Water is a necessity for survival; almost impossible to live without, but I just read a story about a women who is ALLERGIC to water.  Is this real?

(picture from Euclid Public Library)

The story is about a woman named Rachel Prince who is allegedly allergic to water.  The conditions that makes you allergic to water is called aquagenic urticaria.  “With this conditions Prince cannot swim, take long baths, drink cold water, or be kissed by her fiancee.  The water causes her throat to swell up, or painful rashes and hives to appear.  She is even allergic to her own tears, saliva, sweat and blood.”  Here is her answer to a question we are all thinking of, “‘They say, “how do I wash”? The answer is very quickly. When I have a bath I am only in it for a few minutes at the most and then when I get out the rash is so itchy and painful I have to lie down afterwards for some time, it just totally drains me.”

(This is Rachel Prince and her fiancee Lee Warwick before she is touched by water form Daily Mail)

(this is Rachel Prince after being touched by water from Daily Mail)

This story published in Daily Mail claims that only 35 people in the world are allergic to water.

This intriguing story made me wonder if she is off her rockers or if this is actually real?

According to MD Health, “aquagenic urticaria is a rare form of physical urticarial (chronic hives). This condition causes a rash or hives to appear whenever the patient comes in contact with water. Itching and pain may also be present. This condition will appear regardless of the condition or temperature of the water, though there must be no skin lesion present to differentiate this condition from aquagenic pruritus or aquadynia. Aquagenic urticaria tends to affect women more than men, though infantile patients are equally susceptible to this condition. Patients going through puberty are the most likely to manifest symptoms of this condition.”

Ok, maybe she is not off her rockers because this skin condition actually does exist.  Here are a list of symptoms:

• “itching and burning
• rashes or erythema surface between 1 to 15 minutes of exposure
• 10-120 minute lesions
• difficulty swallowing, wheezing, or subjective respiratory distress” (Daily Mail)

This rare condition is said to be most common in women and usually start around puberty time.  “The exact underlying cause of aquagenic urticaria is currently unknown. Due to the rarity of the condition, there is very limited data regarding the effectiveness of individual treatments; however, various medications and therapies have been used with variable success.“

According to the National Center for Advancing Translational Science, there are a few treatments that help reduce the pain:

• “H1 antihistamines
• Propranolol
• Ultraviolet B (UVB) light treatments (also called phototherapy)
• Durabolin (an anabolic steroid)
• Creams that serve as a barrier between water and the skin
• A low dose of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, in combination with cyproheptadine and methscopolamine”

Unfortunately, as interesting as this skin condition is to be able to conduct experimental studies you need to have a large group of patients.  Given that there is less than a fifty people with this condition worldwide, its difficult to conduct and repeat studies to full understand aquagenic urticaria.  Also, as we all know to conduct experimental studies scientist need thousands or millions of dollars and valuable resources.  Is a skin condition so rare that about 35 people in the world are affect worth such valuable resources?

Cancer; we all know about this nasty disease that takes thousands even millions of lives each year.  We know about the research and money that goes into finding a cure; as Penn Staters we even host the “oldest and longest dance marathon in the country” known as THON which is the “largest student run philanthropy in the world” to raise money for pediatric cancer research.  We all know someone who was effected by cancer. But do we know the origins of cancer?  Where did it come from?  When did it start?

(image from THON)

Before answering those questions we have to understand what cancer actually is.  According to the National Cancer Institute, cancer is when “some of the body’s cells begin to divide without stopping and spread into surrounding tissues.  Cancer can start almost anywhere in the human body, which is made up of trillions of cells. Normally, human cells grow and divide to form new cells as the body needs them. When cells grow old or become damaged, they die, and new cells take their place.  When cancer develops, however, this orderly process breaks down. As cells become more and more abnormal, old or damaged cells survive when they should die, and new cells form when they are not needed. These extra cells can divide without stopping and may form growths called tumors.”

There are many different forms of cancer.  Click Here if your interested in learning about the different types of cancer, their symptoms, treatments and research.  However, for the purpose of this blog, we are looking at cancer in a whole not a specific type.

(image from becuo)

According to the American Cancer Society , “Some of the earliest evidence of cancer is found among fossilized bone tumors, human mummies in ancient Egypt, and ancient manuscripts. Growths suggestive of the bone cancer called osteosarcoma have been seen in mummies. Bony skull destruction as seen in cancer of the head and neck has been found, too.  Our oldest description of cancer (although the word cancer was not used) was discovered in Egypt and dates back to about 3000 BC. It’s called the Edwin Smith Papyrus and is a copy of part of an ancient Egyptian textbook on trauma surgery. It describes 8 cases of tumors or ulcers of the breast that were removed by cauterization with a tool called the fire drill. The writing says about the disease, “There is no treatment.”

(Edwin Smith Papyrus image from U.S. National Library of Medicine)

According to the research above, the first signs of what we know today as cancer originated in Egypt.  This was concluded because scientists looked at the Edwin Smith Papyrus and concluded that the conditions written about are similar to cancer.  However, Andrew has repeatedly said, “data can be consistent with more than one hypothesis.”  So can these conditions actually be other diseases besides cancer?

Tracing the roots of cancer, Zimmerman and Rosalie David, his colleague, “analyzed possible references to the disease in classical literature and scrutinized signs in the fossil record and in mummified bodies. Despite slivers of tissue from hundreds of Egyptian mummies being rehydrated and placed under the microscope, only one case of cancer has been confirmed. Dismissing the argument that the ancient Egyptians didn’t live long enough to develop cancer, the researchers pointed out that other age-related disease such as hardening of the arteries and brittle bones did occur. Evidence of cancer in ancient Egyptian texts is also ‘tenuous’ with cancer-like problems more likely to have been caused by leprosy or even varicose veins. The ancient Greeks were probably the first to define cancer as a specific disease and to distinguish between benign and malignant tumors. And the first reports in scientific literature of distinctive tumors only occurred in the past 200 years or so, including scrotal cancer in chimney sweeps in 1775 and nasal cancer in snuff users in 1761.”

The research done by Zimmerman, David and the American Cancer Society has helped to explain the origins of cancer and how it started.

Did you have a stuffed animal when you were younger; one that you took everywhere?  The answer is most likely yes.  They are cute, make for a great pillow during long car rides, and are your best friends.  But do they have other effects on children or are they simply the latter?

(picture from Yale New Haven Hospital)

Parent Magazine reported the research of Paul Donahue, a child psychologist in Scarsdale, NY. He claims that stuffed animals teach children these 5 important lessens:

• “Independence: Dolls and stuffed animals can help toddlers cope with separation anxiety. (Donahue, PhD.)
• Dealing with Emotions: Children at this age can learn to manage their emotions by role-playing with dolls, it gives them a way to communicate their own experiences in a playful, nonthreatening manner.
• Learning Language: When toddlers start chatting with his dolls and stuffed animals, it means he’s also listening to the sound of his own voice — which can help him improve his pronunciation and beef up his rapidly expanding vocabulary.
• Getting along with Others: Her dolls and stuffed animals give her the opportunity to practice taking turns, sharing with friends, and empathizing with others, explains Dr. Donahue.
• Building Confidence: Toddlers need to feel a bit of control, children play the role of parent to his doll or stuffed animal, treating it the same way a parent treats him: telling it “no,” putting it to bed, punishing bad behavior with a time-out, or giving it hugs and kisses.”

Stuffed animals are not just toys children play with; these toys teach children valuable lessens.  This is all observational data and not a study with a randomized control group. An experimental study would entail giving half the group of toddlers stuffed animals and the other half nothing and following their development over the years.

Research by UV University Amsterdam   looked into self-esteem leading to depression and anxiety.  The university says that stuffed animals can help decrease the latter.  Sander Koole, led researcher says, “cuddling with a teddy bear for example can soothe existential fears and can give some sense of existential significance.”

This research states, “Of course while stuffed animals cure depression to a point they shouldn’t be used as a substitute to proper treatment. Still they are a good way to help out with minor problems and to be an additional help for more serious cases.”

Stuffed animals are a good way to ease your pains, but if your depression is serious consult a doctor for treatment.

(picture by the Frisky)

Boise State University conducted a study “to see if stuffed animals worked as therapeutically as real animals.  Rose M. Barlow, Department of Psychology, surveyed a sample of high and low dissociative female college students and those with dissociative identity disorder (DID) about attachment to live and stuffed animals. She found that the DID women had significantly stronger attachments to both live and stuffed animals than any of the other women. She also found that those with high dissociation and those with DID reported higher levels of attachment to stuffed animals than live animals when compared to the low dissociative group.”

In this study, depression, anxiety and bipolar were not considered, however the evidence suggests that stuffed animals are helpful to people with dissociation.  Dissociation “can begin in childhood and result from emotionally unavailable parents, divorce, or abuse, integrating stuffed animals into therapy for young children can provide a sense of security and help to rebuild impaired attachment bonds. Animals, live or stuffed, can aid therapy for both children and adults by providing a way to experience and express emotions, a feeling of unconditional support, and grounding,” (Barlow’s study)

This research and study is correlational and not experimental.  While there may be third variables, we can conclude that is probably wise to give kids stuffed animals.  I mean if science has found something harmful connected to stuffed animals parents would not give their kids stuffed animals.  But we all know that has not happened yet.

Most people who have smartphones take selfies.  While this may be a normative statement and not a fact, I was wondering if there was a science behind selfies.  Are there scientific studies being conducted on selfies?

Let’s start with defining the world “Selfie”.  According to About Tech a selfie is “a picture of yourself usually shared on any social networking”. The phenomenon spread throughout the world and has been recently added to the Oxford Dictionary.

(image by Caspar a you-tuber)

After some research I found the answer to my question. Yes, there are studies being conducted on selfies.  But what are they researching?

A study conducted by Ohio State claims that “men who posted more photos of themselves online scored higher in measures of narcissism and psychopathy.” This study began with 800 men, ages 18-40, filling out an online questionnaire determining their photo posting habits. The questionnaire included

• how often do you post photos of yourself?
• do you edit your photos before posting them?
• questions about anti-social behavior
• questions about self- objectification”

The results were “posting more photos was correlated with both narcissism and psychopathy. Editing photos, however, was only associated with narcissism, and not psychopathy. Narcissism measures inflated self-image (often motivated by underlying insecurity), while psychopathy involves a lack of empathy and impulsive behavior.These findings don’t mean that men who post selfies are actually narcissists or psychopaths, it does mean that they scored higher than others in these anti-social traits, although they were still within the normal range of behavior. The Ohio State study also found that editing photos of oneself was associated with higher levels of self-objectification.”

(picture by FOOYOH)

The study above describes the effects of selfies on men. How about women; do women taking selfies also link to narcissism and psychopathy?  What are the effects of selfies on women? 

Petya Eckler a researcher at the University of Strathclyde claims,” The more women are exposed to “selfies” and other photos on social media, the more they compare themselves negatively.”

Researchers from University of Strathclyde, Ohio University and University of Iowa surveyed 881 female college students in the US to come to the conclusion in the latter. The questions were about

• Facebook use
• eating and exercising regimes
• body images

After completing their research they concluded that there is a link between “time spent on social networks and negative comparisons about body image.”

“Spending more time on Facebook is not connected to developing a bad relationship with food, but there is a connection to poor body image,” Petya Eckler, of the University of Strathclyde, in Glasgow, told the BBC.

(image by My Counseling Service Australia)

Another study was conducted in three business schools in Europe “titled “Tagger’s Delight? Disclosure and liking behavior in Facebook: the effects of sharing photographs amongst multiple known social circles”. Four professors came to the conclusion that there is a correlation between posting selfies and levels of intimacy.  

However, remember that correlation need not equal causation.

To prove the correlation the professors “asked 508 Facebook users with an average age of 24 to rank how close they feel to their friends, coworkers and relatives who also use Facebook. They then compared those answers to how many selfies those people posted. Overwhelmingly, the more someone posted selfies, the lower they ranked on the intimacy scales of the participants. But of course, given that these selfie morons are clearly self-centered, they don’t even realize what they’re doing.”

These three studies are observational and not experimental.  The studies asked a group of people to answer questions; there is always the possibility that people lied on the questionnaire, did not read the questions and just put random answers or did not understand the questions.

More studies need to be conducted before we can prove that selfies are purely negative.

We have all heard a story that goes something like this:  The old loving couple had been married for sixty years and could not stand to be apart.  Unfortunately, she passed away in her sleep one night.  He was so heartbroken and could not stand to live without her, a few days later he died of a broken heart.  This sounds romantic, but is it actually true. Can you die of a broken heart?  Keep in mind I am posing this question figuratively and not literally.

(picture from Psychology Today)

An observational study was conducted by Harvard Researchers analyzing 26,000 Americans over the age of 50.  “They focused on 12,316 of the participants who were married in 1998 and followed them through 2008 to determine which participants became widows or widowers, then recorded when they died.There were 2,912 deaths during the study period. Of those, 2,373 were among married people who left a widow or widower behind. The other 539 deaths were among people who had become widows and widowers themselves. Widows and widowers were more likely to die than people whose spouses were still living, on average.”  The study went on to conclude that death rates of a widower were 66% more likely to occur in the first three months.  “Fifty of those 539 people died within three months of losing their spouse, 26 died between three and six months later and 44 died between six and 12 months later.” (Harvard Study above) However, they are still unclear of what caused the widow’s death.  

 Unfortunately, this study only looked at people over the age of 50 and that could be explained by third variables. Some possible reasons for the deaths were a grief-related mechanism, the spread of the illness that killed the first spouse and the change in lifestyle (no longer going for walks). Additionally, we can not conclude the same findings for married couple below 50.

After more research I learned about a condition known as SADS (Sudden Adult Death Syndrome).  This syndrome is scientifically known as Sudden Arrhythmia Death Syndrome; the sudden death of a healthy person.   “In about 1 in every 20 cases of sudden cardiac death and up to 1 in 5 young sudden cardiac deaths, no definite cause of death can be found, even after drugs have been excluded and an expert cardiac pathologist has examined the heart for structural abnormalities. In such cases, the death will be attributed to sudden arrhythmia death syndrome (SADS). This is caused by electrical functioning of the heart without affecting the structure.”  It is possible that the widows from the first study died of SADS.

We can conclude from the study and the research above that widows can die of loneliness in the form of SADS, a cardiac death caused by an emotional stress.  This makes sense if you loved your deceased spouse.  However, can you die of a broken heart when it isn’t your lover who passed away?

After researching this question I learned about another syndrome known as cardiomyopathy  which  “makes it harder for your heart to pump and deliver blood to the rest of your body. Cardiomyopathy can lead to heart failure.”

A John Hopkins University cardiologist, Ilan Wittstein, MD, studied cardiomyopathy which is also known as broken heart syndrome  for a decade.   “This syndrome is a heart conditions brought upon by high levels of stress (caused by heart-breaking scenarios) that restrict the heart’s ability to pump blood. The first several patients we saw, many of them had [just experienced] the death of a loved one, a spouse, a parent. Some people started having symptoms at a funeral.”

Wittstein along with other doctors conducted a study with “19 previously healthy patients who were admitted to Johns Hopkins Hospital with chest pain or symptomatic heart failure precipitated by acute emotional stress.  They underwent the following tests Patients were evaluated by means of serial electrocardiography and serial measurement of cardiac isoenzymes, including creatine kinase, creatine kinase MB fraction, and troponin I.”

Unfortunately, this study looks only at 19 patients, the likelihood of chance being the third variable is much higher.

(picture by Cardiac Health)

After reading all of these studies, one can conclude that while it may not be possible to die of a broken heart, the emotional stress involved in losing a loved one may affect your heart in the form of SADS and Cardiomyopathy and wind up killing you.

I am not a “girly girl” by any standards; I hate nail polish and am not a big fan of makeup.  However, I love shoes; heels, boots, flats, sandals, etc.  I previously wrote a blog called The Science in High Heels.  Most people are aware that heels are not the best shoes for daily wear.  That blog looked into how heels actually harm the body.  However, I had no idea that other shoes were also detrimental.

Someone commentated on my blog informing me about plantar fasciitis; which can become worsened while wearing flats or flip flops.  According to the Mayo Clinic, plantar fasciitis “is one of the most common causes of heel pain. It involves pain and inflammation of a thick band of tissue, called the plantar fascia, that runs across the bottom of your foot and connects your heel bone to your toes.”

(picture by Braun Fitness)

This brought me to my new topic: Are all shoes harmful?  What shoes provide the best support for your feet?

A study was conducted by the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg called “Shod Versus Unshod: The Emergence of Forefoot Pathology in Modern Humans?” In this study they “examined 180 modern humans from three different population groups (Sotho, Zulu, and European), comparing their feet to one another’s, as well as to the feet of 2,000-year-old skeletons. The researchers concluded that, prior to the invention of shoes, people had healthier feet. Among the modern subjects, the Zulu population, which often goes barefoot, had the healthiest feet while the Europeans—i.e., the habitual shoe-wearers—had the unhealthiest.”

Walking barefoot is beneficial to your health, especially when you walk on natural surfaces such as grass, soil or sand.  Dr. Isaac Eliaz claims that walking barefoot allows you to receive electrons from the earth which is beneficial to your health.  A study claimed that this form of walking “changed the electrical activity in the brain, as measured by electroencephalograms. Still other research found that grounding benefitted skin conductivity, moderated heart rate variability, improved glucose regulation, reduced stress and boosted immunity.”

We can conclude that shoes alter the way you walk.  But how?

(picture by the science of sport)

Dr. Rossi, a consultant for the footwear industry, believes that “Natural gait and shoes are biomechanically incompatible because all shoes automatically convert the normal to the abnormal, the natural to the unnatural. And no therapy or mechanical device, no matter how precisely designed or expertly applied, can fully reverse the gait from wrong to right.”  The gait is a walking abnormality caused by shoes with different forms:

• “Propulsive gait — a stooped, stiff posture with the head and neck bent forward
• Scissors gait — legs flexed slightly at the hips and knees like crouching, with the knees and thighs hitting or crossing in a scissors-like movement
• Spastic gait — a stiff, foot-dragging walk caused by a long muscle contraction on one side
• Steppage gait — foot drop where the foot hangs with the toes pointing down, causing the toes to scrape the ground while walking, requiring someone to lift the leg higher than normal when walking
• Waddling gait — a duck-like walk that may appear in childhood or later in life”

Once the damage is done, it is almost impossible to fix it.

These studies and claims prove that shoes in general are harmful to your feet.  However, this does not mean that people should walk barefoot.  Can you imagine everyone around campus… barefoot?

Science once again has not abandoned us.  There are solutions, you could walk barefoot while wearing shoes.

Companies such as Merrell, VivoBareFoot, Planet Shoes, Xero shoes and tons of others are dedicated to creating shoes that “lack high cushioned heels, stiff soles and arch support,” according to Daniel Lieberman

(picture from Vivo BareFoot)

While this information is very intriguing, I do not foresee myself wearing Barefoot shoes because typically the shoes range from $100-$200.  Given that we are college students with loans we would rather by a $50 shoe compared to a $100 one.  Next time your feet hurt remember that it might be your shoes.

Lets be honest, we have all complained at one point or another in our lives.  Complaints could be, the food was horrible, this person is annoying, can my teacher stop being weird.  

We are constantly told that everything is science, so complaining must be too.  Lets take a deeper look at how something that is part of our everyday lives is science.

Jenny Mandelbaum a professor of Communications in Rutgers (not intended to offend anybody who dislikes Rutgers) claims, “They say complaints are fraught with social complexities,…Sometimes all the person wants is to be understood, they just want someone to listen.”

Complaining could be a positive thing because it expresses how the person feels.  It is always best to share your feelings instead of bottling them in.

Complaining causes health problems, “People who complain on a consistent basis are inclined to have poor health, tend not to do well in their jobs and have relationships that are less satisfying and shorter lasting.” (James Mapes 2012).  Mapes believes that people complain for three reasons.  The first reason we complain is that its become an unbreakable habit; secondly, its a good conversation starter and lastly, for validation.

Complaining is a form of expression, an art if you will.  The more you complain, the more you have to complain about because all you are allowing yourself to do is see the negatives.  What ever happened to being grateful.  Always remember that someone has it worse than you and by complaining you are not helping the situation.

Guy Winch Ph.D says that complaining results to damaging mental health.  He says, “Obviously, one such incident won’t harm our mental health, but we have so many complaints, this scenario happens many times a day. This accumulation of frustration and helplessness can add up over time and impact our mood, our self-esteem, and even our general mental health.”

While complaining allows you to get your anger out and feel better temporarily, overtime your health will worsen.  Also, when you constantly look at the negatives, the positive moments flash before you without you noticing.

Trevor Blake, author of “Three Simple Steps: A Map to Success in Business and Life.” says “exposure to 30 minutes or more of negativity–including viewing such material on TV–actually peels away neurons in the brain’s hippocampus. That’s the part of your brain you need for problem solving. Basically, it turns your brain to mush.”  

Complaining even effects our brain, this is a good sign that we should stop complaining and refocus our energy on positive things.

If you notice that you complain too much, maybe its time to break your habit.  Lauren Stewart has provided ways to break your habit:

1. Change the way you think
2. Allow time for occasional venting
3. Do yoga
4. Become less judgmental
5. Be grateful
6. Accept responsibility
7. Find things that make you happy

A Hole in the Heart, is not a literal Hole in the Heart.

It looks like this (this is a comparison between a normal heart and a heart with a hole in):

(picture provided by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute)

Not like this         :

The “hole in the heart” phrase has been intertwined in my family’s conversations since I was 8 years old.  My cousin, was born with “a hole in her heart”, the actual terminology is ventricular septal defect; this is a birth defect.  All I knew about this defect was that when my cousin was born, she had immediate surgery.  Now, ten years later she still has a five inch scar in the middle of her chest, and she sees a specialist once a year.  Luckily, she is an energetic and healthy (besides this defect) kid.  A couple of years later, I discovered that my sister had the same condition, fortunately hers was minor and no surgery was required.  I always wondered about this defect, and now I have an opportunity to answer my questions.

The American Heart Association reported the following, “ Ventricular Septal Defect is a hole in the wall separating the two lower chambers of the heart. VSD causes blood to travel across the hole from the left ventricle to the right ventricle and out into the lung arteries.  The extra blood being pumped into the lung arteries forces the lungs and heart to work harder and the lungs could become congested.”

VSD affects children by causing  their breathing to speed up, if this is a serious case, then they will become restricted from doing normal things.  My cousin’s condition restricts her from playing competitive sports along with other things.  Luckily, she has a passion for singing and playing music, which VSD does not restrict her from participating in.

This defect is not as uncommon as people believe.  This defect does not change the child physically or mentally; therefore, most people (strangers, friends, neighbors) never know the child has the defect.

But what causes VSD, how does a child get this defect?  The Mayo Clinic claims that “this defect arises from early problems in the heart’s development, but until now they still have not found a cause.  All that is known is during fetal development, the muscular wall (septum) separating the left and right side fails to form between the lower chambers and the heart ventricles.”

The first clinical description  of VSD was described by Roger Eisenmenger in 1879. If this defect has been around for over a hundred years, then why hasn’t science been able to find a cause or a cure?

Technology has progressed over the years, why is no cause found?  While in my cousin’s case, this could be genetic, but how did my sister get it when nobody else in my family had it?

There is a multitude of defects and diseases that science has not been able to completely understand.  But why?

Is it cold outside and is it making you tired?  How about those cloudy days, do they make you gloomy?  Is the sun out and are you hyped? Depending on the weather, my mood tends to change.  Is this real, or am I just weird? This brings me to my research of whether or not weather affects your mood?

According to PsychCentral, John M. Grohol, Psy.D. claims that weather impacts our mood.  “High temperatures brighten up depressed people’s mood, while wind or not enough sun depresses people.  Extreme heat brings out a 14% increase in aggression and 4% increase in violence.”

Marie Connolly, researcher, conducted a study that interviewed a group of women during rain, and different temperatures.  “When the women were interviewed during the rain and high temperatures, the women had decreasing life satisfaction.  On the other hand, when it was lower temperatures and no rain, the same women reported higher life satisfaction.”

It is all about mind over matter and self control.  When the weather is hot and we let it get to us, we become cranky versions of ourselves.  When the weather is cold and we let it change our days productivity, we are letting the weather win the battle.  By learning self- control we can learn to push through the climates changes and not let the weather affect our mood as much.

However, we are all humans and we do not have complete self-control so we allow the weather to affect our moods, there is even a disorder relating to this.  Seasonal affective disorder (SAD), is a type of depression that comes with the changing of the seasons. The Mayo Clinic reported that “In most cases, SAD comes in the fall and continues throughout the winter. There are people who get SAD in the spring or early summer, but these cases are less common.”

We let other aspects of our lives control our lives. Isn’t it time we took matters into our own hands. (I know this is the biggest cliche ever, but if the shoe fits).

(picture by Mother Earth Living)

A study in France showed that when the sun is out, people are more helpful and positive. Vinita Mehta PH.D., Ed.M. conducted an experiment which entailed four researchers to pose as hitchhikers on cloudy and sunny days.  “Out of the 2,864 instances, more drivers were willing to pick them up on sunny days compared to cloudy days.”

Researchers kept digging to find out the science behind this by conducting more experiments.  Jaap Denissen of Humboldt University in Berlin conducted another study with 1,233 participants in Germany. “The participants were mainly women age 28, but the ages spanned from 13-68.  This study was to determine how wind, temperature, sunlight, rain, snow and air pressure affected people’s moods.  The participants had to take a daily online questionnaire measuring their mood.  Here are the results:

• temperature, wind, and sunlight effected negative mood, and sunlight played a role in how tired people were
• wind negatively affected mood in spring and summer compared to fall and winter
• shorter days caused positive feelings”

The Huffington Post also reported some interesting facts about how the climate affects our well-being

• “winter brings people down
• extreme weather events contribute to mental health problems
• extreme weather brings out empathy
• violent crimes rise with the heat
• suicide incidences tied to seasonal factors
• warm climates have a lower risk of death”

While we cannot blame the weather for every mood we have, the weather does partly affect us mentally because we allow this exogenous factor to control us.  With the cold weather slowly approaching, let’s keep SAD away from Penn State.

Throughout my educational career, I noticed that when I like a teacher as a person, I do not mind the course load, and I wind up getting better grades.  I like teachers who are supportive towards my educational career.  Oppositely, when I do not like the teacher because they are distant or unsupportive I dread the class and everything about it, even if its a subject I enjoy.  Do platonic student-teacher relationships actually affect school performances? 

A study was conducted by Gwen Dewar, Ph.D. in 2013.  Dewar and a team of researchers experimented on 120, six year olds.  Each child was given a test to measure how their teacher relationships affected their abilities.  By doing so, before each question a picture of the student’s teacher would flash; the picture went too quickly for the eyes to recognize, but stayed long enough for the brain to connect with it.  The results showed, “the kids who have close, affectionate teacher relationships – as opposed to distant ones — end up solving many problems faster” (Ahnert et al 2012).  This begins to prove that when students have a friendly connection with their teacher, they are prone to do better.  

In my experience, when I have a close relationship with a teacher, I work twice as hard in fear of disappointing them.  Other reasons could be that when the student likes the teacher, they open their minds and allow the knowledge to enter their heads.  Oppositely, when students dislike the teacher, they do not pay attention and barely learn in that class.  When teachers connect with their students on a deeper level, and show that they care about their students, the students are willing to work harder to make their teachers proud.

Another study was conducted in 105 German students to explore how student-teacher relationships affect stress hormones.  The group experimented on by the Department of Developmental Psychology, University of Vienna, Austria, were all first graders.  In the experiment, “saliva was taken from students on Monday and again on Friday to display diurnal cortisol profiles“. The students who “had unsupportive classroom settings, teacher, had flatter cortisol profiles at the beginning and end of the week.  Comparably, students with healthy student-teacher relationships showed optimal cortisol profiles.”

Not only is this relationship affecting the students grades and ability to learn, it is also affecting their mental health.  This relationship is significant and can alter a child’s perspective on life.  For instance, a child in a “bad” neighborhood may feel pressured into joining a gang or dealing drugs because that is what they were raised in.  All it takes is one teacher to encourage and inspire you to fight for a better life.  We have all heard those stories of people who achieve the impossible and go from troubled neighborhoods to becoming company CEO’s or doctors.

Additionally, another study was conducted with 657 at risk students  showing that distance from one teacher, during a young age, has a lasting impression.  This lasting impact proved to affect children’s development and academic achievement.  On the other hand, students who were given support from their teachers had positive effects on their development. 

We have all had that one teacher that changed our lives in some way; the teacher that inspired us to apply to our dream schools, become engineers or just accept who we are.  I took a gamble on this relationship being science, but everything really is science.

We cannot ignore the facts and the studies that proves that student teacher relationships are beneficial. 

Maybe if we all had supportive and better relationships with our science teachers, we may be science majors today, or actually like science.

Girls we all know when there is a formal party, we love to strap on those super cute high heels.  This is an essential for any short girl, at least for me because I am 5’2.  Heels tend to make our feet hurt after wearing them for a long period of time, but we still wear them anyway.  So what is the science behind high heels?  Is wearing high heels affecting our health?

High Heels pay a toll on women’s spine, hips, knees, ankles, feet, posture, and gait. A study was conducted showing the affects of heels on your body.  First, lets get some facts straight:

The Spine Health Institute (Florida Hospital Medical Group) claims,

• Percentage of women who wore heels at some point: 72%
• 77% of women wear heels for special occasions
• 50% wear them for parties
• 33% wear them for dancing
• 31% wear them to work

(picture by the Spine Center Altamonte)

Researchers discovered that high heels actually “alter the natural position of the foot-ankle complex, and thereby produce a chain reaction of effects that travel up the lower limb at least as far as the spine.” heels create acute and chronic effects that impact women’s balance.  

Another study was conducted with women in school to be flight attendants, in South Korea.  If you have ever been on a plane, you probably have seen female flight attendants in some sort of heel.  This is a four year school, thus, ten women from each grade level participated in this experiment.  The students were tested on “balance boards and computerized exercise machines”. Jee Yong-Seok, the professor of exercise physiology at Hanseo University, led this study.  The freshman, were the control so to speak because they have just began wearing heels; therefore, they did not have any change in their feet or balance.  Moving on to the sophomores and juniors who were wearing heels for a longer time, their feet showed that “wearing high heeled shoes may at first lead to adaptation and increased strength,….upperclass women had worse balance than the freshmen, even as some of their muscles were strengthening. (Yong-Seok 2015). You may think, if wearing heels make your feet and ankle stronger, then we should wear them more often.  You are actually wrong to think this way because the study does not end there.  Finally, the seniors were tested and the results showed weakening in their joints and muscles around the ankle.  Dr. Yong-Seok claims,”the ratio of strength between the muscles on the sides of the ankles and those at the front and back became increasingly unbalanced over years of wearing heels, contributing to ankle instability and balance problems and eventually to a decline in the strength even of those muscles that had been stronger for awhile.”

This study, as compelling as it is, lacks a large group of randomized women.  More than forty women should be tested to make conclusive results.  Also, women all over the world should be tested, to eliminate a third variable.  What if the shoes are not causal to the muscles and ankles worsening, but an environmental factor is present?

With the facts presented we can assume, 99%, that the shoes are a direct causation to the worsening balance and the muscle changes.  High Heels do affect women, after long periods of time, so do not be discouraged from wearing heels once in awhile.  If you wear heels everyday, you may want to rethink that decision if your concerned with your health. 

But do not worry, science has not abandoned us, there are solutions to help ease or limit the pain. 

After reading these articles, I will be wearing heels only when I need to: during a party, wedding, or my future career. Let’s save our feet from short term aching and long term effects by reducing our heel wearing today.  

. 

(picture by the Spine Center Altamonte)

Hello, I’m Rana Mohamed.

Glad to know that I am not the only one who absolutely hated all my science classes in high school.  I like to think and form my own opinions and conclusions instead of being told that there can only be one answer.  I am really looking forward to have the opportunity to do that in this science class.

1.) When I was creating my schedule back in July I chose to get my science gen eds out of the way because I absolutely hate science.  This way I could take courses I actually had an interest in during junior and senior year.  While I was looking through that extremely long list of available science class I rolled my eyes about how awful each one sounded.  Click here  to see how much of a disaster high school was.  I am not majoring in anything science related so why would I put myself through bio or chem?  Then, I found science 200 and once I saw that the class was made for non-science majors and people who do not enjoy science, I scheduled it immediately.

2.) I am not planning to be a science major because the subject does not interest me at all.  Over the years I took various science courses (bio, chem, physics) and none of them grabbed my attention.  I have compiled a list of things (subjects, course, hobbies, activities) that I enjoy doing and I am good at, and science is just not one of them.

Representing Penn State during graduation.