doused by body in sunscreen. Sunscreen is the holy bible to sun defense, at least, that is what I use to think. As I got older, and as I learned about the life threatening consequences of the sun, I started to apply more and more, trying to prevent the third-degree burns I would get on my skin if I was not fully protected. However, there have been instances where even after constant reapplication and with Sunblock up to SPF 100+ I would still get burnt! Was this because I was doing something wrong? Was my skin allergic to the sunblock? Or was it that the sunblock was not working?

The main goal of sunscreen is to block the many harmful rays the sun produces, including ultraviolet rays. Besides the obvious harmful effect from sunscreen, cancer, the sun can also cause premature aging of the skin, cause sun spots, and also cause freckles. One of the biggest problems people have understanding isthat the sun is in fact good for us, producing the Vitamin D we need; however, too much of this can cause the other problems. When dealing with sunscreen, people need to understand how to properly use the product. Simply applying the block to your body without giving a 20 minute gap before sun exposure, not reapplying, or not rubbing in the lotion, are all common mistakes the average sunscreen user makes. “In fact, some sunscreens lose as much as 90% of their effectiveness in just an hour, so they need to be reapplied often”(doctoroz.com.) These reasons do not actually prove sunblocks harsh effects on the body, other than the fact that they are caused by human naiveté.

The main reason that our sunblock might be killing us is caused by the toxins inside each bottle. Not all sunblocks are toxic, but it is important to know the difference between nontoxic and toxic brands to prevent yourself from the horrors they will cause. “The Environmental Working Group (EWG) just published their 2014 guide to safe sunscreens. They reviewed over 2000 sunscreens and over 257 brands. They found more than 75% of the sunscreens contained toxic chemicals that can increase your risk of cancer and other health issues”(draxe.com.) In order to have toxic effects, the sunscreen must be absorbed through the skin into the bloodstream.  In sunscreen, some ingredients may, “Release free radicals in sunlight, act as estrogen, disrupt hormones, cause allergic reactions, cause skin irritation, and have no rigorous safety standards,”(draxe.com.)  These side effects can be extremely harmful to a users health, a reason why people need to learn to turn away from the harmful lotion.

Next, the ingredients inside of sunblock may actually be fooling you. Everyone is told sunblock prevents cancer, but can the ingredients inside some sun tan lotions actually cause it? Ingredients such as oxybenzone, methoxycinnamate, and PABA have been found to be tied to cancer. For those who wear religiously like I do, it may be important to consider some important facts, for example, what is actually in the chemical mixture you’re putting on your skin. Unsafe particles include, “Para amino benzoin acid, octyl salicyclate, oxybenzone, dioxybenzone, phenylbenzimidazole, homosalate, menthyl anthranilate, octocrylene, methoxycinnamate, and parabens”(draxe.com.) Is the sun really your enemy, or is it the sunscreen you’re putting on?

If you are careful with the certain sunblock you put on your body, while making sure it does not include toxic chemicals, sunscreen in your best friend. As long as the rules are followed and proper sun exposure is practiced skin should stay free of any type of sun damage. As for now, make sure you read the ingredients on your sunscreen before you use it, after all it may cause life threatening diseases!

https://www.quora.com/Human-Physiology/Is-sunscreen-absorbed-into-the-bloodstream

http://draxe.com/75-of-sunscreens-are-toxic-what-to-do-

instead/http://www.beautylish.com/a/vmspq/beauty-remorse-face-sunburn

Researches show that for the mental development you have to choose the latter.

Scientists say, that learning of foreign languages literary causes the brain grows or rather growth related only to some of the brain parts such as hippocampus and cortex of hemisphere.

This statement is proved by the experiment held in Academy of Translators in Sweden. Recently freshmen were offered to study difficult foreign languages such as Russian, Arabic and Dari language. They had to study for many hours every day. At the same time the scientists were investigating students of the medical university which were also working hard. Participants’ brains from both of groups were MRI scanned in the beginning of the experiment and three month later. MRI images showed that brain structure of the medical students had not changed. But students from the language studying group had enlarged their brain areas responsible for digestion of the new knowledge (hippocampus), long memory and spatialization.

It is also known as a fact that bilinguals have better capabilities for concentration.

Professor Viorica Marian from the Northwest University had been studying for a long time what impact foreign languages have on brain. Already fifteen years ago she noticed that people speaking more than one language can easier choose words. Due to their large vocabulary they can instantly truncate the “incorrect” options.

In her last study, Professor Marian decided to find out which processes take place in the human brain when they hear different words. She divided 20 volunteers into two groups: bilinguals and the ones that knew only one language. The professor used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to observe which brain areas became more active during solving the cognitive tasks.

Participants were told different words, for example “candy” and were asked to choose one picture out of four which had the image of candy and one more picture which had an image of the object sounded similar to candy, for example “candle”

MRI showed that some brain areas became more active during the process for people who knew only one language. This means they had to put more effort for choosing the right picture. “It works like a traffic light, – explains Viorica Marian. – For one language bilinguals always turn on the green light and for the other language – the red light. When you do this all the time, you learn to block the words that are not required.”

According to Professor Marian, this ability is useful not only for choosing words but also for making decisions in general. “Whether we drive a car or conduct a surgery, it is necessary to concentrate on the main event and ignore the bye.”

Scientists also assert that studying a foreign language improves the memory and musical skills, prevents from Alzheimer’s disease.

But I think besides the mental improvements, learning foreign languages has also a cultural aspect. As for the experiment, in my view it was well-conducted. Due to the fact that the trial was non-randomized, Professor Marian obtained the most accurate results; however, as always, the result could’ve been gained by chance, as there is always a possibility for a confounding variables and in addition, if increased the sample size, I believe Pr. Marian’s data would be even more stronger.

Ludwig Wittgenstain said: “The limits of my language means the limits of my world.” In other words, when we learn foreign languages we enlarge our world. The more languages we speak the greater is the knowledge of the world. This gives us an opportunity to communicate and understand people from around the world, from different countries and different cultures.

Sources:

http://bibo.kz/hochu-znat/963942-inostrannyy-yazyk-i-razvitie-mozga-6-udivitelnyh-faktov.html

http://es-eschool.ru/blog_es/izvestnye-poligloty-znanie-yazykov-i-pamyat.html

http://medportal.ru/mednovosti/news/2014/11/13/001language/

Many are familiar with the “study drug” adderall, whether they take it for medical purposes, to study, or to get ahead in their classes. This drug increases the activity of neurotransmitters such as norepinephrine and dopamine and helps one focus while stimulating the central nervous system. The drug has some very mild side effects, one of which being loss off appetite, but why does this occur?

Since adderall increases the amount of dopamine released in the brain and dopamine helps send signals when the body is satisfied from food, the adderall is sending messages to the body is full when it actually is not. This then can lead to weight loss because a person will not eat if they’re not hungry.

Chemically the drug tells you you are full when you’re not but it may be suppressing your appetite in a different way. Sometimes someone can be so focussed on what they are doing that they forget to eat. They can be so focussed on trying to do work rather than realize that they have not ate in hours. At this point, however, they do not magically become hungry, they will realize that yes their appetite has been suppressed.

Adderall also speeds up metabolism. The stimulant increases blood pressure and heart rate, which increases energy. So, people taking the drug will have a higher level of physical activity. So will the suppression of appetite, and increased physical activity, many will abuse this drug for weight loss.

As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed yesterday evening I saw an impressive picture of Justin Bieber shirtless, posted by none other than himself. I decided to click on the photograph to get a closer look, and instead of looking at his abs my attention drifted toward the intense comments. I was in complete awe as I read through two girls literally arguing with each other about who is more in love with Justin. In light of my fascination, I conducted some research on why it is that people are feeling “Bieber Fever.” More generally why people become obsessed with celebrities, I reference Bieber because he is a great example. In my studies I instantly came across the topic of celebrity worship syndrome. Celebrity worship syndrome is described as an obsessive and addictive disorder that involves intense involvement and fascination with a stranger celebrities life. Yes, this is a real disorder that is causing a lot of distress in adolescence and adults alike. Often times the symptoms are due to underlying psychological problems. 

Why do we care so much about celebrity lives, and when does it become a danger to ourselves? Stuart Fischoff, an emeritus professor of media psychology at the University of California, Los Angeles, says that following an alpha is wired in our DNA. We are programmed to “follow the leader”, as he said, so it is natural for us to feel influenced by those who are standing out. It is important to recognizing that all of us have an ability to be influenced by others, but not all of us are obsessed to the point that it becomes distressful to our lives. What this shows is that the issue in itself is not just our DNA, but rather how people react to it. In 2002 three researchers introduced the celebrity worship scale, which has since been modified to the celebrity attitudes scale. This scale can detect at which stage and dimension an individual is in, regarding their interest level in a famous person. The scale is widely used in differentiating a healthy interest from a psychotic obsession. The three dimensions are:

1. The entertainment-social dimension- the celebrity captures the persons attention and is entertaining
2. The intense-personal dimension- “He is my soulmate” The respondent begins to demonstrate obsessive and compulsive behaviors toward the celebrity. Their thoughts are consumed.
3. The borderline-pathological dimension- the person shows pathological behaviors such as worshipping the celebrity. When asked if they would complete something illegal at the celebrities request they answer yes without hesitation. An example of this is #cutsforbieber. While it was allegedly a hoax, some people who were already vulnerable to self harm took the act seriously.

There are different aspects that play a role into ones susceptibility to CWS. One of which is personality. Irritability, impulsivity, and moodiness are often characteristics that increase ones chance of being affected by an obsession. Young teenagers are more likely to be affected because they are in a developmental period of their identity. The celebrity may help them identify with themselves in an easier way. They are being influenced by that persons views, and lifestyle, and acknowledging them as their own. Recognizing that pathology can be a cause of the syndrome and not just a response is critical. Those who poses the genetics for a pathological mental illness are often triggered by their celebrity of interest. It becomes an outlet for their problems and the underlying disorder is clouded.

Dr. John Maltby of the University of Leicester, generated numerous studies on a wide sample of people and found that there is a strong correlation between CWS and poor mental health on UK participants such as: high anxiety, high stress, and more depression. He also found a correlation specifically with poor body image through studies conducted on adolescence. This does not come as a surprise to me. The media promotes thin and unhealthy eating habits like crazy. In my opinion, and quite obviously, if someone wants to be thin they are going to identify with a celebrity who resembles that. It also relates back to the fact that adolescence are in their developing stages. Celebrities are projecting their eating habits and body types onto adolescence and they are embracing those behaviors in order to look like them. Or projecting their desire into becoming obsessed with someone they want to look like. In summarizing his research Maltby found that in data from about 3,000 people only about one percent showed obsessional tendencies. Overall CW shows comorbidity with certain personality and mood disorders. While it often does not reach a concerning level, when it does it can be frightening. It is at this level that stalkers and impersonators arise. 

I would have been much more content with the studies I cited if I was provided more of a background with them. But because they are not making shocking claims, I am confident in their findings. Although all of the studies and articles I researched gave a plethora of information about the “disorder”, I would be interested to find out what proven treatment methods are useful. In my opinion, if CW is so comorbid with mood and personality disorders, anti depressants and SSRIs would be worth trying. If someone is exhibiting symptoms of the three divisions, it would be helpful to take them to a specialist rather than overlooking it as just a crush. Their behaviors pose threats to their development and lives. If someone is putting so much attention and effort into another’s life rather than their own, they will begin to deteriorate emotionally. They will show higher levels of anxiety, depression, and stress. I also wonder if someone is at the borderline-pathological stage if they would be at risk for narcissistic personality disorder or dissociative identity disorder. If they are so consumed by another’s life can they reach a point where they believe they are that person? These are all questions I invite you to explore in comments. There is a boundary between healthy love and pathological obsession toward celebrities. If it becomes serious it can cause many depressive  and dangerous symptoms.

Sources:

http://www.livescience.com/18649-oscar-psychology-celebrity-worship.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3960781/

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2006/03/04/when-celebrity-worship-leads-to-mental-problems.html

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-excess/201307/celebrity-worship-syndrome

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/08/cutting-for-bieber-twitter-hoax-4chan_n_2426802.html

New studies show that more people prefer to shop online rather than going to the store to shop. Personally, I have always preferred online shopping. It may be because I am lazy, but I think the main reason is because I hate when the store workers follow me around asking if I need help. If I need help I will ask you. You do not need to follow me. Am I the only one who prefers online shopping? I decided to research this topic more to see what other people prefer.

Similar to me, the results of an Ebates.com holiday survey in 2013 asking 1,000 U.S. adults if they preferred online shopping or visiting a store found that 84% of the people surveyed said shopping online is better than visiting a physical store. Why is that? There are many reasons why people prefer online shopping. According to Ebates.com the most popular reason, cited by 60% of the respondents, was that they prefer to not have to deal with the people in malls and on town Streets. 51% said they prefer not having to leave the house and 49% said that online shopping is more convenient and negates the need to drive. I guess you can say that online shopping helps the environment. The more people that online shop, the less people have to drive to the store, then the more gas is being saved. People are helping the environment and they do not even know it.

In contrast, some people still prefer to go to the store. An article in the Business News Daily talks about how many people use the Internet to browse the items they want and then they will go to the store to purchase that item. According to PwC’s consumer survey, 40% of consumers make purchases inside a physical store at least once a week while only 27% do the same online. The shoppers who prefer going to the store know that online shopping is easy. However, there are many different reasons as to why they still choose to go to the store. These include, allowing them to have the item immediately, avoiding the delivery fees, they get to try on the item and seeing it in person before buying it. Also, returns a lot simpler as well. 

I think these studies need to be refined to the type of purchase being made. Consumers probably are more apt to make an online purchase for a less personal item, like an appliance or electronics after doing their research. For more personal purchases like clothing, it is possible more buyers would prefer to purchase in the store after trying on and seeing how it looks.

Whether you choose to online shop or go to the store to shop, there are pros and cons for both decisions. A big pro for online shopping is you don’t have to commute, find parking, wait in long lines, and deal with big crowds. Those reasons alone are the reasons why I choose to mostly online shop. A couple of other pros include you can ship gifts directly to your friends in another state and shopping online offers you a variety of similar items. One con for online shopping is that people have to pay for shipping. Delivery fees can add up and it may come to the point to decide whether the $15 for shipping is worth it or just go to the store and purchase it? On the other hand, some pros to in-store shopping include you get to try the item on, it is much easier to return, and you don’t have to pay for delivery fees. Trying an item on can make the biggest difference. I always see items I like on the mannequin, but when I try it on it looks completely different. Clothes fit each person differently and it is almost necessary to try them on when purchasing. Lastly, cons of in-store shopping include you might not be able to make it to the store when they are open due to school or work, you may have to drive a far distance to get to the store you like, and if you don’t want to drive that far you are limited to the stores close to you.

After researching both opinions, I still think that online shopping is the way to go. The pros for online shopping out weigh the cons. The biggest con for online shopping was the delivery fee. However, if you can wait for the item to come in a couple days, you usually don’t have to pay that much extra. The sooner you want your item, the more you pay. So just buy the item in advance so you don’t have to pay that big fee. Now that you have read the pros and cons of each, which method do you prefer?