Unless you lived under a rock in 2012, you have probably heard about, or even attempted, the Cinnamon Challenge. You were either dared to do it or stepped up to the challenge to try and show off, because it definitely was not something you wanted to do just for fun. In case you are unaware of what the Cinnamon Challenge actually is, “the objective of the challenge is to film oneself swallowing a spoonful of ground cinnamon in under 60 seconds without drinking anything, then upload the video to the Internet”. You may be thinking, “Oh that doesn’t sound to bad”, but believe me, it’s pretty bad.

I have taken the challenge twice. The first time I don’t really count because I did not put the whole spoonful into my mouth, but the second time I made sure to take it all in. I lasted less than 10 seconds because I started to laugh, and it all went downhill from there. Cinnamon powder spewing everywhere, me trying to grasp for oxygen, and then me running to a garbage can to throw up everything I had just eaten for lunch (sorry for the mental images). Whether we know it or not, the Cinnamon Challenge is dangerous and could be really bad for our health. However, people continue to take the challenge and post their failures on YouTube. “As of August 10, 2012, there were 51100 YouTube clips depicting the Cinnamon Challenge. One video was viewed .19 million times, predominantly by 13- to 24year-olds, ages similar to people taking the Cinnamon Challenge and associated with the greatest need for conformity”.

The challenge is close to impossible because of the substance found in cinnamon, known as cellulose. The cellulose does not break down and can end up coating the lungs, making it difficult to breathe. There are substantial health risks from the cellulose such as coughing, gagging, vomiting and further inhalation of cinnamon that leads to throat irritation, breathing difficulties, and risk of pneumonia or a collapsed lung.

In 2011, 51 calls were made to the US American Association of Poison Control Centers relating to the Cinnamon Challenge. For the first 6 months of 2012, there were 178 calls dealing with this viral issue; 122 (69%) were classified as intentional misuse or abuse of cinnamon and 30 (17%) required medical attention. According to the Florida Poison Information Center in Miami, between the span of one year from 2011-2012, “there were 26 calls regarding cinnamon exposure in individuals ranging from age 1.5 to 83 years”. Most of these patients were okay after washing out their system. Five cases involved follow-ups which were resolved in a couple of hours. Two of these cases had potentially toxic exposure from the Cinnamon Challenge.

Do people follow other’s behavior even though we know the risks and danger involved?

Null Hypothesis: People did not take part in the Cinnamon Challenge because they knew the risks involved.

Alternative Hypothesis: People participated in the Cinnamon Challenge after being influenced by others, not taking into account the risks that came along with it.

“The total number of Google hits on this topic rose from 0.2 million in 2009 to 0.9 million in 2010; to 2 million in 2011; and to 2.4 million in the first half of 2012″. This fact supports the alternative hypothesis, but the hypothesis is subjective. Not everyone that participates in the cinnamon challenge does it because they don’t care about the risks. They might not know the risks at the time or they might simply disregard what could happen. Some people might not take part in the challenge because they were not presented with the opportunity, or it wasn’t in their personal interest, or they have pre-existing medical issues such as asthma. There are a lot of third variables that can be taken into consideration when it comes to studying why people do the Cinnamon Challenge.

I have done the Cinnamon Challenge before, so I can speak from experience. I do not suggest anyone to try and challenge themselves by trying to eat a spoonful of cinnamon. Don’t do cinnamon, kids!

Do you remember when you were a little kid that didn’t like any food that your parents tried to put in your mouth? They would use the “train” or the “airplane” or they would just end up eating it all themselves. What about now? Other than the fact that we are struggling college students, I’m sure we would appreciate any type of food that our parents tried to feed us. That’s because our taste buds have evolved.

In case you were not aware of this, children have different taste buds than adults. When we are younger, our taste buds are in charge of trying new foods and they determine whether or not they like what they eat. Its not all up to the taste buds though. “Taste is a composite sense that’s partly determined by the taste buds, but also affected by a food’s aroma, its appearance and even previous experiences with that or similar foods”. Whenever I am trying a new food, I have the tendency to smell it first because I can usually predict if I am going to like it or not.

The four sections of the tongue.

According to Wikipedia, the human tongue has between 2,000 and 8,000 taste buds. There are four different categories for our taste buds, including sweet, salty, bitter, and sour. Some people include savory as a category, but it is not scientifically proven yet. Taste buds, or taste receptors, are grouped inside papillae, the small bumps you see on your tongue. The taste buds themselves are composed of lots of small receptor cells, between 50 and 150, which actually process taste. We have found that 80%-90% of taste is actually smell. “We fail to distinguish between their functions, instead mentally blending the real distinctions between taste, smell, flavor, and aroma just as we do when we eat. The interaction between smell and taste commences with the link between aroma and appetite.”

Even though our perception of taste also depends on third variables such as smell and appearance, if we think that we will like a food beforehand, chances are we actually will. We now have a better understanding of why kids are picky when it comes to certain foods being put on their plates.

Study 1: At the University of Western Sydney in Australia, young boys between the ages of 8-10 were compared to adult males, and it was found that the younger boys were more sensitive to sweet flavors.

Study 2: At the University of Copenhagen, 8,900 Danish children were observed and showed a noticeable change in taste perceptions as they got older. The older kids were able to distinguish flavors better, but did not prefer sweet flavors as much as the younger children did.

Study 3: Stanford University placed two identical meals in different packaging; one in a plain wrapper and one from a fast food restaurant. Children picked which meal tasted better and generally associated their experience with the name brand packaging.

The data from these studies are difficult to analyze because of the fact that taste is subjective. Looking at the two hypotheses, we have the null (taste buds don’t change as you get older) and the alternative (taste buds evolve over time). Based on these three studies, the alternative hypothesis is true. We lose up to half of our taste buds as we get older, which is the main reason that food tastes less flavorful. This makes me even more afraid of getting older, simply because my favorite foods may not taste as good anymore!

I broke my first bone when I was three years old, or so my parents have told me. I do not remember what happened but they say that I jumped off of the picnic table, and I guess I thought I could fly. Unfortunately, I was not able to fly and landed straight onto the pavement below. As a result of my naïve actions, I ended up fracturing my right clavicle, or in other words, I broke my collarbone.

Fast forward to seventh grade. My family and I were going into Brooklyn, NY to celebrate the Jewish holiday with the rest of the family, but we made a stop first. I love to ride rollercoasters, so my parents figured we would go ride one of the oldest coasters still running, the Cyclone at Coney Island. I was so excited to ride this historic rollercoaster, and my adrenaline was rushing. The ride started and right after the first turn, I heard a pop in my shoulder and have never felt so much pain before. Little did I know, I experienced the same amount of pain when I was three. After going to the hospital, they told me that I had fractured my right clavicle…again.

A drawing of what a fractured clavicle looks like.

I have only broken two bones in my life, and they both happened to be the same one. The doctor said that this was a freak accident and that something like this rarely happens, especially to such an abnormal bone. If it was a finger or wrist, that would be  a little different. This got me thinking about the chances of breaking the same bone twice.

Null Hypothesis: Broken bones do not get stronger than they were before they were broken.

Alternative Hypothesis: Broken bones become stronger than they were before they were broken.

Studies for this hypothesis are simply observational and anecdotal, because it could be considered unethical to have people break their bones for this type of research. In my opinion, I believe the null hypothesis to be true simply because of my history with broken bones.

The three areas of the collarbone and the frequency of fractures by location.

To state the obvious, human bones and muscles strengthen when they are used a lot, but they also weaken when they are not being used as much. “Wolff’s Law was developed by the German anatomist and surgeon Julius Wolff in the 19th century that states that bone in a healthy person or animal will adapt to the loads under which it is placed. If loading on a particular bone increases, the bone will remodel itself over time to become stronger to resist that sort of loading.The inverse is true as well: if the loading on a bone decreases, the bone will become weaker due to turnover”.

After a bone is broken, the healing process is started when a callus is formed over the fracture to protect it from further damage. In addition to being added protection, “calcium is deposited to aid rebuilding”, according to Dr. Terry D. Amaral, director of pediatric orthopedic surgery at Montefiore Medical Center. In return, the fracture site becomes stronger than the rest of the bone due to all of the extra calcium that it has been receiving.

At some point, the bones will return to equal strength, and the fracture site will be no more or less likely to break again. It returns to a clean slate, and whatever happens depends on the actions of the person. “Dr. Amaral said that in studies in which healed bones were subjected to bending and twisting forces, the repaired bones were capable of breaking anywhere, including the fracture site” according to the NY Times.

In conclusion, the null hypothesis is correct, just not for the reasons that I thought. The bones in fact do get stronger when they are making a full recovery, but once it is healed, the chances of breaking it again are the same before it was broken. Like my doctor said, breaking my collarbone twice in the same area was truly a freak accident.

As we jump back in time to first grade, you probably recall the dreaded days when the teacher began to teach us how to write in cursive. Even though it was such a struggle to connect all of the letters within each word, I remember feeling like such an adult because I could finally write like one. Not many kids can say that anymore. You ask them to sign their name, and it takes them so long to figure out where to even start. At this point is it even possible for cursive to make a comeback?

Null Hypothesis: Cursive does not need to be taught/learned anymore.

Alternative Hypothesis: Cursive needs to continue to be taught/learned.

In May 2013, the New York Times decided to propose a debate in their opinion pages for the topic, “Is Cursive Dead?”. Four people shared their thoughts on this topic, two supporting cursive and two rejecting cursive.

Supporters: Suzanne Baruch Asherson (occupational therapist at the Beverly Hills Unified School District in California) and Jimmy Bryant (director of archives and special collections at the University of Central Arkansas)

Rejecters: Morgan Polikoff (assistant professor of education at the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education) and Kate Gladstone (founder of Handwriting Repair/Handwriting That Works and director of the World Handwriting Contest)

Asherson wrote an article called, “The Benefits of Cursive Go Beyond Writing”, stating that writing in cursive makes use of more parts of the brain compared to printing or typing. She mentioned “the College Board found that students who wrote in cursive for the essay portion of the SAT scored slightly higher than those who printed, which experts believe is because the speed and efficiency of writing in cursive allowed the students to focus on the content of their essays”.

Bryant’s article is titled, “Cursive Handwriting Is a Cultural Tradition Worth Preserving”, and as an archivist, he believes that writing in cursive is a form of art that should be cherished. “At one time in our history people took great pains to write a letter utilizing their best penmanship. In fact, a case could be made that some of the finer examples of cursive writing are actually a form of art”.

On the other hand, Polikoff’s article, “Let Cursive Handwriting Die”, focuses on the future instead of trying to bring back the past. He states, “Given these realities, teachers would be better off focusing on the skills and knowledge that will impact student success in the future. These include printing and typing, but not cursive”.

Lastly, you have Gladstone’s opinion, “Handwriting Matters; Cursive Doesn’t”. She mentioned that handwriting teachers were surveyed while at a conference hosted by publishers of cursive textbooks. “37 percent wrote in cursive; another 8 percent printed. The majority, 55 percent, wrote a hybrid: some elements resembling print-writing, others resembling cursive. When most handwriting teachers shun cursive, why mandate it?”

After being presented with these different opinions, has your view of writing in cursive changed?

Cursive vs. print

There are PROs and CONs when it comes to comparing cursive and print. Cursive is more natural, and helps with motor skills by using smooth strokes as the pen is able to flow in between letters. With cursive, words are clearly separated from each other which makes the sentence easier to read. If you can read cursive, chances are you can read manuscript as well, but that is not the case the other way around.

Printing is obviously more widely used. The alphabet for manuscript is easier to use than the cursive alphabet. Many people believe cursive is less legible and harder to read, which is why many documents will have the phrase “please print” typed at the top. Also, people with dyslexia, who have a hard time reading, can only get more confused by trying to distinguish letters written in cursive.

While the debate between cursive and printing could continue on, there is a new, third variable that could be introduced into the hypothesis. We live in the 21st-century which means we have the luxury of being able to type on computers and smartphones. Karin James, a psychologist at Indiana University, created and executed an experiment that tested children who were not yet taught how to read or write. They were “presented with a letter or a shape on an index card and asked to reproduce it in one of three ways: trace the image on a page with a dotted outline, draw it on a blank white sheet, or type it on a computer”. The children were then placed in a brain scanner and the image was shown to them again. When the kids drew the letter freehand, they used more parts of their brain than when they traced or typed the letter.

The new debate

James conducted another study to compare kids who learn by watching others form the letters. She concluded that the effort of writing the letter is the only way to get the brain fully engaged and ultimately learn how to write.

Virginia Berninger, a psychologist at the University of Washington, conducted a study focusing on children in 2nd grade to 5th grade to try and prove that printing, cursive, and typing all use different brain patterns. “When the children composed text by hand, they not only consistently produced more words more quickly than they did on a keyboard, but expressed more ideas”, she stated.

Two psychologists, Pam A. Mueller of Princeton and Daniel M. Oppenheimer of the University of California, have done research to prove that college students who write down notes instead of typing them on a computer are able to learn and process the information better.

After looking through numerous amounts of studies, it seems as if the initial null and alternative hypotheses are outdated. If I were to choose a hypothesis that best fits the studies and information gathered it would be the alternative hypothesis, but just with one small revision.

Alternative Hypothesis: Cursive Writing needs to continue to be taught and learned in the classroom.

When you turn on your TV guide to find something interesting to watch, chances are you will come across at least one crime show, whether it be a new episode or a rerun you’ve seen a thousand times. There is CSI, NCIS, Criminal Minds, Law and Order, and Bones, just to name a few favorites. CSI has been one of the most popular crime shows to date, which could be a reason for having three different series for it (CSI, CSI: Miami, and CSI: New York). This popular show has had quite an interesting outcome when it comes to the courtrooms, which is how it came to be known as the “CSI Effect”.

The three different CSI shows.

Monica Robbers, an American criminologist, defined it as “the phenomenon in which jurors hold unrealistic expectations of forensic evidence and investigation techniques, and have an increased interest in the discipline of forensic science”. On average, there are about 63 homicides shown per week on primetime television across six different networks, according to The San Diego Tribune. Every time one of these homicides is shown on TV, the audience tries to figure out who committed the crime, by following the leads of the show’s detectives. The audience then tries to solve the cases when it was their turn to be jurors in the courtroom. From watching crime shows, jurors think they know every little aspect of an investigation, when in reality, they’re only shown the basics.

To see if the “CSI Effect” truly had an impact on the average person, Gregg Barak, Ph.D., and Young Kim, Ph.D., criminology professors at Eastern Michigan University, surveyed approximately 1,000 people who were to be selected as jurors for an upcoming case. The first question asked about the programs they watched on television, including how often they were watched and how realistic they were thought to be. The survey included questions about several types of cases relating to murder/attempted murder, physical and sexual assault, breaking and entering, theft, and possession of a gun.

The results from the survey.

The results: 46% expected to see some kind of scientific evidence in every case. 22% expected to see DNA evidence in every case. 36% expected to see fingerprint evidence in every case. 32% expected to see evidence from ballistics in every case. 27% would not convict someone without scientific evidence. And 42% of the 1,000 people surveyed watch CSI.

Although this evidence is purely anecdotal, other studies have received results that proved watching crime shows had an effect on people. Arizona State University conducted mock trials with their students and found that 29% of non-CSI viewers said they would convict, however only 18% of CSI viewers would have convicted the defendant.

Some incidents have occurred that show the “CSI Effect” taking place in the courtroom. In Phoenix, AZ, jurors brought to the judges attention that DNA was not collected from blood found on a lab coat, where the judge replied that tests were not needed because the defendant had already admitted to being present at the scene. The judge agreed that the jurors learned about DNA tests from television shows, but not enough about when to use them. On the other hand, in Richmond, VA, jurors were able to overturn the outcome of a case when they asked if a cigarette butt could be tested for DNA that could relate back to the defendant. The DNA tests were completed, but not introduced into the evidence because the tests exonerated the defendant. “Obviously these represent only a fraction of the instances in which previous “knowledge” gained by jurors from television had predetermined their views of the important, possible, and applicable tests, procedures, and therefore altered their expectations. The true number of times that these types of views have biased or at least influenced juror decisions can never be quantified” according to Evan Durnal, a researcher of the University of Central Missouri’s Criminal Justice Department.

Statistics from 97 defense attorneys that were surveyed by Monica Robbers:

• 47% felt they were forced to spend more time weeding through potential jurors during voir dire (a preliminary examination of a witness or a juror by a judge or counsel).
• 66% felt they spent additional time discussing forensic evidence.
• 62% felt that juries had an unreasonable expectation of forensic evidence.
• 40% felt that they had been involved in cases in which forensic evidence was presented but was entirely irrelevant to the proceedings.

Statistics from 89 judges that were surveyed by Monica Robbers:

• 46% felt that forensic evidence that was irrelevant to the case was presented.
• 58% felt that more time had been spent in voir dire.
• 69% felt that jurors had an unreasonable expectation of forensic evidence.

As you can see, the perspectives of the attorneys and the judges have pretty similar opinions about how they feel the “CSI Effect” has impacted the courtrooms. Is there such thing as the “CSI Effect”? Yes, yes there is. Watching crime shows, such as CSI, does have an effect on jurors in the courtroom. Could there be reverse causation? There is a slight chance that it could be the case. If you are a juror on duty and you are actually interested by what is taking place, then you might be intrigued to go home and watch more crime shows. The studies tended to be more observational than experimental, since the outcomes are mostly subjective. As Evan Durnal wrote in his research, “It may not influence every juror one way or another, but it most certainly has influence on the criminal justice system as a whole”.

Although most of us have probably never been placed on jury duty, do you think you could be affected by the “CSI Effect”?

Now that I have caught your attention with such an intriguing question, I can explain to you how science does not agree that swimmers are as “hot” as we think they are. Whether you swim competitively or once or twice over the summer to get a good tan, we all know it takes a good bit of energy to stay afloat. You may or may not be wondering where all of the energy from swimmers goes once it leaves our body. Is there a relationship between swimmers and the temperature of the water in the pool? Well believe it or not, there is a little thing called science behind it all.

Energy cannot be created or destroyed, but it can be converted from one form to another, which is stated by the Law of Conservation of Energy. In 1840, James Prescott Joule began experimenting with this theory, and even created an “apparatus in which a weight (1) running over a pulley (2) pulls on a rope (3) and spins a paddle wheel so it agitates water inside a closed container (4), heating it up by a small amount”. After repeating the experiment multiple times to make sure is results were accurate, “Joule calculated that the potential energy lost by the falling weight was exactly the same as the heat energy gained by the water in the container”. In short, the energy that was “lost” was exactly the same amount that was “gained”, and end up canceling each other out. The amount of energy that swimmers put into the water is the same amount of energy that gets converted into warmer temperatures.

Joule’s pulley system applied to a swimming pool.

Science can be applied to any part of our daily lives; for example, the Law of Conservation of Energy can be applied to swimming to find out if swimming warms the temperature of the pool. Intense swimming during practice or just for exercise causes people to sweat and burn off energy, which we can assume goes straight into the water. If the water is 20°C (68°F) to start with and we need a temperature rise of 80°C (176°F), and knowing it takes an hour to give us 0.007°C (32°F), we’d need swimmers to keep going for 11,200 hours”.

That is equal to 466 days, or about a year and three months.

In conclusion, ‘yes’ swimmers do make the pool warmer, but not nearly enough to make the slightest difference in the temperature.

Now that you know what effect swimmers have on the temperature of the water, you may be wondering if it is better for swimmers to train in warm water or chilly water. When swimming in cold pools, you need to allow more time for your body to warm up. In pools under 60°F, blood vessels in the body close up to keep the heat in, but eventually they will need to open back up to regulate the blood flow. When they open, cold blood will begin to run through the veins and once that blood reaches the organs, the swimmer is at risk of hypothermia.

According to SFGate, “Two studies of athletes competing in long-distance, open-water swims found that most of them were suffering mild hypothermia by the end of the race, even when the water temperatures were in the 60s or higher. 11 participants in a 2000 Alcatraz swim were studied and found that five were suffering mild hypothermia by the end of the event. And perhaps more concerning, their temperatures continued to drop after they got out of the water”.

Water that is 90°F, however, is too warm and can lead to overheating and exhaustion. When swimming for a long period of time or doing a tough workout, your body temperature increases and results in more sweat and quicker dehydration. “Profuse sweating can lead to an imbalance of electrolytes, which can effect muscle mobility”, according to Livestrong. As a swimmer myself, I know how hard it can be to swim outside on those hot, summer days with the sun shining bright. It may start off with being a little light-headed, but can eventually lead to heat exhaustion and nausea.

A study written in “The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness”, from 1993, states that 70°F is an ideal temperature to swim in because the human body adjusts better to cooler water. The best temperature ultimately depends how strenuous the swimming is, how long the workout lasts, and personal preferences of the swimmer.

When it comes to whether or not swimmers heat up the pool with their energy, there is a possibility for reverse causation. Depending on the temperature of the pool could affect how much energy swimmers exert, which brings us to figuring out the “perfect” temperature to swim in. However, there are no third variables likely to come into play.

“Hot” Olympic swimmers, courtesy of Google Images.

To answer the initial question, swimmers are indeed hot, even though swimming pools don’t really seem to be affected by it too much.

Since I’ve been in college, I have noticed myself staying up pretty late to do homework already. To keep myself awake for these long, dreadful hours, I like to stock up with energy to make sure that I get everything done that needs to be done. If this means eating chips and drinking coffee at midnight, then I guess that is what I need to do.

I have told myself before that doing this can’t be good for my health or my weight, so I have decided to do some research on this question. Will eating late at night make you gain weight? Surprise, surprise… The answer is yes! The main reason is probably because when it is late at night, most people don’t pay much attention to whether or not the food they are eating is healthy or not. We tend to eat ice cream or cookies or leftovers when we are looking for something to eat late at night.

According to The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, “nighttime eaters ate 12 percent more calories than those who ate only throughout the day”. Eating foods with a high-fat content before bed can cause you to go to bed with increased blood sugar levels. “At any time of day, these set the body up for subsequent sugar crashes and weight gain, with the body quickly storing excess sugar as fat, says Lori Zanini, a California-based registered dietitian and certified diabetes educator with HealthCare Partners medical group” (US News). Since you are less likely to perform any type of exercise after eating late at night, the sugar goes straight to your fat cells, causing you to gain weight. According to WebMD, not only does eating late at night add unnecessary calories to your diet, but it can also lead to indigestion and problems sleeping.

If you do find yourself in my situation and you are absolutely starving at one in the morning, some good options are fruit, low-fat yogurt, small portions of popcorn, and anything that is 100 calories or less. Experts say more research still needs to be done on this topic to determine what causes the weight gain exactly, but for now, just stick to eating healthy if you find yourself getting the munchies while you are up late stressing about your homework.

For those of us that have seen the movie Inside Out, we know it is about an 11-year-old girl named Riley, who struggles to adjust to the changes in her life after moving from Minnesota to San Francisco. Helping her adjust are her five main emotions, known as Joy, Sadness, Disgust, Anger, and Fear.

To the viewer, it seems as if Joy plays the leading role amongst the five emotions in Riley’s head. Scientists wrote an article in the NY Times regarding the movie and suggest “studies find that our identities are defined by specific emotions, which shape how we perceive the world, how we express ourselves and the responses we evoke in others”. From this information, we can assume that Joy is not always the “main character” in everybody’s head, simply based off of how people act.

Some may feel as if Sadness plays the biggest role when it comes to examining Riley’s emotions. As Riley is going through these changes in her life, Joy is trying so hard to hold back the sadness, but in the end, we see Sadness come out to help Riley feel better about her situation.

One lesson to take away from the movie is “emotions organize rational thinking” (NY Times). Dacher Keltner and Paul Ekman, the scientists who wrote the article for the NY Times, believe that “emotions guide our perceptions of the world, our memories of the past and even our moral judgments of right and wrong, most typically in ways that enable effective responses to the current situation”. Throughout the movie, we see flashbacks of Riley’s childhood, and we see how Sadness has shaped them, proving the importance of Sadness to the audience.

Is it bad to be sad? Nope. Not at all. From Sadness, Riley recognizes how she has changed from the past, and is able to redefine herself. People always think you should go through life with positivity, but sadness helps define who we really are.

I remember back when everybody wore mood rings. It was always cool to see what people were “feeling”, or at least what the ring thought we were feeling. I never understood them to be honest. When I read a twitter post about these new bracelets called lokai bracelets, I thought they were really interesting. There is a whole story behind what looks like such a simple bracelet.

The white bead is filled with water from Mt. Everest, which is the highest point on Earth. This is to remind you that even when you are feeling on top of the world, to always stay humble. The black bead is filled with mud from the Dead Sea, the lowest point on Earth, and symbolizes that even when you feel like you’ve hit a low, to stay hopeful.

Every time someone tells me that they like my bracelet or when they ask me what it is, I explain to them what the beads represent, and it reminds me that I am wearing the bracelet for more than just an accessory. This bracelet is a reminder how life works. Its full of its ups and downs, but if we have the right mindset, we will be able to move on to the next step.

As Her Campus states, “The highs and lows of life coexist to keep us balanced; we must be grateful when we are at our highs, and know that things will soon get better when we are at our lows. The lokai bracelets remind us that we must stay balanced throughout times of triumph, tribulation, and everything that comes between the two.”

You may think it is just a meaningless bracelet, but next time you don’t know how to react to something that life throws your way, live like lokai.

If any of you have seen or even heard of the SyFy movie, Sharknado, you must have thought how ridiculous it sounded. I have seen all three Sharknado movies, and while they provided some laughter, they were obviously filled with computer edits and a green screen. Over the summer, there was a very noticeable amount of shark attacks that took place, so there is definitely not a shortage of sharks in the world. As silly as it may sound, could a “sharknado” be a realistic natural disaster?

Some would quickly shut down the idea, while others may take it into consideration. According to Ready.gov, tornadoes are nature’s most violent storms, and are the reason for many fatalities and devastated land in a certain area. Accuweather.com estimates about 60 people are killed each year by tornadoes. Now just imagine how many more fatalities there would be if sharks came flying out of these tornadoes.

This idea is not irrational. Marc Silver wondered the same thing, so he conducted research, which was printed in The Washington Post. He does not think a sharknado could happen, but he doesn’t think it is impossible either. He found information regarding waterspouts, which have winds strong enough to potentially lift animals from the water’s surface, and drop them off on land. There have been several occasions in the past where a waterspout has occurred and carried animals within them. On May 28, 1881 in England, it was raining snails. Kentucky had an alligator fall from the sky on December 26, 1887. The most recent was in July 2007, when worms were coming from the sky in Louisiana. Other animal-related incidents included jellyfish, frogs, and fish, but nothing to the extent of a shark.

After looking into the idea of sharknado taking place outside of a movie studio, I have found that it is highly unlikely. Many of you are probably not surprised by this conclusion, but we live in a world where anything can happen. Just incase anything should happen, a chainsaw could come in handy when going up against a Great White (at least that’s what Hollywood thinks).

As a freshman in college, I am starting to be very thankful for foods that can be easily made in the microwave.  I put a bag of popcorn [kernels] inside the microwave after a long day of classes, and just listened to each kernel “pop” and wondered how it all happens. Popcorn is eaten at many different places, on numerous occasions, whether it be at an amusement park, a sporting event, or in front of a good movie.

According to Wonderopolis.org, popcorn became more popular through the invention of television sets in the 1950s. More people stayed home to watch television in the comfort of their own home, and popcorn was there to satisfy their craving for a TV snack.

So, what makes popcorn pop? Well, inside each kernel is a small drop of water surrounded by a hard shell, called a hull. When the water gets hot and starts to boil, steam is produced which creates pressure, resulting in the hull “popping” and turning into the fluffy snack that we love to eat. Creative flair can then be added to satisfy even more taste buds.

Popcorn is unique; No other corn kernels have this drop of water inside of them, therefore they do not “pop” when they are being cooked. So next time you sit down to eat popcorn with friends or family and someone wonders what makes popcorn pop, you can show off your intelligence and tell them the science behind this salty snack.

Hi everyone! My name is Sara Perlowitz and I am a freshman here at Penn State. I am from North Brunswick, NJ, which is right by Rutgers. Since Rutgers is literally my backyard, I wanted to venture off a little further for college. I am planning to major in Sports Communications because I have always been a sports fan, and I especially love the Pittsburgh Steelers. When I was selecting my classes at orientation, the Communications advisors suggested SC200 to me after they saw my reaction to having to take a science course this semester. I was never strong in any of the science classes I took in high school, and knew that wouldn’t change in college. After seeing the schedule of possible topics that we will be discussing in class, I have a feeling that I will enjoy this course, mainly because it requires you to think in ways that are different from how you would normally.

The one reason why I am not planning on being a science major is probably because I two courses I took in high school, biology and chemistry. However, before I decided I wanted to pursue Sports Communications, I was considering on pursuing a career in Law, after taking a Forensics course in high school. I really enjoyed taking that course because it required you to be very detailed oriented, which wasn’t hard, especially if you have OCD, like me. Ultimately, I needed to choose a major which interested me the most, and that was a major that dealt with sports.

In addition to watching sports, I also enjoy playing sports, especially swimming. If you want to see what the U.S. Olympic team does in their spare time, click here. Lastly, please enjoy this picture of very attractive swimmers 🙂

Thanks for reading!