As a teenager in college, I have been warned of the consequences of drinking alcohol by my parents and many other adults. But no one ever mentioned there could be benefits of it as well- in moderation of course. Alcohol is known for its horrible effects the morning after including the headache, fogginess, and maybe even nausea. What is unknown is that some alcoholic beverages can benefit the body in rare ways. Red wine is said to somehow decrease the risk of getting Alzheimer’s disease. Because Alzheimer’s is such a common disease, it makes me believe it is very hard to cure. How can something as simple as red wine stave off the effects? Is it only red wine that has this ability or are there other foods or substances? 

According to Science Line studies of France and Denmark, those who drank two or three glasses of red wine a day fared better than those who drank none or those who drank heavily. Neurobiologists wanted to see if red wine would help grey matter. Grey matter is mostly made up of neuronal cell bodies and processes signals from sensory signals. It also helps process information in the brain. If red wine reinforces the grey matter then it can process information better, or at least as well as it always has, and discourage the degeneration that comes with Alzheimer’s Disease. One study that looks to prove this used mice for experimentation. These mice were bred to develop a disease that resembles Alzheimer’s. Different chemicals were distributed to the mice that are found in red wine. The results showed that a grape-derived polyphenol enabled learning and grey matter stability the most. Polyphenols are antioxidants that can protect against certain effects of aging. Another study published in the journal Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment found similar results. They found that moderate drinkers were 23 percent less likely to Alzheimer’s or memory loss than others. However, this study describes moderate drinking as only one drink for a woman and two for a man rather than two to three. Although their study encourages the idea that drinking opposes Alzheimer’s, they do not propose that one should take up drinking to do so as the effects of drinking are too small to redeem it. 

David Teplow describes the mechanism of this process using the analogy of cooking pasta. The proteins that form alzheimer’s are like cooked noodles- soft and flexible. When noodles are taken out of water, they become hard and stable again. These hardened noodles are like unhealthy Alzheimer’s proteins. Teplow says this is how the polyphenol stops Alzheimer’s at all steps of the process. However, with the two studies combined, it does not sound to me as though the chemicals from one or two glasses of wine are enough to stop the process altogether. These results could be a false positive and there could be a confounding factor such as a chemical from something completely unrelated that we do not know about. The majority of studies that have been conducted so far have only been imposed upon animals and not humans. Further research and the following human experimentation will have to occur for red wine to be taken seriously as an Alzheimer’s-fighting method.

As many parts of the country, including the campus of Penn State, transition in to fall, I am beginning to see more boots and sweaters and fewer shorts and flip flops. The trees are changing color and we are beginning to feel the first nippy touches of the winter to come. The other day I noticed my own sun-bleached hair becoming brown. But more importantly, I noticed how absolutely pale I looked. Summer tans only linger if they are not completely gone. Now is when many people break out the self-tanning lotion or run to get a spray tan. Some even turn to tanning booths. But aren’t those dangerous? I am one of many who prefers being tan but I have always been warned against tanning booths. Is there really any truth behind these warnings? How are tanning booths harmful and how much actual harm do they inflict? 

The most common concern is that bed tanning can lead to melanoma, which, according to Medline Plus, “is the most serious type of skin cancer”. Dr. Jeffrey Gershenwald says in an article of The New York Times that a majority of melanoma cases are due to exposure to UV. UV waves, or ultra violet waves, are given off by the sun and are known to increase risk of damage to DNA or other cells. These waves are given off by tanning beds. Gershenwald claims that “there’s no longer a question of whether UV is important”, meaning it is definitely harmful. One recent controlled case-study, published by Oxford University Press, tested this idea on a variety of participants. They tested the effects of indoor tanning on those who had never been sunburned before, those who had tanned in an indoor bed before without burning, and those who had never tanned in a bed. Despite the different UV exposure levels, it was proven that each group’s risk of melanoma was increased. Another study, conducted by DeAnn Lazovich, came up with the same results. Lazovich used 1,167 participants with melanoma and 1,101 without. The patients without melanoma were the control side of the experiment. Her results showed that 63% of the melanoma patients and 51% of the healthy participants had tanned in a tanning bed before. This data also strongly supports the alternative hypothesis that bed tanning causes melanoma. This case is one of those situations where the cause-and-effect are found without a mechanism. As the American Cancer Society states, although risk-increasing factors of melanoma have been discovered, “it’s not yet clear exactly how these factors cause melanoma”.   However, I think we may be able to say it is proven as far as science can prove anything that UV light given off by tanning beds increases the risk of melanoma. 

Grief is a well-known emotion that we all hope to avoid. We most commonly associate it with with death and loss. Grief is defined as a deep sadness especially caused by someone’s death. We can say that humans generally react in this way to the death of someone known to them. I have experienced death in my family as well as death to a pet. An interesting situation arose with the death of one of my cats. My family of course was distraught over his passing away and we all went through our grieving processes. But with only one of our two cats dying, we were worried about how our second would react. Would she grieve with us? Instead of grieving she actually became much happier. It turned out she enjoyed being “an only child”, as it were. It made me wonder if animals could really grieve at all. Can animals understand death and feel the pain of loss? Or do they take no notice at all?

Many of these questions are actually discusses in Katherine Foley’s article on human grief. The first study she discusses is one conducted by Barbara King asking if animals grieve the same as humans do. King found many different animals of all sizes, from elephants to ducks, that had similar brains to one another. She then conducted an observational study which determined that each type of animal reacted to loss in a very similar way to humans. They were “withdrawn, less interested in socializing, restless or unable to eat or sleep”. They showed signs all the signs of grief that humans typically show. Her reasoning behind grief is that an “adjustment period” is necessary. Animals learn certain routines based around other beings, just as humans do. Once they are lost, they have to relearn habits and feel the absence of their loved one which is grief. While I do not find an observational study to be as affective as an experiment, it would not be ethical to test the affects of loss, or death of a loved one, on animals. There for, in this case, it is an effective method. 

However, in his paper, Richard Bryne takes another approach that can be experimented upon. He discusses whether elephants, specifically, can feel emotions resembling grief. He suggests that elephants showing interest in other elephant carcasses could be evidence that they do. Elephants are known to show interest in dead elephant bodies. Could this be because they understand the pain of loss and feel grief? Or would any other body or object provoke their interest? National Geographic conducted a study to find out. Nineteen groups of elephants were shown different objects and tested to see which they found most interesting. One group was shown elephant skulls and other objects like wood and ivory. Another group was shown elephant skulls opposed to skulls of other species of similar size. One group of only elephants who had lost their matriarch recently were shown the skull of their matriarch as well as skulls of a few other unknown matriarchs. All objects were placed the same distance from each other and from the elephants. Two out of three described groups showed evidence that elephants preferred investigating elephant bones over anything else. The first group spent six times longer on average investigating the elephant skulls rather than ivory or wood. The second group spent twice as long examining elephant skulls rather than skulls of rhinos or buffalo. The third group was shown only elephant skulls. While they investigated the skulls, the elephants could not tell their own matriarch apart.

The suggested reason for this result is that elephants form strong social bonds, similar to the ones humans make. While they may not be able to tell the bones of their relatives apart, they are looking for their lost ones. Unfortunately this is still not evidence that elephants feel grief. While it is in support of the alternative hypotheses- elephants can grieve- it does not prove it. Animals’ minds remain too much of a mystery for us to know for sure. I do not know in which direction science should go to find out more but I believe it is very possible that it will  be discovered that animals can grieve as humans do.

Lullabies are a common solution to crying children. Before babies’ brains even approach the ability to speak, they can react to music and we use it to soothe them. I want to know what it is about music that can generally soothe a crying baby so easily. I believe there must be a certain reaction in the brain that is the explanation behind it.

A study done by the Great Ormond Street Hospital was mentioned in article by the Telegraph. Their experiment first sought to find evidence that music really does soothe babies. The hospital tested on thirty-seven children under three that were all inflicted by respiratory or heart problems. I believe that by using children under some distress, the circumstances were more extreme which they hoped would provide more clear results. Each child was put through three ten minute trials. During one trial they were read to, another they were sung lullabies and another they were left by themselves. After the music sessions, the results showed a “significant  decrease in heart rate and pain level”. The music was soothing in multiple ways. I think that the same findings could be seen in many observational studies of distressed children as well. However, for this particular experiment I wish they would specify if the ten-minute intervals were spread out or done in a row. I believe that would impact the interpretation of the data because one could not really tell if it was only the music rather than a combination of all three. Other than that I believe it to be a fairly sound experiment. The conductors of the experiment commented that these results were obviously atavistic, meaning something “related to or characterized by reversion to something ancient or ancestral”. They believe that the infant enjoys the music because it relates back to the outside world. I am not satisfied at all with their explanation because it does not provide a mechanism. However, a Tim Griffiths, who is mentioned as having commented on the experiment, provides a better explanation. He believes that the music arouses the emotional part of the brain which decreases pain responses. In this case, the mechanism would be increased emotional activity in the brain which leads to a more soothed child.

Sing baby with headphone,isolated on a white background.

If music can be so dramatically soothing for children, I wondered if it could have other useful healing qualities. I found that experiments have actually been done studying the affect of music on adult cancer patients. They used a meta-analysis of randomized control trials. The forty-five studies of sixty-two controlled treatment comparisons used mostly white, American female participants. The studies compared several different types of treatment including music therapy. The other treatments included “behavioral interventions, nonbehavioral counseling and therapy, informational and educational methods, organized social support provided by other patients, and other non-hospice interventions”. Unfortunately, the experiment did not find significantly different results from the use of music. Each treatment resulted in similar effectiveness. I think this study could be taken further. I believe it is worth it to continue in to the field and conduct experiments maybe using different genres of music, varying chords, varying voice types, and so on. Further experiments could also study the affects on a larger variation in participants rather than a majority of women. They could study the affects on different races and maybe even different ages. I think there could be a future for Music Therapy in medicine.

In the age of constant cell phone use, we are beginning to see all kinds of affects that cell phones have on our lives and our health. I have heard it mentioned that staying away from lit screens before bed can help you fall asleep more easily and improve the quality of sleep. Usually, I have no trouble sleeping but lately I have been struggling to fall asleep and also waking up in the middle of the night, unable to go back to sleep. In search of possible solutions, I wonder if avoiding my phone before I go to bed will help with either issue.

The first study I came across, published on Business Insider, studied not only the effects of phone usage on sleep patterns, but the effects of any blue-and-white light typically given off by an electronic screen. Three participants were utilized in this experiment procedure. One participant viewed a tablet when at its highest brightness, the second viewed through blue-light-emitting goggles, and the third viewed through orange-tinted “dark-control” glasses. Each participants melatonin levels were measured after one hour and then two hours. At the end of the study, the results consistently showed that prolonged periods of blue-and-white light exposure increased the suppression of melatonin. Melatonin is a “natural hormone” that your body gives off from the pineal gland. The Pineal Gland is a structure located in the brain that exists as a source of melatonin and controls reactions that are caused by light and darkness. The positive results are only true in “prolongued periods” of time because an increase in suppression of melatonin was only shown after two hours. The melatonin levels are the mechanism that cause the process of falling asleep to take longer. There for, the independent (x) variable is the amount of blue-and-white light taken in before sleep and the dependent (y) variable would be how long it takes to fall asleep.  When melatonin levels increase in the body, a person becomes less alert which leads to sleep. Because levels of melatonin were being suppressed, the body never received a signal to sleep. I believe this experiment to be overall effective. I think it was important that they tested different kinds of light to provide stronger evidence that it truly is blue-and-white light rather than another kind. However, there are more types of light than three. Because only three were tested I think he evidence could be made stronger still with a greater number of experiments and more varied types of lighting. 

In the short-term the outcome of this study is already negative. But I wonder about long-term affects on our bodies. While I can not find a study hypothesizing that phone usage before bed has long term damages, some articles discuss how long-term sleep deprivation can lead to brain damage. As shown by the previous study, phone usage before bed can disrupt sleep which means sleep loss. Insufficient sleep causes neuron degeneration which is damaging to the brain. Some experiments even show signs that disrupted sleep and loss of sleep can lead to Alzheimer’s. An experiment was carried out that texted the affects of sleep deprivation on mice with human DNA. One group of mice was exposed to 12 hours of light and 12 hours of darkness while the other group was exposed to 20 hours of light and 4 hours of darkness. At the end of the experiment, the group with less sleep due to more light showed memory impairment. However, it does not seem to me that there is enough proof behind this theory to be sure. While the findings are intriguing enough to provoke more research, animal testing is only somewhat reliable when it comes to human reaction to the same affects. I think more studies are in order before we need to worry too much about getting Alzheimer’s when we lose sleep.

I have noticed a lot of my posts trend toward food. But as a freshman in college, attempting to avoid the freshman fifteen, knowing about food is important to me. My biggest challenge is cravings. Why do I get those sudden cravings for something sweet or salty? I think cravings of all kinds could be considered a big opponent of weight-loss. If there is a cause, maybe there is a solution to wipe out every type of craving. 

Most cravings psychologically based. Reactions that originate in our brain can lead to the wish to eat. Who hasn’t heard of stress eating? Mental stress can become associated with certain foods or just cravings in general. This study chose to stimulate the “reward pathways” of the brain. Reward Pathways are circuits in the brain that tell a person to repeat a “rewarding” experience. In other words, they are greatly connected to the reaction we get when tasting food. Something rewarding could be a food that tastes good or even a social interaction. This study examined how stress causes the release of endogenous opioid in the body. Endogenous Opioid, simply put, is something that acts as an endorphin. Once this is released, the body’s defense mechanisms are activated and stress responses stimulated. Whatever rewarding reaction we choose repeatedly stimulates the reward circuitry. This is what leads to over-usage of these actions, or over-eating. Stress is the independent variable with Endogenous Opioid being the mechanism that leads to over-eating, the stress response and dependent variable. This is one explanation for an increase in eating frequency and cravings.

However, sometimes we lose our appetite instead of feeling hungry when we are stressed. What could be the difference leading up to the two feelings? Apparently, you can actually lose your appetite OR crave food due to stress. It all depends on whether the stress is short-term or long-term. The Harvard Health Publication explains the mechanisms behind both. During short-term stress, a brain structure called hypothalamus gives off a corticotropin-releasing hormone that suppresses eating. The adrenal glands also send out epinephrine which “triggers a flight-or-fight” response and also suppresses eating. Epinephrine is a hormone derived from tyrosine and is the same as what we call adrenaline. During long-term stress, however, the adrenal gland makes a different hormone called cortisol. This hormone controls things such as metabolism as well as blood sugar. It is easy to see why the hormone is associated with eating. Cortisol increases motivation in general and often becomes motivation to eat. Eating and cravings only stop once the stress is reduced. In both cases, the hormone, either epinephrine or cortisol, would be the independent variable that causes “y”. Y, the dependent variable, would be the response, either the suppression of hunger or the motivation to eat. I believe these studies were well-executed and could even lead to more in the future. Especially with growing obesity rates, this could become a very important and criticized issue. 

I believe these studies to be well done but I still find myself having completely random cravings during the day. Is it possible to have a craving without a reason and the hormones are released by mistake? There don’t seem to be any articles that say so.  However, U.S. News comes the closest with the cause of simple addiction. We no longer eat because of stress, either short-term or long-term, or because of association with an activity. Instead, we eat because some foods taste like a reward to us and we become addicted to them just like we can be addicted to other “feel-good” things. The most common of these, as well as the one that affects me most, is sugar. In the case of addiction, your body sends out endorphins to create that good feeling.

Authority Nutrition claims that food addiction is exactly like other addictions. There for, the laws of getting rid of addiction are just the same. Just as an alcohol addict can relapse, we can relapse from giving into that craving just one time. I hoped that maybe abstaining from sugar after I eat sometimes would work. But Authority Nutrition says that the only way to truly kick addiction is complete resistance. While there was no experiment giving evidence, I am not quite sure there is a possible experiment. However, I think future observational studies could be conducted comparing those who give in to craving sometimes and those who refrain completely.

I have always been jealous of those with photographic memories because I am sure studying and memorization is so easy for them. Now, instead of being jealous, I choose to question if photographic memory truly exists. There is a common idea that some people have the ability to remember detailed images perfectly in their minds. But how do some people remember more detail than others? Is it possible to remember an image perfectly? If so, how much detail are those with this ability able to remember? As someone without so-called “photographic memory”, it is hard to imagine being able to recall an image with perfect clarity.

One possible answer to these questions is discussed an an article of the Scientific American. This article claims that “Photographic memory” is basically the common name for “eidetic imagery”. People with this ability can be easily distinguished using something called the “Picture Elicitation Method”. The person is shown a picture on an easel and when the easel is removed, they can recall the image and even scan the picture in their minds for certain details. The person continues to look at the easel and feels as though they can still see the image This causes them to speak in the present tense which is another factor that points toward eidetic imagery. This is different from how the common brain forms an image. According to the Association for Psychological Science, humans “pinpoint certain visual information for more scrupulous analysis but discard other visual information”. The fact that the mind discards some information instead of retaining all details immediately distinguishes it from Eidetic Imagery, or “photographic memory”. With Eidetic Imagery, people can see an entire city and recreate the entire image from memory like the man in this photo. 

However, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy considers two possible answers. Mental imagery could be another explanation behind “photographic memory”. Mental Imagery is a more perceptual experience. This experience can occur without an external trigger that causes a representation in one’s mind that is more like visualizing or imagining the sensation or image. An image produced from Mental Imagery can be thought of as a “copy” or “echo” of the actual experience. The second possibility Stanford considers correlates with Scientific American’s theory. Eidetic Imagery is less widely understood by the common population. Contrary to Mental Imagery, images produced by Eidetic Imagery are “externally projected”, meaning they are caused by something outside of the mind. This factor makes these images closer to the image or experience in reality. To put it simply- Mental Imagery occurs mostly inside the brain and creates something more like a memory of what a person saw. Eidetic Imagery takes an outside image and recreates it more exactly in a person’s head. After examining the two types of Imagery, Stanford does not say for sure whether photographic memory exists. They do, however, agree with Scientific American that they believe Eidetic Imagery is closest to the phenomenon. 

Although I did not find an article claiming that “Eidetic Imagery is the same as photographic memory”, I feel that there is enough support to claim they are extremely similar. According to the theory of Eidetic Imagery, some brains process external images differently than others. Some brains can create images with more detail, images that are more like photographs. This sounds like a photographic memory to me.

Entering my freshman year, eating late at night while doing homework or studying has already become a regular routine. The freshman 15 is a common concern but I have been pondering a different aspect of weight gain. I have heard myths for years claiming that eating at night, right before you sleep, makes you gain weight. Now that these myths may affect my eating habits and daily routine, I want to know if they are valid. Does eating at night have a different affect on my body than eating during the day? And does the time between when I eat and when I go to sleep matter?
Beth Israel Deaconess claims that late night eating is technically not the cause of weight gain. It looks like throughout the years of myths, an observational study developed. People began to hypothesize that their late night eating was the cause of all of their weight gain. While this is probable causality, scientists investigated the concern with experimental study. Researchers used animal testing, which we know to be a good indicator for human results. They found that monkeys who tended to eat later in the day did not gain any more weight than those who ate early. While it is in support of the hypothesis that eating late does not cause weight gain, it is not evidence. The evidence supporting the claim is the fact that your metabolism does not slow when you go to sleep. Your metabolism is the combination of all chemical reactions in the body that work toward “maintaining the living state of the cells and the organism”. While you are not as active, your body still must perform bodily functions. A true reason for what gain is not when you eat but what you eat. I found it interesting that those who eat late usually choose to eat unhealthy snack foods because they eat out of boredom and not hunger. This is the true reason for higher calorie intake, and in turn, higher weight gain.

The NY Times published an article in support of this idea. The article included a study investigating further the timing of a person’s normal sleep hours and the correlation with their quality and amount of food intake.

In the past, I have been asked the question “Are you addicted to your phone?”. I have never know how to answer. I use my phone every day- does that make me an addict? If so, then I know hundreds of other addicts as well. I check my phone at least every hour and a lot of the time every few minutes. I spend a lot of time texting, snap chatting, surfing safari and using countless other apps on my phone. But what defines addiction? Is it really possible to be addicted to your phone? And if so, is it bad for us?

The definition of “addiction” according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary is “a strong and harmful need to regularly have something or do something”. While no one really answers the questions “Is phone addiction real?”, by this definition I believe it is. Psychology Today says that if you feel anxious when your phone is not near or you are not checking your phone, you may have an addiction. There are warning signs such as feeling imaginary vibrations, commonly known as “phantom vibrations“. Another sign is tuning out others around you. Some also see failing school as a sign of phone addiction. However, I think there is a possibility for reverse causality. I think that prior poor grades could lead to increased phone usage and even addiction due to looking up answers or simply giving up on work.

Whether it is addiction or not, a clear increase in phone usage can be seen. A study even shows that people are now using their phones during sex. One in ten out of the study admitted to phone usage during sex. One out of five people from the age of 18-34 admitted to it. I find these to be alarming rates for something so outrageous. While it may be the most surprising, the bedroom is not the only new place phone usage is increasing. Checking emails or texts at the dinner table and in restaurants is becoming the norm as well when in previous years it was considered completely unacceptable.

While no one has a final answer on the matter, I believe that the definition fits all too well. I think phone addiction is a real thing and may even affect me. As far as the question of whether it is bad for us, I think it can easily be seen as harmful along with more common addictions. I think being distracted by our phones only detracts from our reality. We miss the important things around us and are deprived of significant interactions. This could easily become a recognized social problem in the future.

Either I have traveled through time or we have finally reached “the future”. For years people have watched future-themed TV shows and movies featuring hoverboards imagining, but never really believing, that one day these devices will be real. As hard as it is to believe, they have arrived. I was skeptical at first, but now that I know they really do exist, I have to know- how do they work? What does the future look like for this new   technology now?

The idea behind these new gadgets is “magnetic levitation technology” which involves four flat circular engines called “hover engines” that use magnetic fields to hold the craft above ground. The board can carry a person and never touche the ground. This invention makes me extremely curious in the technology behind it, where it began and where it’s going. The ArxPax Company can explain a lot of where this technology started. The founder, and the man behind much of the science, is Greg Henderson. Greg Henderson was a an airborne ranger and has an engineering degree from West Point as well as a master’s degree from University of California, Berkley. Greg Henderson is the mind behind MFA- Magnetic Field Architecture. Henderson began developing this technology to solve issues with things such as clean water and air using magnetic levitation. What I find interesting about this technology is that while it seems more logical that very strong magnetic fields would be utilized during levitation, weak fields are aligned to do more work than stronger fields.  The magnetic fields depend on whether the process is started with electromagnets or permanent magnets and the structure goes from there.

The first use is obviously the hoverboard which is rapidly becoming a craze. As far as what happens now, ArxPax has big plans for future uses. In one interview, Greg Henderson said “We approached this with a social goal in mind: to be able to protect equipment and structures from earthquakes, floods and rising sea levels”. The alarming method they plan to use is building levitation. They hope to levitate all kinds of buildings including hospitals and homes to avoid damage from natural disaster. In another report, Henderson says he even hopes for the technology to cost less due to eliminating use of some materials such as graphene.

While I have very little knowledge of interaction between magnetic fields, the technology seems to be a prospective new aspect of our construction. After seeing Tony Hawk do boarding tricks on this new, amazing toy, I am astonished by what I have found. These new boards that seem almost like toys are using science that could become an entirely new future for the way we construct our buildings and solve major issues.

My roommate and I eat dinner together all the time and every time she gets a pickle with her meal. I can never understand why because I detest pickles. Why does taste differ from person to person? I have always thought of it as our taste buds being wired differently. That sounds logical but I have also noticed that my tastes have changed over time. Foods I did not like as a child I adore now. Beside the fact that children judge the look of food and not the taste, can taste be acquired and not “programmed” into our liking?

A basic understanding of taste buds is a good starting point for all these questions. After food enters our mouth and begins to be broken down by our teeth and the enzymes in our saliva, the food reaches our “papillae”. The papillae is the group of thousands of bumps that cover your tongue. Each one of these bumps are made up of onion-like structures that contain taste cells folded together. Taste buds are actually designed to tell us whether what we are about to eat is safe or not. But what we use them for regularly is what I am more interested in- our likes and dislikes. However, this determination involves more than just the tastebuds. It involves all five senses– sight, hearing, taste, smell and touch. The sense most closely associated with taste is smell. As we take a bite of something, small amounts of air are forced up the back of our mouths and into our nose. This process is called Retronasal Olfaction. Our brain associates smell with taste and helps us determine if we enjoy the food or not.

Although our brain has a lot to do with it, our preferences are formed over our life time, beginning even before we are born. I wonder if our mother’s preferences influence ours. If my mother ate mango often while she was pregnant with me, will I automatically like mango? Will I like mango more than other fruits? It turns out that it does have an impact. Children are more likely to enjoy a food if their mother ate it while pregnant. This actually goes back to evolution and determining whether our food is safe. The fact that our mothers ate a certain food automatically tells us it is safe to eat which leads us to enjoy it more. I never considered that our  evolution could be such a big part of what we eat. While evolution is a large contributor, our tastes can be affected by the smallest factors such as what plate we are eating on. I asked if our preferences change and the answer is they can change over days or years due to our surroundings and how our five senses react. Taste is a mixture of personal reactions to food in the brain, from our surroundings and even from evolution.

Dreams are something we all accept as common occurrences when really not many people have an understanding of how they work. I have many of my most interesting thoughts in dreams and I want to know where they come from and why? A similar question discussed in class arises with dreams as well- which factor is the cause and which is the effect? We asked if worms make kids stupid? We considered whether worms caused lower IQ or if lower IQ, and the poverty that comes with it sometimes, causes worms. The answer we came to was that worms cause lower learning ability for many different reasons. But worms are the cause. Are dreams the cause for our thoughts?

First we need to understand the basics of how dreams exist. When people realized dreams existed, dream studies began with REM cycles. REM stands for Rapid Eye Movement and a REM cycle is a period of deepest sleep. Our muscles are paralyzed during this time to prevent movement caused by the dream we are engaged in. Although it is called Rapid Eye Movement, our toes and fingers are also involved.

While that tells me that REM cycles make dreams possible, I want to know where the content of our dreams come from? Does that content begin in our dream or does it begin in our daily lives? The answer is both. One theory is that our mind is freer during a dream to explore new ideas. The obstacles we self-impose during daily life are broken down and our minds are able to consider new thoughts. For one example, Jack Nicklaus amazingly improved his golf swing as a result of a single dream. In his dream, his swing was improved compared to his swing in reality. When he awoke the next day, he realized that his grip on the golf club in the dream was different than his usual one. After trying this new grip in reality, his overall golf game improved. This supports the case that dreams cause our daily thoughts and even improve them.

However there are many supporting factors that say it is the other way around as well. Most people have probably had a dream they know for a fact is based off of their real life. This is how dreams help us cope with conflict. They can even tell us more about ourselves and our emotions. Dreams allow us to face painful emotions more willingly than we can in real life. In turn, we often gain a better understanding of how we feel toward a certain conflict. This clearly encourages the idea that dreams are largely based off of real life.

There is no single answer as to why dreams occur or why we dream about the things we do but instead is a mix of many reasons. I think this goes to show how inconstant the human mind is from one person to the next. The brain is fundamentally the same but thoughts are different for everyone. The differences in people is why we will never have a clear-cut answer to the question “Where do dreams come from?”.

My name is Katie Hagar and I am not a science-y person. I am from outside of Philadelphia (where I hear everyone is from) near Valley Forge National Park. I went to a large high school that offered many science courses and I took one each year of my high school career. I discovered this science course now because I need to fill my Gen Ed credits. I really liked that it was described as a course for non-science people. I feel much more comfortable and confident that I won’t fall behind everyone else in the class. I chose this over many other Gen Eds because although I don’t like science very much, I seem so succeed in science classes.

I do not plan to be a science major because the topic does not interest me enough to make a career out of it. I consider myself an English subject oriented person and English is very different from science. Although I do not want to be very involved in science I hope to find this particular class interesting.

I have been a been riding horses for almost 12 years and the only thing I miss a lot since coming to Penn State is my horse Mr. President.

I hope i’m not the only one tired of waiting for the 2015 PSU Football Season to start!