I am sitting here at karaoke night trying my hardest  to tune out this young man’s tone deaf singing. Then the thought occurred to me, why do some of us sound like a dying animal when we sing , and some of us sound like heaven’s angels.

Let’s see why…

Sean Hutchins a neuroscience researcher , at BRAM (International Laboratory for Brain, Music and Sound Research), suggests that  our brain has all the tools necessary to “produce” a wide range of notes. According to Hutchins singing is a “complex emotion” especially “bad” singing , which is uncontrollable.

The problem is people who can’t sing are horrible at “pitch accuracy“, which is one of the three elements needed in order to be a “good singer” The other two are timing and note memory. Bad singers are good at the other elements , this is the reason , you recognize the song that they are attempting to sing. However, you may regret you allowed this tone deaf person to open their mouth. Being tone deaf is actually a condition , that goes by the name of amusia

Amusia is defined as ” the inability to recognize musical notes , or the ability to reproduce them” This condition could be another reason why you can’t sing. So maybe you should get diagnoised! In it’s more severe form people who suffer from amusia, can’t even hold a beat in their head without the lyrics being present. That is pretty severe in my opinion being as though I can’t sing at all but I know at least sometimes I can hold a beat.

My opinion on this singing matter, if you can’t sing … sing anyways because guess what WHO cares. As long as you’re enjoying yourself it is okay to sound like a tone deaf dying horse.

Not everybody can be a GREAT singer…

Her voice blessed my soul… so i suggest you click play…

These little creatures (formally known as Ectophylla Alba) are from Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica ,and western Panama, and their known as Cotton Ball bats. They are also categorized as “near threatened” which means that either extinction or endangerment of extinction is in their near future (sad… sad news). I don’t know about you all , but I am not too fond of bats. However these little critters are adorable. They are only about 4-5 cm long... this is where you all say “awwwwww”. Their nose and ears are yellow , and their fuzzy all over … completely different from the image usually associated with bats. Similarly, to the stereotypical bat their nocturnal , which I know does not come as a surprise being as though their from the same “bat” family. When it comes to food these little buddies LOVE them some fruit and vegetables (or other plants… whatever works for you)

Now , how in their world do these little fuzzy wuzzys stay away from predators? Their fur is white , their nose and ears are yellow , so they obviously can’t stay in dark caves , or tree holes ! They would be snatched up so easily because their white fur would be visible in the dark. Don’t worry not only are these little fellas cute but their also very resourceful. To keep predators at bay they build themselves a little tent out of  the giant green leaves of a Heliconia plant. They do this by cutting the side veins of the plant, this causes the leaves to collapse inward, and WA LA a beautiful tent to keep them hidden. This wonderful talent they posses has also coined them the name “The white tent bat”(I think cotton ball bat , is more suitable…). Just to put their side into perspective A WHOLE colony ( about a dozen) of these bats can live on this one set of leaves … peep the picture below…

They are really itty bitty.. The reason they are protected by these leaves has a lot to do with their white fur. When the sun shines through the plant it gives these cotton ball creatures a green appearance which allows them to blend in , and not be seen.  As I mentioned before a dozen of them usually live together on that plant.. and the majority of them are female cotton ball bats. There is usually one male and several female bats until they reproduce ( this usually occurs in the spring) then the male leaves the nest.

I hope this post give you a different perspective on bats… not all of them are dark and scary!

Here is a video of these cuties…

I know many of you have heard time and time again… be careful love is blind, but is it really?? If it is , WHAT makes it blind? So MANY questions that need answers! I am here to find those answers!

Love is blind in the sense that most lovers often only see the positive in their significant other, and are blind to the negative traits. Lovers tend to “love the idealized object rather than the real one” as Psychology Today  suggests. It has been reported in numerous  cases that people tend to fall in love with either the idea of love , or the positive vision of their significant other. They hardly ever fall in love with the actual reality of their lover.

The reason us humans created idealized visions of our lovers is simple, our brain loves to process the positive traits that we admire in our significant other’s. Were more inclined as humans , to a person we’ve evaluated positively! It’s also some sort of “defense mechanism” which allows us to “partly justify” our whimsical choice in mate. It’s sort of like when you’ve bought a car, and you see it all the time , and you look at all the advertisements that feature YOUR car, but you make sure to stay away from the other cars that you could of chosen. This is how ,we humans, are with men. Idealizations are most commonly seen in situations like “love at first sight” and the honey moon stage of a relationship. This is actually how many people end up divorced, when they marry to fast, because they come down from that high of being SO in love , and start filtering the negative aspects of that person. Lets get one thing straight before we go any further, idealized visions are not misperceptions… it is just a person choosing to only evaluate the positive traits of their significant other.. not taking in the negative  qualities, and even though I mentioned that people do get divorced after stepping back into reality , it is not EVERYONE!! There are people who can love an evil , selfish , arrogant person and filter these negative traits.

Although , I don’t believe an experiment could be conducted in order to actually test this theory. I do believe that an observational study could be administered. Scientist could study different types of couples and their relationship. They could first provide a survey  to get an understand on which couples were suffering from idealized visions , and then ask them to participate in the study. The study would be held over a couple years , so we could see what happened when one or the other person began to evaluate the negative traits of their significant other. Then record the findings. I think that would be a good/ interesting study.

In my opinion, without any study having been conducted on this topic is YES I do believe that love is blind especially in the beginning stages, because in the beginning of relationships it always feels like you’re walking on clouds , you’re always happy laughing , and you just love everything about the person. Then a year into the relationship you start realize how annoying the person can really be, and you start thinking can I really deal with this on a daily basis? So yes love is blind in my opinion!

Last , but certainly not least , the THIRD view. As I mentioned in my last two blogs there are three views and this post will cover the last view. The last view is that antibiotics should not be prolonged under ANY circumstance.

Andrew , our professor, is one of the scientist who believe that the continuous use of antibiotics after you feel better is complete and utter nonsense. He believes that bacteria that cause infections are living , and in prescribing antibiotics , we are basically picking a fight with mother nature. This is because sooner rather than later the infection evolves to be resistant against the antibiotics that doctors prescribe to get rid of it. This resistance has been seen for years on end. Andrew answers the obvious question that many scientist refuse to address “if you have antibiotic-resistant pathogens in you, wouldn’t they survive antibiotic treatment no matter how long the course?” basically saying what is the point of taking antibiotics for weeks on end if there are these pathogens that are going to resist it any ways? It doesn’t matter how long you take the antibiotic it is still not going to work.. all it’s going to do is create more resistance  in the other pathogens that weren’t resisting the drug. He goes into more depth here in this video.

Moreover, Robert Bearmore , also a scientist, whose research is on the same page agrees with Andrew. He even suggests that much of what doctors consider to be “good practice“, which is taking all antibiotics is beneficial, is actually based more on assumption than actual evidence. Bearmore tests this “good practice” with E. coli bacteria.  What he found was continuing antibiotic dosages actually increased and quickened bacteria resistance rather then eliminating it. This leads us back to the the question Andrew answered “if you have antibiotic-resistant pathogens in you, wouldn’t they survive antibiotic treatment no matter how long the course?” Bearmore proves that YES it will in fact not only survive but cause other pathogens to multiply AND resist.

My take away from all of this is , Andrew and Robert have a really compelling case… (no I am not only saying that because he is my professor) but really their test even proves their proposition is correct. However, I don’t know which view I would actually go along with next time I am prescribed antibiotics for an infection, and that’s only because my ENTIRE life I have grown up to believe that doctors know it all. Who am I to question them? Once a belief is set in stone it is hard to reverse it, but if doctors were to get on board with scientists such as Andrew and Robert, than I would be on board also. The reason is I am a paranoid person and a hypochondriac so since I am not a scientist myself I would think that if I don’t follow the doctor’s orders I will be lying somewhere in some hospital, wishing I followed directions, but that’s just me.

As I mentioned in my previous post there are three different views to the argument on whether or not antibiotic use should be prolonged.

In this post I will discuss the second view, which is if it is an acute infection it is not necessary to continue antibiotics after you feel better, Gwendolyn Gilbert is an advocate for this view. Gilbert is a professor at the University of Sydney. She believes that ” there is minimal risk in stopping antibiotics if the signs and symptoms of a mild infection had resolved” so her belief is if it is an acute infection, you should be fine if you don’t finish your prescription. Chris Del Mar is another professor who agrees with this concept. My question is what makes an acute infection different from a severe infection? The answer seems to be that if it’s a serious infectious disease then symptoms may improve even though bacteria may still be  “flourishing” in the body.

However, if it’s a little infection , the body can usually “mop up” the rest of the bacteria , that the antibiotics didn’t take care of. As I said in my previous post antibiotics wipes out all bacteria , even harmless bacteria, these professors say that could leave patients vulnerable to bacteria becoming resistant. So Gilbert suggest , that the less antibiotics one is exposed to the better. Evidence shows that for minor infections like a UTI (urinary tract infection) two or three days is sufficient to clear up the infection, yet doctors prescribe it for five days. That is completely unnecessary.  Professor Chris Del Mar has actually been quoted stating ” the old mantra about finishing a course of antibiotics was based on an assumption that unless you eradicated the infection it could come back and you would need another course of antibiotics, but there is no evidence for this except in a few very specific illnesses such as tuberculosis” in simple terms unless it’s a serious infection you do not need to finish all antibiotics because it will not remove all the bacteria in your body. Although that is the popular belief.two professors basically think that the question of whether to stop antibiotics when you feel better is complicated. It is based on numerous things. Such as whether or not its a severe infection or your medical history. The decision should be made on a case by case basis , and pertain solely to that individual patient. So basically their on the fence about the issue.

Again my take away: I need a definite answer on the issue , it is not clear to me whether or not I should finish my antibiotics or not. I have heard many anecdotes on the situation. As Andrew mentioned in class anecdotes are not sufficient enough evidence to prove whether or not the science is correct. Nonetheless, I am going to still share my anecdote. I have a friend who had strep throat and was prescribed antibiotics , and decided he was gonna stop taking them after he felt better, and the infection returned again two weeks later. So this ideology would not cut it for him and it’s not cutting it for me. I would not want to be the one who stops the antibiotic and get an even worse infection. Or be the person who is continually taking my antibiotics and contributing to the problem of resistant bacteria. So this idea leaves me stuck in the middle.

I was sitting in SC200 the other day when Andrew brought up one of his recent research topics , and it peaked my interest.The basis of his research was patients should not have to continue antibiotics after feeling better. My question is why do doctors highly recommend that we do the exact opposite which, is take these antibiotics for weeks on end, what is the reasoning behind this?

Before I even get into all the deep stuff, let me first tell you what antibiotics are. Ok, so, antibiotics , or antibacterials (whichever you prefer): are  types of medicine that either eliminate bacteria or hinder the growth of bacteria. They are used to treat infections caused by bacteria. Bacteria are microscopic organisms. There are good and bad bacteria , bad bacteria are what causes illnesses. When antibiotics are prescribed it clears out, and/or slows the growth of both good and bad bacteria.

Now, that you know the key terms, you should also know that there are at least three different views on the prolonged used of antibiotics, and in this first blog I am going to cover the first view, which is taking ALL of the prescribed antibiotics is necessary. Most scientist , and doctors believe that  “failure” to take all antibiotics can cause drug resistance , which is a public health problem that is increasing. To understand this concept you have to first understand how antibiotics work. Their purpose is to fight “disease-causing” organisms that enter your body when you are ill, but the problem is antibiotics do not instantly kill all the organisms in your body, it only kills some of them. The “additional dosage” of antibiotics wipes your body clean of good/bad organisms. The problem that most scientist think you will encounter if you cease antibiotics after you feel better , is leaving your body at risk for a serious relapse. This is bad because since you didn’t finish all of the antibiotics, the bacteria that was left behind in your system has grown a resistance against the first round of antibiotics, the reason that there are some bacterias that get left behind is relatively simple. Different bacteria responds in different ways, even if they are within the “same population”. There is a range of tolerance within the bacteria population in your body when you are ill. It ranges from low tolerance to high tolerance. So the doctors beliefs goes as follows: prolonging the length of time in which a patient takes an antibiotic can decrease the chance of any of these stubborn bacterias being left behind and growing a resistance against the first drug. The bacteria would also begin to reproduce and grow at faster rate with this new resilience to the drug. Stopping this process would lead to a patient having to be prescribed another round of a different/stronger antibiotic.  However , if the bacteria gets to the point where it “overwhelms” our immune system and becomes completely resistant to antibiotics, this could mean big problems for Doctors, because there is only but so many antibiotics that they can prescribed, before they run out of drugs.

I don’t know about you , but all of this sounds really scary for a person like me (hypochondriac). However, after looking through numerous articles I am starting to believe that maybe the common belief of “taking all of the prescribed antibiotics” is all based on assumption… There’s actually no research that shows me ,through patients, the actual benefits of taking ALL my antibiotics. It’s kind of like well… you should take it just in case ya know…

  this view is basically a don’t ask just follow.. in my opinion.

I put on lotion every single day, to avoid being ashy, but it just occurred to me that I don’t even know how lotion even works? How does it prevent my skin from getting dry?

Well, the main purpose of lotion is to moisturize your skin and keep it from cracking due to dryness. The way that lotion executes this task is by holding water in the stratum corneum, outermost layer of skin. Although, when we put on lotion the only function we think its serving us is moisture. That is simply not true, lotion actually has a lot of functions. It protects your skin from the harsh environment we live in. It does this by being a shield and repelling all the nasty chemicals that can irritate and dry out our skin. So lotion does a lot more then preventing your legs/ elbows from looking like you were playing in chalk all day long. There are also many different types of lotion, for different types of skin.

There are moisturizers that are made for normal, dry, oily, and sensitive skin, and they are all made differently. Normal skin type moisturizers contain light natural oils. Dry skin type moisturizers ( the category I fit in) need heavy oils that contain humectant (substance used to reduce moisture) to keep moisture in that outer layer I mentioned before. Oily skin type moisturizers do not contain any oils for obvious reasons. If you have that kind of skin your body is probably taking care of that aspect, maybe even to much care. However, there are still lotions for those who have this skin type their just oil-free, in order to keep your pores unclogged. Last but not least Sensitive skin type moisturizers are usually fragrance free and very basic , because if your skin is sensitive it does not take much to cause a huge ugly break out. Also, for those with sensitive skin, two lotions are often required because your sensitivity may differ on different regions of your body.

So, now you know next time you know the benefits of the task of putting on lotion, a seemingly effortless task. That benefits you in more ways than one. You can find out how to find the perfect moisturizer for your skin here.

I am sitting here commenting on posts , listening to music , and trying to think of two more possible topics to cover before this blog period ends on Friday. Suddenly, my favorite song comes on , and I get super hype singing and dancing along. It got me thinking THIS is what I should write about , the effects on music on your mood. I don’t know about you , but whenever my SONG comes on while I’m doing homework, I get excited and it helps me get through my work a lot faster.! I decided to share my favorite song  here incase you were interested in what caused my burst of energy.

But, really.. why does music effect our mood? What is the science behind that?

Music has the power to change your mood from happy to sad all within a couple shuffles. Why is that? Research says its the rhythm and tone of the music. First off , let me give you the definition of rhythm in music: “it is a pattern of regular or irregular pulses caused by the occurrence of strong and harmonic beats” So it’s basically the sound that you will most likely find yourself bobbing your head to. As for the definition of tone: “it’s a vocal sound made by vibrating muscular bands in the larynx”. In lay mans terms the actual voice you hear singing the song.

Now were going to talk about the effects that the aforementioned terms have on our moods/ emotion. Starting with rhythm. The way that rhythm affects your mood is through your heart beat. The heart  gets in tune with whatever rhythm is playing , and starts beating accordingly. For example if a sad slow song such as this one here starts playing , your heart starts beating slow and relaxes , this sends a signal to the brain saying that something “sad or depressing” is happening. Once your brain gets that signal, which takes less then a second, you start feeling down. Even though sad music may leave you down in the dumps, it can also help sort through your emotions. The meaningful words in some sad songs may give you something to relate to. I know for me whenever something is making me blue or heartbroken I turn on some slow R&B music and that helps me sort through my feelings. Ok we’ve established how rhythm effects your mood. Let’s move on to tone. The term tonality is the word that tells us why music “evokes emotion” . Tonality ” is the character of the tones and harmonies of a piece.” This is what tells us whether we’re listening to upbeat , lively music  or dark, depressing music. The different keys that send the actual signals to our brain are the major and minor keys. The major key tells us when the song that’s playing is cheerful and happy. Whereas the minor key tells us when it’s sad and depressing. I’ve given all these definitions , but I know you guys are waiting for some proof. Well here it comes…

The University of Missouri conducted two studies on this topic. Both of these studies measured the brains activity as the participants listened to one of the two genres of music that was provided. In the first study , participants brains were scanned as they listened to classic music, and in the following study the participants brains were scanned as they listened to a more upbeat type of music. They were required to listen to the music for a duration of two weeks. The results showed that participants in the group of upbeat music , had a rush of dopamine (feel good hormone) to their pleasure spot in their brain. This proved that music does in fact biologically increases your mood. It’s not make-believe. You see how upbeat music has been proven to elevate your mood, but what about sad music?

Well, in regards to sad music, a University in Berlin , Germany, conducted an observational study where they surveyed 772 “multi-ethnic” people around the world. In the survey they had participants listening to a variety of sad music , and getting their take on it. They discovered that listening to sad music is rewarding. One of the researchers, Liila Taruffi, was even quoted in an article on Today.com saying “People turn to sad music for comfort, and to deal with bad feelings, but also simply for pleasure”. The comfort it provides is the ability to really think through the emotions you are feeling by listening to the words of the artist who seems to really understand.  Taruffi  backs this up with something she calls “emotion regulation” she noted that most participants said that” when they were in a bad mood, experiencing sadness through music made them feel better afterwards and provided an emotional boost” The reason for this is the songs allow you to release the pain you are feeling by expressing it through singing along either out loud or in your head. We all know the famous saying “Misery love company” that saying really ties into this study because listening to depressing music while your sad, is fulfilling that need for company. At least that is the conclusion that I have come to.

The take away from this is certain tough situations in life that cause pain or stress can be eased by singing to a particular song that may relate to the position you’re in. For example if you had a loved one that just passed away and you are having a hard time dealing with their passing, try playing Bye Bye by Mariah Carey, Or maybe you just caught your stupid boyfriend/ girlfriend in a lie, listen to Rihanna Take a Bow to raise you morale and to get you to stop thinking EVERYTHING is your fault. Maybe, you’re Drunk in Love like Beyonce (the Queen). Whatever it is that you’re feeling MUSIC CAN GET YOU THROUGH IT. You are never alone.

According to a new study, researchers can read a “signature” based off all 150 of your genes and determine your biological age, which scientist believe is a better measure for determining someones overall health.

“People age at different rates”

In the new study, researchers find that their able to establish whether or not a person ages quickly or slowly as early as their 30s. They assessed a group of 38 year olds by how well their body system functions , and determined their biological age. The participants cognitive abilities,blood pressure, kidney markers, liver, lung, and immune system were all tested. The results were 38 year olds biological age ranged from 28-61 years old. This means that some 38 year olds bodies were still functioning like a 28 year old , whereas some 38 year olds bodies are functioning like a 61 year old. Scientist found this intriguing, that a middled age group had such variation. Most of these studies usually are performed on older participants to get answers on age-related disease. This leads me to the next part of the study…

Researcher studied the genes of 65 year olds, searching for genes that showed that these participants were maintaining their health as they aged. They found a RNA classifier (150 genes) that was used to calculate a “healthy” gene age, to test their calculations they tested a group of 70 year olds. The results were consistent with their calculations a higher score does indeed mean better overall health and cognitive health. Researchers even discovered a correlation between lower healthy gene scores and Alzheimer’s disease, However, as we learned from Andrew, correlation is not causation , therefore researchers cannot conclude that every person who has a low healthy gene score will have the Alzheimer’s disease.

This is a relatively new discovery so their aren’t much studies on it yet, but there were able to look at a group of 70 years olds and determine amongst them who had healthy cognition and who did not. They were also able to look at 38 years old and see variation in biological age. Their ultimate goal is  to use those genes to find out the cause of the Alzheimer’s disease, and be able to give someone a blood test 10 years prior to getting infected.

It shocked me to discover that in a couple more years health will not be determined solely by chronological age. Scientist actually want to start studying young people aging in order to prevent diseases that are associated with aging. I actually took a biological test while writing this blog found here, although it may not be as accurate as a blood sample. It can give you an idea as to where your body is at, at this point in time. My current score is 5 gene years , no wonder I look so childlike !

Woo! I feel good! Do you ? Nothing makes me feel better then throwing on my best outfit and stepping out like DANG! I look good. Let’s get serious now… can clothes affect our cognitive ability? can it improve how we perform on task?

Well , well, well, have the no fear. The answers to all your questions are here, and it’s called Enclothed cognition:the systematic influence that clothes have on the wearer’s psychological processes. To make it simple the term describes the emotions a person feels when their wearing certain items of clothing. It is scientifically proven that clothing not only affects how others perceive us but how we perceive ourselves. Researchers from Northwestern University, Hago Adam and Adam Galinsky, conducted  two experiments, in which they tested the affects of wearing a doctor’s lab coat versus a painters lab coat versus no lab coat

In the first experiment that Adam and Galinsky conducted there were 58 undergraduates (41 females , 19 males) the age average was 20.29 years. “They were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: wearing a lab coat vs. not wearing a lab coat.” As Andrew mentioned in class the x-variable is the predictor or independent variable, so in this case that would be the lab coat. Anyways, The task participants were asked to perform is called the  Stroop task. Stroop effect (which it’s often referred to as) is defined as: “an outcome of our mental (attentional) vitality and flexibility. The effect is related to the ability of most people to read words more quickly and automatically than they can name colors. If a word is displayed in a color different from the color it actually names So the participants were directed to perform this task as quickly and as accurately as they could. There were 50 trials. The scientist measured whether the participant indicated the right color as well as the length of time they took to complete the trial. The results are shown on the graph below:

The result showed: Participants in the wearing-a-lab-coat condition made around half as many errors as participants in the not-wearing-a-lab-coat condition.

Experiment 2: The importance of symbolic meaning. The goal of experiment two is to show that both wearing the clothes and knowing the symbolic meaning are two components thats are necessary in order for enclothed cognition to occur. To test this  the scientist again manipulated the predictor which was the lab coat by either associating  it with medical doctors or painters.

For this experiment they got seventy-four undergrad students .  They were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: wearing a doctor’s coat vs. wearing a painters coat .

In order to test these conditions the participants were asked to perform a task. The task was kind of like an i-spy game. Participants had to look at a side by side of a picture and quickly spot and write down the difference between the two pictures. They were told that their were four differences in the pictures. The scientist measured the number of different participants found as well as the time it took them to complete the task.

Results are in!! In the case of the symbolic meaning of the lab coat being essential. Scientist found DING! DING! DING! Their hypothesis is consistent with the results. “Participants in the wearing-a-doctor’s-coat condition found more differences than participants in the wearing-a-painter’s-coat condition. Due to heightened attentiveness while wearing the doctors lab coat.

So, now you know what you wear can affect how well you perform. My advice dress the part at all times and your performance will match it !

A Paleo diet is a eating habit that is inline with the same foods that Paleolithic people used to eat: seafood, fruits, meats, and nuts. DNA evidence has shown that within the last 40,000 years basic human physiology has had little change. You are probably asking well what does that have to do with the diet. Well what that means is our dietary needs are the same as our cavemen ancestors. Our body has adapted to , as Loren Cordain says, ” a world in which food had to be hunted, fished, or gathered from the natural environment”.

Whether or not Paleo is the optimal diet is highly debatable amongst dietitians. The problem Alex Nella has with being Paleo is the risk of being deficient in calcium and vitamin D, which he says ” is critical to bone health” Not taking care of your bones could lead to bone fractures , osteoporosis , and bone rickets. Another alarming factor is consuming saturated fat and protein above recommended levels can lead to kidney and heart disease, or even cancer.  What would cause such serious illness in a diet that seems healthy? Well,  over time the LDL (bad cholesterol)  which is a fat could increase and clog your arteries, which raises the risk of heart disease. In addition to health factors, According to Nella, any diet that is too restrictive of one or more food categories is very difficult to stay committed to. John Beradi adds to this by saying “Without being consistent, you can’t make progress.” So basically how healthy can it really be if it is impossible for your body to stay committed to such a diet, and without commitment like Beradi says what changes are you really making? Contrastingly, Cordain is a scientist who is pro paleo diet. He believes that it’s the cereal and dairy products that clog our arteries and make us fat. The diet was made for us by nature according to Cordain, because during the stone age:

• Cavemen couldn’t chase down cows and milk them.
• They almost never ate cereal grains because it was a last resort food.
• The had no means to add salt to their food.
• Only type of refined sugar available to them was honey and even that was rare.

Everything that the primal people ate came from the earth, nothing was processed.

My take away from this, I personally believe that a well-balanced diet is the way to go. Including at least one thing from each food group in our meals. Human ate in that fashion during the stone age because that is the only resource that was available to them. I do agree however that nowadays we eat way to much processed foods , and add to much salt to our already high fat diets. Following the choose my plate dietary guidelines is the best way to maintain a well-balanced diet.

Hello , I’m Shirneil and I am taking this course because I am honestly NOT about this science life… don’t get me wrong I have appreciation for the different topics but I just could not work in a field where everything is based on theory. I also could not deal with my theory being proven wrong because I HATE being wrong. Also, I overthink way to much to ever come up with a reason as to why something behaves and or reacts a certain way… all in all it’s just not for me! However, I am about this english/ social studies life. I am really passionate in these subjects, which is why I am a Comm major who wishes to attend law school some day. Oh yeah, I also thoroughly enjoy Bill Nye the science guy he’s really the man, and back in 8th grade earth science I learned a lot through his videos ( especially the theme song).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EtqGeFXx54

I decided to bless this post with a moon video from this awesome guy… you’re welcome.

Oh yea.. Ben Franklin is my favorite scientist because he’s a man of MANY trades I mean he did everything, he’s also on my favorite bill… so that is another way to work your way up to my favorites!