In these years, the rate of suffering by stroke is increasing. More and more people are seeking methods to avoid stroke. What is a stroke? A stroke is a”brain attack”. It can happen on any people at anytime, but elders are affected on a higher possibility. “It occurs when blood flow to an area of brain is cut off. When this happens, brain cells are deprived of oxygen and begin to die. When brain cells die during a stroke, abilities controlled by that area of the brain such as memory and muscle control are lost.” (Stroke.org)

According to the latest study, learning another language,  not only benefit for communicating, but also extend to many hidden cognitive domains, such as to protect your brain in the event of a stroke or dementia and other health problems.Researchers from Britain and India collected data 608 stroke patients in Hyderabad. They found that  the patients who can handle more than one language have a greater chance of recovery from stroke. Rehabilitation also increased prospects for a very high level. Bilingual people have the probability of recovery twice more than that of monolinguals after stroke, even taking into account other factors, such as smoking, hypertension, diabetes, and age.

The researchers found that brain is challenged when people say more than one language, and this experience will inspire cognitive reserve, which would enhance the brain’s ability to deal with damage caused by a stroke and other diseases.Bilingual people can switch between two languages, when they stop using one, it is necessary to activate another language to communicate,” Thomas Bak, one of the study authors at the University of Edinburgh, said, “This switch allows the brain to continuous evolving, thus becoming factors in helping stroke patients to have rehabilitation. Apart from showing better recovery on brain function after a stroke, bilinguals who are able to speak more than one language also perform better in stroke sequelae tests, including tests of attention, gather and organize information.

It is worth noting that the amazing recovery results of this study demonstrates particular related areas. According to the researchers published  “Stroke” magazine, Hyderabad is a multicultural city, mixed with a lot of languages, including Telugu, Urdu, Hindi and English. These people live in Hyderabad receive daily “brain training” – so it has been a corresponding benefit – which is difficult to have the same conditions as in other places.

Personally, I think this study did not explain clearly enough. It takes a long page to state the importance of knowing different languages. But how can we classify “different”? For example, in China, even nearby provinces have varied dialects. Can dialects be counted? Or two have to come from completely different phylum? Moreover, the question is “Has Learning languages to  be the only way?” In my opinion, as long as you keep your brain actively often enough, you will always be influence less after a brain damage. For many, learning anything that new for them can be beneficial, including reading a new book or using a new ways to play poker. More detailed guidance for people to maintain an active brain can see here. Overall, I think this group of researchers claim their founding a little subjective. I believe learning new languages is only one way to exercise brains. We should find out the real reason for impact but not hold one example too tight.

Reference:

Water is something everyone consumes. I’ve always had people yelling at me if I ever use tap water to use bottled water instead and that tap water is unhealthy for you. On the contrary, sometimes people yell at me for using water bottles which are damaging to the environment, when you have equally accessible tap water. With inventions such as the Brita water filter, this has led me to wonder what is the deal with tap water. Is tap water bad for you? Or is it safe to drink? Why do some people claim it’s safe to drink in some locations yet in other places tap water isn’t safe to drink at all?

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA)  regulates bottled water, while the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates tap water. Their standards of safety vary which accounts for how “safe” both bottled and tap water are (Mayo Clinic 2015). The EPA mandates annual reports regarding quality to customers. The customers then give feedback towards the water’s quality. This system however, isn’t the best method considering their could be general ignorance among the customers in terms of where their water source is coming from and health effects are cloudy regarding whether or not any illnesses are as a result of consuming the tap water (Environmental Protection Agency 2015). The FDA, which deals with plastic water bottles, has the power of making sure that water bottles are produced and transported under “sanitary” conditions, protected from chemicals and bacteria, and to test the final product for contaminants (Food and Drug Administration 2015). It seems that both the FDA and the EPA have similar standards for quality control, making tap and bottled water seem equal in terms of safety.
Tap water can be contaminated by containing microorganisms such as parasites and bacteria which can get in the water from animal fecal matter. Nitrates used in fertilizers sometimes can enter tap water from land runoff. Improper disposal leads to unwanted minerals such as mercury. The EPA strongly advises that people who are more vulnerable towards potential harmful minerals such as pregnant women, people with HIV/AIDS, and people undergoing chemotherapy, considering the EPA has minimal health regulations (WebMD 2015). This concerns me considering even the agency that deals with regulating tap water admits tap water isn’t the safest option for everyone and advises bottled water instead.

In 2005, the Environmental Working Group tested tap water in 42 states and found about 260 contaminants. Of the 260 contaminants, 141 were unregulated, meaning the public health officials had no safety measures against them, or the ability to simply remove them. Despite these alarming facts, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) states: “In the short term, if you are an adult with no special health conditions, and you are not pregnant, then you can drink most cities’ tap water without having to worry” (About News 2015). This is since most contaminants are in such small amounts that an overwhelming amount of tap water would have to be consumed for potential health problems. Likewise, bottled water isn’t as safe as it seems. The FDA allows some contamination of E. Coli in bottled water while the EPA would never allow such amounts in tap water. The NRDC also finds that bottled water has no requirements for bottled water to be tested for parasites unlike EPA regulations where tap water must always be tested for such things (About News 2015). My only issue with these government organizations claiming tap water is healthy is the fact that these government funded agencies have a bias towards a government run system such as tap water. Therefore, it’s harder to understand whether or not tap water is truly equally as safe as consuming bottled water.
Ultimately, it is important to assure safety among both tap and bottled water for all users. Whether or not tap water is safe to drink and healthy for you depends on location,  and the consumer’s health. In terms of comparing tap water with bottled water it seems as though tap water is equally as healthy as bottled water when conditions such as the safety of that location is resolved.

Works Cited:

Drinking Water Quality: What You Need to Know (2015). In WebMD. Retrieved from http://
www.webmd.com/women/home-health-and-safety-9/safe-drinking-water?page=2

FDA Regulates the Safety of Bottled Water Beverages Including Flavored Water and Nutrient-Added Water Beverages (2015). In Food and Drug Administration. Retrived from
http://www.fda.gov/food/foodborneillnesscontaminants/buystoreservesafefood/
ucm046894.htm

Ground Water and Drinking Water (2015 ). In United States Environmental Protection Agency . Retrieved from http://water.epa.gov/drink/

How Safe is Tap Water? (2015 ). In About News . Retrieved from http://environment.about.com/od/healthenvironment/a/tap_water_safe.htm

Zeratsky, K. (2015, January 8). Is tap water as safe as bottled water?. In Mayo Clinic . Retrieved from http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/expert-answers/tap-vs-bottled-water/faq-20058017

Now that Thanksgiving break is over and we’ve all moved up a notch on our belts (rightly so), it’s back to the sleep deprived college lifestyle. Fortunately, many of us gained a few extra hours of sleep on Thursday during the post Thanksgiving dinner nap… or at least your dad passed out right after dinner like all dads do on Thanksgiving. You’re also probably familiar with how those who nap after the meal blame it on something called tryptophan. Maybe you yourself took a little cat nap this year, I know I did. This time around, I was the one to bring up tryptophan and my girlfriend was quick to say that tryptophan is not actually the reason America naps after turkey dinner. As with many of my blog posts this semester, lets find out what is really going on with something else we put in our bodies, Turkey.

Tryptowhat? 

Courtesy of the University of Illinois at Chicago

Tryptophan, an essential amino acid, is found in many foods including turkey, eggs, chicken, fish, peanut butter and cheese. It is crucial for healthy growth in infants and is important for maintaining appropriate nitrogen levels in adults. Additionally, your body converts tryptophan into niacin and serotonin; serotonin is an important neurotransmitter responsible for healthy sleep and promotes stable moods. However, being an essential amino acid, our bodies cannot produce tryptophan on its own. Most people do not have an issue getting enough tryptophan but it is clear that it is an important macronutrient… but is it the culprit for our “thanksgiving nap?”

All of the above information courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

So why am I so sleepy??

Many attribute the “turkey daze” we feel on thanksgiving to an increase in serotonin due to the tryptophan found in turkey. This hypothesis does pass the sniff test, because as we found earlier, serotonin has long been associated with sleep and tryptophan is the primary precursor to serotonin in our bodies. Serotonin is created through biosynthesis that occurs after tryptophan has crossed the blood-brain barrier and interacts with the enzyme tryptophan hydroxylase in our neurons creating serotonin (Macalester.edu). However, according to an article on Scientific American’s website, it turns out that turkey is not actually responsible for “turkey daze.” Like any protein rich food, there are many amino acids found in turkey and tryptophan is actually one of the scarcest of the bunch. In fact, cheddar cheese, gram for gram, actually contains more tryptophan than turkey does (LiveScience). After thanksgiving dinner there are many amino acids circulating your bloodstream and for them to enter your brain they must cross the blood-brain barrier via the same transport proteins. Due to the fact that tryptophan is scare relative to the five other amino acids found in turkey, it must compete for the same transport proteins and it more often than not gets left behind says David Wurtman, a former professor at MIT (ScientificAmerican). He also goes on in the article to say, “Paradoxically, what probably makes people sleepy after Thanksgiving dinner is…dessert, eating carbohydrates increases brain serotonin in spite of the fact that there is no tryptophan in carbohydrates.” Furthermore, it may just be the sheer amount of food that we consume on this holiday that makes us so sleepy. “Studies have indicated that stretching of the small intestine induces sleepiness and a protein–fat loading of the stomach induces sleepiness,” says biologist H. Craig Heller at Stanford University.

So… whats the deal?! 

Based on my own research, which includes eating a ton of turkey and then napping a week ago and a little over an hour of online reading and searching, I have found mostly speculation as to what is causes the post thanksgiving meal drowsiness. There seems to be a dearth of studies looking into the matter, which is understandable because science likely has more important issues to look into. But like all things, I imagine that it is a combination of things that are taking place to cause the drowsiness. Although the tryptophan is relatively scarce in our bloodstreams after eating turkey, it is still in our bloodstream and some of it is sure to cross the blood brain barrier as the other amino acids in turkey find their way across and become less concentrated in our blood stream. So, eventually serotonin biosynthesis should take place and that combined with the carbo overload and stretching of the small intestine would surely cause some turkey daze. However, if we were to conduct a study, it would need a single-blind randomized control trial where we have people eat identical thanksgiving dinners and then measure serotonin levels in the hour or two following the meal. It should be single-blind so that that we, or the researchers, do not know who ate the turkey and who didn’t to eliminate bias. This way we could isolate the effect of turkey on serotonin levels in the experimental (turkey) group and use the control (no turkey) group as a benchmark. In a study such as this it would be important to only test one dependent variable to steer clear of the sharpshooter problem. Moreover, randomization of both groups would allow for an accurate representation of how turkey or no turkey affects the average person.

In the end, turkey daze really isn’t an issue but more of an interesting phenomenon that takes place after thanksgiving. I couldn’t help but think as I was sitting around Thursday evening when I saw 5-6 people in the same room as me all asleep watching football that the turkey daze would make for a thought provoking blog post. It always interesting to learn a little of the science taking place behind things like this. Gobble Gobble.

They say, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” They say everyone sees the world from their own unique view. They say everything is a matter of perspective. They say two people may view the same exact object but not see exactly the same thing, as they may ultimately develop their own opinions and their own likes or dislikes, in their own specifically shaped memories to that vision. However, generally, everyone sees colors the same: Red is red. Blue is blue. Green is green. Yellow is yellow, and so on. Colors are consistent between everyone, standing as the natural pallet for which visions are universally derived…

But are they really? What about the colorblind? Are their colors consistent with others? What do they see… if not the same thing? And what’s caused them to become colorblind?

Well, for the colorblind, their red is not necessarily red, nor is their blue necessarily blue, or their green necessarily green, and so on. And their colors, in relation to ours, are obviously not the same. So then what are they?

What do the colorblind see? How do they experience the vibrant colors of the world?

With approximately 8% of the male population effected, and .05% of the female population, a relatively large amount of the world is affected. Of all those effected however, not all are effected the same. So the answer really depends on the type of colorblindness an individual possesses. Most commonly, there are three types of colorblindness: deuteranopia, protanopia, and tritanopia.

 This is normal vision.

This is deuteranopia.

This is protanopia.

And this is tritanopia.

The first, deuteranopia, is often considered to be the most prevalent in individuals who are colorblind. Their red isn’t red…but rather grey. Their reds are entirely gone. Purple is gone. Their green also appears slightly grey. And bright colors or “derivatives” of red, like pink, turn grey as well. There are no “green cones” as optometrists would state.

As for the second, also relatively common, protanopia, these individuals experience relatively the same sight. However, their reds and brighter colors appear much darker. From the general perspective, there is not an astounding difference. The eyes of protanopes are said to be missing their “red cones”.

Tritanopia is the rarest of these three kinds- it’s also probably the most unique. The view for individuals with tritanopia can almost be considered surreal, or even hallucinogenic; the color yellow is not yellow, but rather pink. Orange ceases to exist. From the general perspective, almost everything in sight transforms into what can be considered…mostly shades of pink and blue. Certainly, with billions of people in the world, there are all different forms of colorblindness and all different sights and all different experiences (some even report only being able to see the world through black, white, and grey) These three were simply the most common. But what is it that makes the colorblind…blind?

Typically, colorblindness is an inherited trait carried through the X-chromosome (promptly explaining why millions more of men have the issue, while women are less frequently effected). However, it isn’t always a chromosomal abnormality- it’s also common for colorblindness to develop throughout one’s lifetime. While inherited colorblindness typically does not worsen with, the contrary can be true when it’s “contracted”. A surprisingly large number of diseases can lead to one losing their ability to see certain colors: such as glaucoma, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, leukemia, or alcoholism. Causes for developed colorblindness don’t end here though. Drugs such as digitalis and chloroquine have also proved to prompt such a side effect. Various industrial chemicals do the same alongside other eye injuries. And…unfortunately…old age can be another platform for colorblindness. Yet one is still left wondering what makes these individuals unable to see certain colors. So what is it exactly that makes their eyes different from others? The answer simply deals with the rods, cones, and abnormal photopigments within our eyes.

So for all these colorblind, all these unfortunately deprived of experiencing the world’s beauty in its thousands upon thousands of colors… is there hope to see the broad expanse of the world’s colors as others do? Is there a cure for colorblindness?

The generally accepted answer, sadly, is no. There is no treatment or cure for colorblindness, whether it be deuteranopia, protanopia, tritanopia, or anything in between or far beyond. However, in one ongoing study, two University of Washington scientists believe they may be onto something. It is estimated that these scientists will even be able to begin testing their medicine on humans within the next two years.

These two individuals- the Neitzes- have studied the disorder for years. In 2009, they discovered that they could utilize gene therapy to inject a human gene behind the retinas of monkeys. Placed in an experiment where these monkeys had to locate color on a screen for a grape juice reward, they initially could not detect the certain necessary colors. However, after the injection behind their retinas, the monkeys were able to detect the correct color… nearly every single time.

Sadly, the technique requires surgery. And with surgery- especially eye surgery- comes a large amount of risk.

So the Neitzes acted as scientists do and were quick to find an alternative mode of inserting the necessary gene. This time, they discovered it could be transfused through a “safe vector’ known as an “adeno-associated virus”. Thomas W. Chalberg Jr., an executive working on the project, described it best by stating, “It’s a protein shell, kind of like a Trojan horse, that gets you entry into the cell. Once you’re there, the DNA gets to set up shop and produce the photo pigment of interest.” This could possibly lead to the curing of colorblindness.

All in all, colorblindness is a relatively common disease effecting many people- plenty of whom don’t even realize. However, as science constantly progresses and moves mankind further and further away from debilitating disorders and diseases, the 21st century will likely progress toward discovering a cure. But amongst the causes of the disorder, the symptoms, the types, and so on, it’s likely rather to be sooner…rather than later.

We just can’t allow ourselves to become blind to colorblindness as time moves on.

By: Isaac Will

Throughout Penn State there are many wall distributors of hand sanitizer in order to decrease the amount of germs that are spreading from person to person. I know there are especially a few outside and inside the commons so that we can use them before and after eating. The presence of hand sanitizer is becoming more and more popular throughout all different schools, especially elementary schools. But, are they making any difference in the amount of germs that are spreading from person to person and how effective are they?

To be considered an effective germ killer, hand sanitizer must have certain qualities. First, it should include ethyl alcohol. According to UCSB Science Line, ethyl alcohol, “kills bacteria mainly through 2 mechanisms: protein denaturation and dissolving the lipid membrane”. But having this chemical isn’t enough. According to studies the product should have at least 60 percent
alcohol in order to kill most of the germs. Also, how you apply the hand sanitizer can make a big difference in the amount of germs that are killed. You should make sure that you keep every part of your hand, including the back and wrist. Also, you should take off all hand jewelry before applying it in order to insure that no spot lacked the sanitizer.

As stated about in order to kill bacteria and germs most efficiently, the product should have a minimum of 60% alcohol. The reason for this is because the higher the concentration of alcohol to more likely the hand sanitizer is to work equally well for all classes of germs. Also, some germs are able to develop resistance to the sanitizing agent, so a higher concentration of alcohol, decreases the likeliness of this. The higher alcohol content can also reduce the growth of germs rather than solely kill them. With all this in mind, it is important to make sure that the hand sanitizer contains moisturizers that will reduce the likeliness of skin irritation and dryness.

Many experiments have been done throughout the years to decide the effectiveness of using hand sanitizers, especially in schools. Scientist, Brain Hammond, and his collogues did an observational experiment to decided if there was a correlation between hand sanitizer use and elementary school absenteeism. To conduct the study, they observed 5 individual school districts, 16 individual schools, and more than 6000 students in Delaware, Ohio, Tennessee, and California. Overall this was a very reliable, large sample group, especially since the states were all at different regions. It minimizes the chance that there was a third variable involved with the conclusion. To do the experiment, each school in ach district was assigned a product or no product. The school with no product was the control group. Absenteeism due to infection was recorded and the reduction was concluded to be 19.8%. At the end of the experiment, they found that, “Elementary school absenteeism due to infection is significantly reduced when an alcohol gel hand sanitizer is used in the classroom as part of a hand hygiene program.”

Clearly, as shown by the observational study above, by applying hand sanitizer you are reducing the chance that you will get sick from bacteria. By watching the type of hand sanitizer you are purchasing, and applying it regularly, you are killing the germs and maybe even preventing further growth.

Common medication that is prescribed for children is Ritalin and Adderall, which is used to treat ADHD. It is very possible these drugs are over-prescribed, and it is obvious that these drugs are abused especially on college campuses. This is all important to consider because there are new risks being considered with these drugs.

There is recent concern about ineffective studies involving Ritalin (Fox News).  The advantages of using Ritalin were not based on strong evidence or hard facts. The article mentions that “large well run trials still need to be done to assess the risks and the benefits.”

For this kind of trial, there would need to be large random studies done, it may help if the trial was blind or double blind because the participants could behave differently if they know they have the medication. A placebo may be helpful in this case to not have a bias based on receiving the drug. Having the trial be a double blind random control trial, could help the fact that the experimenters could have preconceived notions about what will happen to the person who takes the medication, and this could lead to a confirmation bias because they are trying to prove exactly what it is they expect.

The side effects concerning Ritalin are difficulty sleeping and loss of appetite. For college kids that are taking ADHD medication that don’t actually need them and already don’t sleep or eat enough, this could add to the problem.

It would be interesting to know what the mechanism is for why Ritalin leads to sleep problems because just from intuition you would think it would have the opposite effect.  ADHD medication by design is meant to slow people down and make them less hyper, so I would expect that it would be easier to fall asleep if they are on the medication but apparently it has the opposite effect.

A separate study may need to be done to account for sleep difficulty and appetite separately. A control trial that just looks at all observations between the group of people that took the medication and the group with the placebo may not be in depth enough to account for everything.

It would be best to try different methods of random control trials to see what would be the most effective option for a quality trial.

“ADHD is one of the most commonly diagnosed childhood disorders” (Fox News). which makes it very important that the medication is safe and the right medication is given. The fact that the previous findings were based on studies that were not done well is pretty alarming.

Another issue with ADHD that gets talked about a lot is over diagnosis, it seems like a lot more children are being diagnosed with ADHD than in years past. If more children are determined to need the medication but the medication might not be all that effective and causes other issues, then people that potentially did not even need treated are experiencing side effects.

A common drug like Ritalin that is frequently prescribed for children should be safe with a high amount of confidence behind it, but this is not the case. The bottom line is medication that people take, especially children, should be safe and the studies on the drugs need to be done well all the time.

Sources:

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/11/25/research-raises-questions-over-adhd-drug-effects.html

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/110404/20151125/researchers-urge-caution-in-prescribing-adhd-drug-ritalin-may-not-treat-symptoms.htm

The ADHD Drug Abuse Crisis on College Campuses

An anecdote but a pretty strong one could be a solution for migraines. A woman that experienced terrible migraines all the time, simply got her ear pierced, the type of piercing on the ear is specifically called a daith piercing. Sheri Utecht had severe headaches that would interfere with her daily life. She has to take off work, they cause vomiting and a lot of suffering for her. So one day Sheri decides to pierce her ear, unrelated to the migraines, she just thought it would look nice. It turns out that this piercing, according to her, has cured her of these massive migraines that cause her great agony. The thought behind why this piercing could possibly rid her of her migraines is that it is similar to acupuncture therapy and it had the same kind of effect. Is acupuncture therapy even known help with migraines though? A randomized control trial was done to test this exact idea.

(daith piercing pictured to the left)

In the randomized control trial, there were four groups of around thirty people each (32, 30, 31, 34) to be exact. Every group received the drug Rizatriptan, the first three groups got a different kind of acupuncture (true acupuncture according to traditional Chinese medicine, ritualized mock acupuncture, and standard mock acupuncture), and the fourth group was the control that received no kind of acupuncture. The Migraine Disability Assessment Test (MIDAS) was given before the trial, at 3 months, and at 6 months, then the MIDAS Index was calculated. The results were that the true acupuncture according to traditional Chinese medicine was the only group that was “able to provide a steady outcome improvement in comparison to the use of only Rizatriptan”  (Parry 2015)

This trial, while interesting is too small to take anything big away from it. The trial would need to be repeated multiple times, preferably with a lot more than 120 or so people in it. These results could easily be due to chance and the true acupuncture may not be the best method or it could turn out that none of the methods offer any additional benefits compared to the medication only control group.

As this relates to Sheri Utecht and her piercing solving her migraines, it would be interesting to run a large random control trial that tried to determine whether the daith piercing helps migraines. This would be a difficult study to do because first you would need to limit the pool of people to people with chronic migraines, then limit it more to people who would be willing to get the daith piercing (mostly women, I’m sure), and it would have to be people that do not already have this piercing. This limits the pool of people to a pretty small pool and this makes it seem like it would be difficult to execute.

What is the mechanism behind why acupuncture is an effective treatment for pain though?

In acupuncture, small needles are put at certain pressure points on the body. “The needles are then manipulated by an acupuncturist, either manually or electrically. It causes the blood vessels around the needle to open up and become wider, allowing for an increase in blood flow to the tissues in the immediate area” (Parry 2015)

“The results showed in conditions including chronic headache, acupuncture was twice as effective as the drugs and exercise recommended by most doctors”  (Parry)

Questions I have for that claim, is what kind of data they have to prove that, were any studies done?

What are they basing this twice as effective rate on? This is only a relative rate, so if the drugs were not effective, being twice as effective as the drugs would not be a big difference. There are no numbers to support this claim.

If daith piercings and/or acupuncture turn out to be a legitimate help for migraines, that could be a big breakthrough in this area.

21^st century is age of information. With the development of the computers and the Internet, our life becomes more convenient than before. However, there are some people using these technologies to take advantage of others, even causing some irreparable harm. It was called cyber crime. Cyber crime is a growing problem all over the world. It is unavoidable for everyone to use Internet during daily life. Consequently, people increasingly suffered threats from cyber crime. So what is the current situation and common types of cyber crime? Can people have the ability to protect themselves? If the answer is negative, it is time for people to know about cyber crime.

According to encyclopedia Britannica, cyber crime is to commit crime or to do some illegal activities through the Internet (Dennis). As the quantity of E-commerce and other Internet business increases, the importance of taking the reality of cyber crime seriously increases as well. Based on the data from the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) , which is a joint project between the FBI and the National White Collar Crime Center, there were 262,813 consumer complaints received with financial loss of $781,841,611 in 2013 (IC3.gov). This information shows that the consequence of cyber crime is too serious to be ignored. In addition, according to table from the 2013 annual report of IC3, there are some conclusions that can be summarized.

Table 1: Overall Age Gender 2013 Statistics

Source: “2013 Internet Crime Report”. Internet Crime Complaint Center. Federal Bureau Investigation.

According to the table above we can conclude that cyber crime could cause many financial losses. Senior citizens are especially easier to be defrauded compared with younger people. Thirdly, male are more likely to be tricked than females.

In order to avoid being defrauded, knowing about the various types of cyber crime is vital importance, such as identity theft, financial fraud, cyber stalking, information forgery, hacking, etc. Identity Theft is one of the most common types of avoiding Cyber crime, which has the significant impact on each individual. This crime involves people who steal others’ personal information for their own benefits. As the website of National Cyber Security Alliance illustrates, cybercrime could not only make victims’ lives inconvenient and dangerous, but also can result in financial ruin and potentially threaten a victim’s reputation and personal safety (“ID Theft”). According to the testimony from FBI about identity theft, “Some studies show that more than 10 million Americans were victimized by Identity Theft in the space of one year, with estimated losses exceeding 50 billion dollars” (Martinez). It shows further that identity theft is an invasion of privacy. Identity thefts are often accomplished through phishing, the act of creating fake website or email messages, to induce people provide personal information. Therefore, people need be on the alert at any time.

When dealing with Internet, it’s important to learn how to prevent ourselves from becoming victim of cyber crimes. Also, it is necessary for everyone to reduce the loss caused by cyber crime. As a matter of fact, as Schmitt mentioned, “the Oklahoma-based group has listed cyber crime prevention as an industry focus in 2008” (“Crimes”). Faced with threats from cyber crime, some effective methods to avoid being attacked by cybercrime are as follows. According to the advice from National Cyber Security Alliance, the most important thing is to think carefully before act so that everyone could be wise when malwares ask for personal information. Meanwhile, everyone should protect all the devices that connected to the Internet against virus and other threats. Last but not least, people should look through the trustworthy website as well as use latest security software to ensure a safe and clean online environment (“Tips”). Nowadays, digital data are increasingly becoming an irreplaceable part of daily life, which also put people in a dangerous condition. There is no denying that the bad guys are capable of using new technologies to commit cyber crime. The best way to learn how to prevent cybercrime is to develop good online safety habits with above advice.

From this research, people could know about the current situation of cyber crime, different types of cyber crime and the solution against preventing cyber crime. It is important for everyone to know about cyber crime in order to avoid becoming the victim. Therefore, having a clear overview about cyber crime is necessary and useful. It is an indispensible part for modern people to use computer and internet. During this activity, people should notice the threats from cyber crime as well as to use effective methods to protect ourselves.

References:

“2013 Internet Crime Report”. Internet Crime Complaint Center. Federal Bureau Investigation n.d. Web. 30 Nov, 2015. <http://www.ic3.gov/media/annualreport/2013_IC3Report.pdf>

Dennis, Michael A.  “Cyber crime”. Encyclopedia Britannica. Global.britannica.com. 11 Nov, 2014. Web. 30 Nov, 2015. <http://global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/130595/cybercrime>

“ID Theft, Fraud & Victims of Cybercrime”. Staysafeonline.org. National Cyber Security Alliance. n.d. Web. 30 Nov, 2015. <https://www.staysafeonline.org/stay-safe-online/protect-your-personal-information/id-theft-and-fraud>

Martinez, Steven M. “Testimony: identity theft and cyber crime”. Federal Bureau Investigation. 22 Sep, 2004. Web. 6 Apr, 2015. <http://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/identity-theft-and-cyber-crime>

Schmitt, Jane. “Crimes in cyber space”. Computer crime research center. Crime-research.org. 28 May, 2008. Web. 3 Apr, 2015. <http://www.crime-research.org/analytics/computer_crime22/>

“Tips & Advice”. stopthinkconnect.org. The Anti-Phishing Working Group and National Cyber Security Alliance. n.d. Web. 7 Apr.2015 <http://stopthinkconnect.org/tips-and-advice/overview/#sthash.RpPBtsB7.dpufb>

“Honey don’t forget your jacket, it’s cold outside” is a line that we have all heard from our parents many times. And how about this, “Don’t go outside with wet hair and wear a hat in the winter sweetie!” are still lines that we have all heard plenty of times. However, does cold weather actually make you sick? There has been many misconceptions based on the answer to this very common question. However, scientists may finally be able to verify the widely-held suspicion that cold weather can in fact, make you sick.

In an article proclaiming about scientists potential new find, “Yale University announced their discovery that lower temperatures weaken the nose’s first line of immune defenses.” An experimental study that was conducted by researchers started off with the modification of a strain of rhinovirus, and testing it on mice. Rhinoviruses are the most common viral infectious agents in humans and are the leading cause of the common cold. After giving the mice this modified strand, scientists recorded how the mice fought off the disease when there were changes in temperature. They concluded that, cooler temperatures meant a more lethargic immune response and a greater sensitivity to incoming infection. As a result this study proves the fact that cold weather affects our defenses against rhinovirus infection.

The question posed has been of curiosity for 50+ years. In the 1960s, researchers first noticed a rapid multiplication in the rhinoviruses if it was incubated a few degrees below body temperature. This finding was beneficial to scientists because, rhinoviruses often infect the lining of the nostrils, which are cooled by incoming air.

There are many misconceptions on what actually causes colds within humans. Examples are, catching a cold because of low immunity, the prevention of colds by Vitamin C and Zinc, Antibiotics curing colds,  getting sick from a flu shot, and participating in home cough remedies. However, our personal favorite, does dry or cold air cause colds?, is also covered. In terms of dry air, people believe that the hot dry air can potentially dry up the mucus in your nasal passages. This is not true and it does not matter what the weather is! Humidity is the only weather condition that could be beneficial, this is because the moist air can help ease congestion and coughing. Cold weather is next, and this reputable source also states that cold weather does not cause colds. There is no correlation between cold weather and viruses. The source states that there is a better chance of getting sick from being in close and hot quarters, and opposed to cold temperatures. It is what we as humans do when it gets cold out, we run indoors to places that contain recycled air with those who all are sick with different virsues. Viruses spread very easily when directly exposed to someone else that is sick. The tendency of blaming colds and viruses on cold weather is ultimately a myth!

Just to be sure, more experimental studies were performed to prove the findings. For example, The New England Journal of Medicine conducted a study based on Exposure to Cold Environment and the Rhinovirus Common Cold – Failure to Demonstrate Effect. The study was conducted on inmates selected from federal correctional institutions or the Texas State Department of Corrections. The subjects in this study were exposed to a cold at each stage of the infection process, therefore this experiment was not a single blind, nor was it a double blind trial. The article explains these time periods as during, “inoculation and incubation, illness and recovery. The results indicate that exposure to cold by methods similar to natural exposure to low temperatures did not increase the frequency or severity of illness from infection with the strain of rhinovirus Type 15 used in this study.” As you can see, this is another study that proves the often wronged opinion that cold weather causes colds.

So next time you’re mom yells at you for not wearing a coat in the winter, you can answer her with “there were copious studies on this mom, I won’t get sick Mom its the confounding variables that will make me sick!”

Music is a universal language used and shared across the world. With todays apps, radios, podcasts, cell phones, and tablets you can access and share with anyone anywhere with a touch of button. But I was curious of how much we actually listen to and how do we listen to it. I didn’t think this would blow up as much as it did when I did a quick Google search. I hopped into the immense amount of knowledge from statistics, surveys, and scientific studies of actually how much audio we listen to a day and how we listen to it. Not only does this help the scientific community but also the technology community. Knowing and estimating how people listen to music can bring new and improved audio technology and advertising ideas to the table. This simple question of how much do we listen to opens up a large range of opportunities across many spectrums of our society.

According to an article done by Spin they found an Edison research study that states most U.S. residents listen to roughly four hours and five minutes of audio each day. That’s divided between broadcast radio (52 percent), owned music such as downloads, vinyl, CDs, and tapes (20 percent), streaming services such as Beats Music, Spotify, and Pandora (12 percent), satellite radio (8 percent), podcasts (2 percent), and the  “other” category, like audiobooks (2 percent). This findings were very surprising to me. I would of put my money on that internet radio and other applications such as Pandora and spotify would dominate the music listening to industry. But taking a look into a deeper understanding is that my demographic of being a 19 year old college student appeals to that community and I just figured that was everyone. If I think of my parents they listen to CDs and the radio much of this split on the chart makes sense. Overall this study is pretty weak in the sense of giving me more information about how the study was actually conducted. I don’t know who the study was based on, and how they obtained the information.

I dug deeper and found a study done by Nielsen, a statistical marketing company aimed to, “study consumers in more than 100 countries to give you the most complete view of trends and habits worldwide.” Extremely trusted and a large company I was confident that their study would be noteworthy for this post. According to Nielsen’s Music 360 2014 study, “93% of the U.S. population listens to music, spending more than 25 hours each week jamming out to their favorite tunes.” 25 hours per week listening is slightly under he recorded amount in the Edison research study. But four hours with this type of study in which each individual studied can generally shift those numbers isn’t a bad range to get an idea of the time we listen to music. Personally speaking I may listen to about 3 hours a day listening to music. At the end of the week I am at 21 hours slightly under the recorded amount but I can make the statement that am not the biggest music listener for prolonged periods of time.  A fun fact I found in this study is when we listen to music which is something I didn’t consider when looking into this subject but according to this study; ” 75% of Americans say they actively choose to listen to music, which is more than they claim to actively choose to watch TV (73%). Whether in the car (25%), at work (15%) or while doing chores (15%), we spend big chunks of our time listening to music.” These are reasonable statics as these are the exact times when I listen to the most music. To get down to the meat of the study lets actually look at how we listen to music. When it comes down to it the story is largely a digital one. “Americans streamed 164 billion on-demand tracks across audio and video platforms in 2014, up from 106 billion in 2013.” Not only did the number of streams in 2014 surge past the number a year earlier, but the pace of weekly streams hit new heights. In any given week across America, 67% of music fans stream music. These are great numbers and very different from the Edison study, both done in the same year. Interestingly CDs and cassettes declined, while vinyl reported its ninth consecutive year of sales growth. With 9.2 million units sold in 2014, vinyl sales roared past the 6.1 million units sold in 2013 by nearly 52%. Vinyl now accounts for 6% of physical album sales. This is unexplained but largely are caused but pop culture trends leaning towards a more vinyl era. from personal experience many of my friends and peers do buy vinyl, I personally haven’t but this odd statistic is represented in personal experience. On average In the U.S and individuals have reported spending around $109 on music. The pie graph gives an in depth look at what they spend it on.

All in all, these two studies do defer and I consider the Nielsen study to be more of a reliable source when it comes to this information. This is a hard concept to study. Age, gender, location, and many variables reflect this extremely and it is so individualized it can be difficult to get a accurate reading. But Nielsen is a large company operating all over the world and this seems to be the best statistic to get on this topic.

Wintertime is coming upon us; we all know what that means. It’s Holiday season with the chance of a snowstorm, the temperature is becoming colder and the air is becoming dryer. Everyone around you is coughing and sneezing and wishing they were in their beds watching a movie and drinking some hot chocolate; it’s flu and cold season. How does one survive through the winter without getting a cold? How can we protect our immune systems and help it become stronger once we get sick? According to science, the answer could be as simple as getting a humidifier.

A humidifier is a device that you can put in any room or building to increase the moisture in the air. There are several different types of humidifiers. Central humidifiers are built directly into  your home heating and air conditioning systems. These can humidify you whole house along with the heating and air. Next, there are ultrasonic humidifiers. These are small machines that you can place on a table in a room that produce a cool mist. Impeller humidifiers also produce a cool mist, put the mist is produced a different way. Evaporators are also small machines that contain a fan that blows air through a wet wick, filter or belt. Lastly, a steam vaporizers use electricity to create steam that cools before leaving the machine.

The humidifiers’ steam that increases the moisture of the air is what can help protect you from the common cold. They are often used for relieving dry skin, sinus congestion, dry throat, nose irritation, bloody noses, irritated vocal cords, dry cough, and cracked lips. All of these are symptoms of the common cold or the flu. Humidity should stay between 30 and 50 percent in order to reduce these symptoms. If you set the humidity too high, it can actually worsen the problem or create new ones.

Jeffrey Shaman and his collogues experimented they effect that using a humidifier has the flu. They did an observational study, examining the rate in which humans get influenza in wintertime compared to other seasons, while observing the humidity conditions surrounding the rate of the flu. They claim to be using the human population as a whole in their data, which also is a large randomized trail, does have some problems because not everyone is diagnosed with the flu that has it. After collecting and comparing all their data, they concluded that the wintertime increases the chances of getting the flu due to the levels of humidity in the air.

Clearly, as long as you keep your humidifiers clean and not at too high of a percent, no harm can come with having one. They help relieve sinus health by decreasing the dry air that doesn’t allow our sinuses to drain properly. They keep our nasal passages lubricated, speeding up our immune systems ability to heal the common cold, flu, and even asthma. The moisture from a humidifier even keeps the throat from drying out and helps relieve us from snoring. The moisture in the air keeps our bodies less chapped and dry, and more hydrated, leading to beautiful, nondehydrated skin. What more can we ask for in the cold and dry wintertime?

College tuition has been on the rise, and even more so during the 21st century.  Since 2001, public college tuition has almost double in price, from $4,800 to $9,400! This is an outrageous as it has surpassed the rate of inflation in the economy.  So how do families continue to afford these crazy prices? Before researching I assumed that as tuition got higher in price more teenagers would either drop out of college or not enroll in the first place.  I hypothesized this because the median American family does not make enough money to fully pay for their child’s tuition without taking out loans.

A study was done in 2008 by professors Dr. Steven Hemelt and Dr. David Marcotte, that compared college tuition and enrollment rates.  They looked at “total headcount, total number of credits taken, and the number of first-time, full-time freshman” and found all this data from IPEDS, which is an “institution-level data set,” that shows all this information.  The two professors took data from over 600 four-year, public college universities in the United States. This experimental study showed data that an increase of tuition of $100 would bring a decrease in enrollment of .25%, and an increase in tuition of $210 would result in an enrollment decline of about 57 students.  Even though these 57 students were essentially “lost”, the institution is not loosing money because they increased their tuition rates so that money lost from the 57 students is being made up by the other students attending the university.  So yes colleges are loosing students due to increased tuition but not as many as one would think.  Students still want a good education and want to attend the best universities to obtain this so that they can have successful careers.  Families are willing to take out large loans and students are having to pay back these loans for many years post college just for their education.  Even though tuition increases students want to attend the schools has not changed making the enrollment rate not decrease by much each year.

  Source

This graph shows how much tuition has risen for private four-year universities and public four-year universities over the span of time from 1994 to 2015.

Many other factors have an influence over enrollment rates into universities. Difference in demographics of who is attending the colleges has greatly changed.  The United States has more African Americans, Asians, Hispanics and other internal students attending the many institutions. This individuals want the higher education levels that might not be available in their own countries. This essentially “forces” those students to come to America and pay the high tuition rates which increases the amount of students that have enrolled at that particular school.

 Source

This graph shows the percentage of students of different races/ethnicities attending Public Schools.  The number of students that are not white, for the first time in 2014, surpassed the percentage of white students attending school.

Although college tuition is still on the rise, students and their families are willing to pay/attempt to pay the high prices if it means guaranteeing better education in the long run. This will not cause dramatic drops in enrollment into public universities as the need for a higher education is needed now more than ever.

Global warming is one of the most discussed, and debated topics in the world today. Scientists and political leaders express different views and beliefs on global warming in the news everyday. With every new discovery, people change their minds or completely “go green.” Scientists have studied climate change for decades in search of the cause of global warming. Taking into account the natural changes and cycles the planet has experienced for millions of years, scientists have discovered the major cause of global warming to be greenhouse gases produced by humans. These greenhouse gases come predominantly from the use of fossil fuels in cars and factories. Emission levels, alongside average temperatures,  have risen more than 20 percent since 1990, and continue to rise each year. Why does this all matter, what is going to happen?

With a warming planet, the ice caps in the north and south pole are melting, causing the sea levels to rise rapidly.  This is destroying the habitats of the animals that live in those harsh conditions, including polar bears and penguins. Sea levels are expected to rise between 7 and 23 inches over the next century, and could be even higher than that depending on the amount of melting endured at the poles. Hurricanes and other storms are becoming more frequent as well, and all natural disasters are becoming stronger on average each year. The effects of Global Warming are endless, and new threats are being discovered with every passing storm. It is crucial, that humans as a species find solutions to this problem.

Scientists all over the world have been working on ways to help reduce emission levels of greenhouse gases. An increase in solar and wind-powered machinery is a great way to reduce the amount of energy used in many different operations. Energy efficiency and vehicle fuel economy are also major changes that could help reduce the level of greenhouse gases emitted by people all over the world. The reduction of these gases in the atmosphere will eventually help lower the green house gas concentrations to a stable 500-ppm. There is no single solution to this problem, but the combination of small efforts from people all over the world, like recycling and fuel efficient cars, will eventually stabilize our earth, and stop the downward spiral we are currently on before it’s too late.

http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/gw-solutions

Coffee is among the most popular drinks in the United States of America, with over 100 million people drinking 1+ cup(s) per day. The effect caffeine has on consumers is widely controversial, and has been studied by scientists all over the world. Coffee has been said to have multiple types of healing powers, along with various dangers depending on the culture. The most outspoken concern about caffeine is whether or not it has a negative effect on a person’s growth pattern. “Coffee stunts your growth,” is the common belief that most people have about coffee. I was told growing up that if I drank coffee I would never be tall like my father, but it was all a lie. Old legends and wives tales about coffee have twisted the truth, and has led us to false information about coffees underlying affect on the youth’s growth.

Recent studies have been performed to measure the difference in bone density between teenagers who drink a lot of coffee, and those who don’t. 81 teenagers were tracked over the course of 6 years, and were studied to bring light to the,  “stunt your growth” reputation caffeine has. The result was that there was no difference between the bone masses of those teenagers who drank a lot of coffee, and those who drank very little. This study leaves out those teenagers who don’t drink coffee at all, whose bone mass in theory could be the best out of all groups. These studies did however, find other health issues associated with coffee, including the large volume of sugar most people are adding to their cups of coffee in recent times. Some other issues found in coffee include Tannic acid, which stains teeth enamel, and dry mouth, which also causes tooth decay. The major issue with coffee revolves around its sugary partner. With only 35% of coffee drinkers drinking their coffee black, leaving 65% of people adding some form of sweetener to their drinks. This is a major factor in the obesity rate in the younger generation. For other cool facts about coffee, click here.

Coffee is not all bad though; it has been proven that coffee does have positive effects on the body as well. Frank Hu, the nutrition and epidemiology professor at the Harvard School of Public Health, claims  “There is certainly much more good news than bad news, in terms of coffee and health…)  It was once thought that coffee had negative effects on the cardiovascular system, but recent studies have proven this to be false, in fact the complete opposite. In Iowa, a Women’s Health Study observed 27,000 women who drank one to three cups of coffee each day over the course of 15 years, to determine the effect coffee has on the cardiovascular system in women. The result was that daily coffee drinkers actually reduced the chance of cardiovascular disease by 24 percent. Other benefits from coffee include reduced chance of Type 2 Diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, and Dementia. 

http://kidshealth.org/teen/expert/nutrition/coffee.html

http://www.statisticbrain.com/coffee-drinking-statistics

http://www.punchwine.com/5-most-popular-beverages-in-the-world

From the time that my generation was conscious of our surroundings, we have been told to always stay hydrated, with mothers and grandmothers nagging that we’re never drinking enough, that we’re going to pass out if we don’t carry a reusable water bottle around. All this focus on hydration has resulted in one of the most fully hydrated generations of all time. On this campus, it is uncommon to see someone walking around without some sort of beverage on their person. This constant hydration is said to be good for you, but often times, doing things that are good for you too often results in bad things happening, such as taking too many Gummi-Vitamins (this can lead to internal bleeding, and occasionally death). This caused me to research the potentially harmful effects of over-hydration, and to see if we are an over-hydrated people.

There is a common anecdote about the harms of too much water. In Los Angeles in 2007, a radio station held a water drinking contest, and one contestant, Jennifer Strange, died from water intoxication, or hyponatremia. Strange’s sodium content became so diluted in her bloodstream due to the excessive amount of water that she consumed, which caused her brain to swell, eventually causing her death. This anecdote shows that there are negative consequences of consuming too much water, but I’ll have to dig further to see if there is widespread evidence of overconsumption leading to physical harm.

Joseph Verbalis, the chairman of medicine at Georgetown University Medical Center says, “Every hour, a healthy kidney at rest can excrete 800 to 1,000 milliliters, or 0.21 to 0.26 gallon, of water and therefore a person can drink water at a rate of 800 to 1,000 milliliters per hour without experiencing a net gain in water”. I have a Nalgene bottle which holds 1000 milliliters, and i usually go through one in less than an hour. The daily suggested water intake is within the confines of Verbalis’ suggestion, though, “Today, the IOM liberally recommends an even higher volume of total daily water intake: 3.7 liters (15 cups) for the average adult male and 2.7 liters (11 cups) for the average adult female.”

This suggested amount is far below what is harmful to the human body according to what Verbalis recommends, but the suggested amount is not necessarily what the average American consumes.

As seen in the chart above, neither children (ages 2-18) or adults (19+) have an average consumption that comes anywhere close to being at risk for hyponatremia. Another thing to notice, though, is that the values for average intake are also nowhere near the IOM’s recommendations.

Based off the research that I have done on this topic, I have come to two conclusions. The first, and the most pertinent to this blog is that, yes, too much water can be very harmful to you. There are countless anecdotes of hyponatremia just like Jennifer Strange’s. The second conclusion, though, is that as a nation, we do not consume too much water, and in fact, we consume much less than the recommended daily value, which is FAR below the value that puts you at risk for hyponatremia. I came into this blog with a concern over over-hydration, but now I am only concerned with dehydration, which, by the way, can also cause hyponatremia. Go figure.

In a recent surf contest in Jefferies Bay, South Africa, a shark attacked Mick Fanning, a professional surfer, in the final round of the contest. Fanning escaped without physical harm, but the contest was called off and everyone was evacuated from the water. Fanning was using a board that was bright yellow on the bottom, claiming that it drew positive attention when performing turns on a wave. Did this bright color have anything to do with the shark encounter? There was another surfer in the water whose board was the normal white color. Would Mick Fanning have been attacked if his board were not colored? Many studies have been performed to try and prevent shark attacks, and color has been one of the main focal points. Is there any way to completely prevent shark attacks?

On the show Mythbusters, they did an experimental study to test if sharks have any preference to color. They do this by setting up different colored bags of chum spaced out in a heavily shark populated area. The colors of the bags consisted of black, yellow, blue, red, silver, and white, and were placed about 30 feet from one another. They then tallied the number of times each bag was bitten and investigated (meaning the shark swam up to it and checked it out.) Once the first test was done, they then switched the positions of the bags to insure that the study was accurate. They found that the shark’s favorite color was yellow, having almost twice as many bites as most other colors, and the most investigations.
While yellow got the most action, all of the colors experienced some form of attack. This could mean that no color entirely fends off shark attacks. The gray area in this study is that all of the bags, no matter the color, held chum. This could prove that even though the color didn’t appeal to the shark, the food inside was too good of an opportunity to pass up. The blue bag showed the least amount of interest to the sharks in this study, suggesting that sharks do not like the color blue. The statistical chance of being attacked by a shark is so low that it doesn’t even cross the mind of most surfers(1 in 11million chance over your lifetime.)
2010 held the highest number of unprovoked attacks in the past decade with 79 attacks. I personally believe scientists should look more into gender affiliation with shark attacks. Out of every shark attack file ever recorded since 1580, 93% of them have been on males. This draws the question, do sharks have a taste for men? Does this have something to do with the testosterone men give off, or is it because men are just actively in the water more than women, or is it just chance? It could have something to do with the surfing population being predominantly men,(or the fact that men are just tastier than women…) For other facts about shark attacks, click here.

Yes I understand that medical marijuana is still illegal in many states across the country, but the legal status of the drug is not what I am going to talk about.  What many people have yet to understand is that they have been brain washed about how marijuana is a so called “dangerous” drug.  Marijuana is helping people all across the country!  At first this whole thing didn’t hit me until i started doing research on it myself.  So I started watching documentaries and reading tons of articles.  There are millions of people out there suffering from chronic pain, seizures, anxiety, depression, and rare diseases that are just very severe.  Medical marijuana is the cure.  If you were to ask someone that has hundreds of seizures a day what medications they take, the list would be quite long to say the least.  And what people also don’t understand is that all of those medications have side effects.  For example,  that person may have a specific med that helps when they have severe pains, so they take the medication and the pain goes away.  So yes they may not be in pain anymore but that drug has now caused them to become very nauseous.  Eventually the meds catch up to you and it is just an on-going process.  So what doctors do is they keep on prescribing all these different medications when all they need is medical marijuana.  In my opinion, most importantly it has been proven to help cancer patients significantly that are going through chemotherapy.   Here are a few videos of patients using marijuana to help with the disease that they have and the results are remarkable.

Here is a women with cerebral palsy which causes severe stuttering and watch the significant difference after the medical marijuana is taken

Here is another video of a child with autism and how medical marijuana made a huge impact on his life

This last video is a women with arthritis, which over 2 million Americans suffer from and she speaks about how marijuana is really the only thing that works and how all of these anti-inflammatories she was prescribed have very bad side effects.

Parents may try many things to soothe a wailing child, such as a diaper change, a feeding, or even burping the baby, but when nothing works some parents take to the magic of the pacifier. Other parents argue the damaging effects the pacifier has on a child and the lasting consequences. There are many different parenting styles and preferences in the world and this is one of them.

In order to make the decision of whether or not a baby will be given a pacifier, the parents must weigh the pros and cons. Since sucking is often a calming reflex to babies, the pacifier can soothe a fussy child and act as a temporary distraction. A pacifier during bedtime may also help a child fall asleep and there is evidence that a pacifier at bedtime may reduce the risk of SIDS, or sudden infant death syndrome. Parents should wait a month before giving a pacifier to the child because of the interference with breast-feeding. A mother’s nipples and a bottle’s nipples require a different method of sucking, which may confuse the child and turn them away from breast-feeding. Another factor that may deter a parent from choosing to use a pacifier is the dependence some babies gain on the pacifier. If a child uses the pacifier for an extended length of time, they can develop dental problems in the future, such as misaligned teeth or teeth that do not come through the gums properly. Along with dental problems, the risk of middle ear infections are also increased.

A mechanism for the introduction of an ear infection as a result of frequent use of a pacifier is explained in the statement, “continuous sucking on a pacifier can cause the auditory tubes to become abnormally open, which allows secretions from the throat to seep into the middle ear,” Academy of General Dentistry spokesperson Maria Smith said. “Transmission of bacteria in secretions would lead to middle ear infections.” Antibiotics are often given to a child to ward off infections, but if a child suffers from ear infections often, a surgical procedure can be done. A parent may try weening a child off of the pacifier to reverse the damage being done to the ears. Correlation does not equal causation and all children will not experience this consequence from pacifier use. Along with increasing the risk for infection, pacifiers may potentially decrease the risk of SIDS.

SIDS takes the lives of around 3,000 babies  each y
ear and little is known about why this occurs or how to prevent it from happening. But pacifiers may offer one way to reduce the risk. Babies that suck on pacifiers while asleep are kept in a lighter state of sleep. The pacifier in the baby’s mouth will ensure that an airway is kept open and lessens the chance that the child will stop breathing. A study was done in which 185 mothers who lost a child to SIDS was interviewed as well as 312 mothers who were in a control group. The mechanism of how a pacifier reduces the risk is poorly understood, but the study found that pacifier use may reduce the risk of SIDS up to 90%.

Ultimately the decision of whether or not a child should be given a pacifier is solely in the parents’ hands and each child may have a different response to the object. While there are both pros and cons, most of the cons can be easily avoided. Starting the use of the pacifier after the baby is a month old will reduce the interference the pacifier has on breast-feeding and weening a child off of the pacifier by the time they are two-years old will prevent dental damage. Though pacifiers may become a dependency for children, they can easily be thrown away to encourage the child from ending the habit, but a child sucking their thumb is harder to break the habit. There is little to do to prevent the ear infections they may cause, but parents must have to take the risk. When compared to reducing the risk of the fatal SIDS, most parents will choose to take the risk of ear infections.

Ahh television. One of the easiest ways to be comfy and lazy is to watch TV. It’s entertainment, for some a way to escape the harsh ways of reality. If anything can be said about television, its that it’s main goal is to please us. It’s objective is to satisfy it’s audiences while still sending out information that the audience can decode and take in as a message. TV is entertaining, funny, and exciting. Watching TV can make you more intelligent, more up to date, and heck, it can even give you something to talk about at the Water Cooler at work. But how much TV is too much TV?

It’s obvious that watching too much TV isn’t good for you, but how bad is it. A recent study has discovered that watching too muchTV can actually kill you! By tracking over 86,000 people over 18 years, it was discovered that watching to much television increases the risk of suffering fatal pulmonary embolism. “Pulmonary embolism is a blockage in the artery that carries blood from the heart to the lungs, and is usually caused by a blood clot formed in a vein in the leg. Up to 60,000 people die as a result of pulmonary embolism each year in Britain”. Watching TV for over 5-6 hours a day, with an increased age (40-59) doubles your chances of suffering from a fatal blood clot. The study, which was done by Japanese Collaborative Cohort Study, resulted in 18 deaths from 36,007 men and 50,017 women. This study was the first to discover a link between prolonged television watching and fatal pulmonary embolism. This study also shows that correlation does not equal causation for pulmonary embolism doesn’t cause one to watch TV.

After reading this article, it got me thinking about what’s really on Television that we watch. I thought it would be interesting to know the effects of what we see on TV and how we react to it. One classic example that can help clear this up is Bandura’s Bobo doll experiment. Albert Bandura, who conducted this experiment with his colleagues at Stanford University, used an inflatable doll and children to help see correlation between what he see on TV and how we react. A short video was shown to preschoolers where their would be a Bobo doll with a clown face printed on the front and sand in the dolls base so the doll bopped back and forth after getting hit. A man was then shown hitting, punching, and kicking the Bobo doll all over the room. Obviously, all children saw that part of the film, but with the way they conducted the experiment, they would show different groups of children alternative endings. In the first ending to the film, the man who beats up the doll is rewarded with praise and food. The second ending showed the man who beat up the doll, punished for his actions. And the third ending was shown to a group of children where they only saw the opening sequence. After the show, the children were lead to a playroom with a Bobo doll inside the room. Bandura and his colleagues then watched how the children acted when seeing the doll. What they concluded was that the children who were shown the first and third endings imitated the aggressive acts they saw on Bobo while the second group of kids tended not to do so. Yet several children in the second group acted violently toward Bobo as well. This discovery was important because it showed that mere exposure to television violence (whether or not the violence was visibly rewarded on screen) could spur aggressive responses in young children. However, Bandura was also able to conclude that the punishment the children saw, when the man got punished for beating Bobo, inhibited their aggressive behavior.

The findings were to suggest that children learn social behavior through observation learning. That is to say that kids, especially at such a young age, learn traits such as aggressiveness through watching the actions of another person.

If I were to conduct an experiment as such, I would do it in the same fashion. An experimental design would be the best for this experiment because the method can establish the effect of cause and effect the best. The variables are also controlled so it can rule out other competing explanations for the results. I would also use the experimental method because of the replicability the method has. Alterations can be made to find or eliminate other results.

In this experiment, the value of having a controlled design was key. Only the endings of the film were varied, so that any subsequent differences among them could be attributed to the differences in media content.

TV now is closely monitored by the FCC. They essentially control what is seen and heard on the airways. A TV Rating system was set into place after public concerns to profanity and graphic violence in television programs. TV ratings are as such: TV Y, TV Y7, TV G, TV PG, TV 14, TV MA. TV Y is appropriate for all children while TV MA is for Mature Audiences only and may be unsuitable for children under 17. Having a rating system and parental guidelines allows Television to be “noticeably” cleaner because children are advised not to watch that isn’t suitable for them, yet it is still on the airways.

In the end, Television can be violent. Television can show sexual content and it can be graphic. The FCC montiors what is on the airways pretty tightly, so nothing too harmful is shown. However, the violence of television is determined and really judged by the actions of the people who watch it.

Works Cited:

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/watching-too-much-tv-can-kill-you-researchers-warn-10478297.html

Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment on Social Learning

Every time I drink a lot of water, I notice that I gain a few pounds. I brought this up to my mom and she said it was just water weight that I’ll lose over the next few days. I never really understood what this meant and how our body works. I thought drinking a lot of water would help you lose weight. Here is a blog clarifying this!

Water is necessary for your body to function properly and is necessary for the transport of oxygen and nutrients. The Mayo Clinic says that water makes up 60% of our body weight and every system in our body depends on it. “For example, water flushes toxins out of vital organs, carries nutrients to your cells and provides a moist environment for ear, nose and throat tissues,” Mayo Clinic. “Your metabolism is basically a series of chemical reactions that take place in your body,” says Trent Nessler, who is managing director of Baptist Sports Medicine. By drinking a lot of water, one can keep their chemical reactions smoothly running. Even being just 1% dehydrated can make ones metabolism drop. Too little water can lead to dehydration. Additionally, Water helps to decrease your appetite so it helps you to not overeat. However, drinking a lot of water at one time can backfire and actually make you gain weight.

The extra pounds that I gain from drinking water are called water weight. If a person drinks a large amount of water at one time, their kidneys won’t be able to keep up and won’t be able to dismiss the extra water. This extra water that’s left over in your body disrupts the electrolyte balance that is responsible for regulating the water. One quart of water is equal to two pounds. This weight will be on the scale immediately after you drink the water, however, in about 24 hours it will cycle and your weight will return to the normal. Additionally, if a person’s diet is very high in sodium, and very low in potassium, then a person has a greater risk for holding water in.

On the other hand, water can also help one lose weight. Adding a lot of water to a person’s diet can help them not feel as hungry throughout the day. “When your body realizes it is getting enough water, it will allow you to release retained waters from your cells through digestion,” (Discover Good Nutrition).

Hypernatremia can come from drinking too much water. This occurs when someone drinks a lot of water at one time. Hypernatremia causes a persons blood and electrolytes to be diluted and also leads to nausea, confusion, seizures, muscle spasms, swelling of the brain and vomiting.

Stew Smith, a fitness author, had a client that lost 20 pounds in one week by just adding water to their diet. His client was very bloated and this was removed when he drank water because the bloating was caused by dehydration and a diet filled with a lot of sodium.

One study found that the people who drank water before they ate consumed less food during their meal. Approximately they consumed 75 fewer calories during each meal. It does not seem like a lot, but if you times it by 365 for every day during the year, then you can avoid eating 27,000 calories.

There is no universal standard for the amount of water one should drink in a day. It is different for each person and depends on their environment and their personal activity level.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/241094-overview

http://www.discovergoodnutrition.com/2013/07/water-weight-gain/

http://www.womenshealthmag.com/weight-loss/drinking-habits-that-make-you-gain-weight

http://3diet-fitness.blogspot.com/2009/08/can-drinking-too-much-water-make-you.html

As a student here at Penn State, I believe that I can speak for all of us when I say that we have all felt overwhelmed at some point in our lives due to built up stress. This stress may come from a social situation, an issue with family, or extreme stress from schoolwork. I’m sure many of us have felt the mental strain that stress has on us, some may have even gotten to the point where it feels like our head is about to explode. Certainly, if you have reached that level on the stress meter, you have also experienced the effects that extreme stress has on your mood. What many people don’t consider, though, is what a strong negative impact extreme stress will have on your body.

According to this article from WebMD, your body is wired to acknowledge stress and react to it. This can be a positive thing, helping you to become aware of danger and helping you to feel urgency toward things like deadlines and assignments. However, it can become harmful to your body if it is constantly dealing with stress, with no break to recover from the challenges you were facing.

Even if you do not realize it, the stress you experience plays a toll on your body in an alarming number of ways. Some of the most common results are to get a stomachache, to get a headache, and to experience aches and pains especially in your neck and back. So many people immediately think these symptoms are from sitting in one spot for too long, from skipping a meal, or having nervous pre-test jitters. However, these effects are direct results of putting your body under too much stress, not just from sitting in an uncomfortable library chair for too long. It is also common for someone under a lot of stress to have trouble sleeping, only worsening the toll your body has to endure.

Aside from negative effects that can affect your day-to-day life, chronic stress can have a major negative impact on your long-term health. Extreme stress can have a serious impact on the following:

• Immune System- First and foremost, people who undergo chronic stress have weaker immune systems, and therefore are more susceptible to infectious diseases like the flu and the common cold. Because of your damaged immune system, it will take your body longer than the average person to fight off a common infection.
• Respiratory and Cardiovascular Systems- The hormones released during periods of extreme stress directly affect both your respiratory and cardiovascular system. Your body’s response to stress will cause you to breathe faster and therefore cause your heart to pump faster. If this happens for too long or too frequently, you may be raising your risk for a stroke or heart attack.
• Muscular System- When your body is under stress, its natural response is to tense up. When your muscles are constantly tight with no chance to relax, it can cause extreme back and shoulder pains, headaches, and body aches that need to be relieved using medication.
• Digestive System- When you are breathing more rapidly, have more hormones, and a faster heart rate your digestive system will be effected.  Those under extreme stress are likely to experience nausea, vomiting, heartburn, and acid reflux. 
• Sexuality and Reproductive Systems- Although men and women have very different bodies, extreme stress will affect both genders in this aspect. For women, chronic stress may alter the menstrual cycle, worsening and causing irregularity in the symptoms. For men, extreme stress will cause a decrease in testosterone, and also increasing the risk for infections in the prostate, urethra, or testes.
• Nervous and Endocrine Systems- Chronic stress can often result in irritability, depression, and anxiety. As a result, some people then suffer from alcoholism, eating disorders, or social withdrawal.

As a grade school and high school student, I never felt that I was under a tremendous amount of stress. Upon beginning my studies here at Penn State, I learned what real stress felt like. My grades are always and have always been my priority, however it is also important to fin time for yourself and remember to have fun, because sadly we are only here for four short years. It has certainly been a battle dealing with the extreme stress levels associated with getting good grades, choosing a major program, adjusting to living on my own, and so many other factors that I’m sure we all face. As my sophomore year rolled around, I realized that you really can worry yourself sick. When you let your mind wander and stress too much, especially about things that you cannot control, you are only hurting yourself. What I learned is that nobody is perfect, and your priority always should be to take care of yourself. When your mom calls you on the phone nagging about if you’ve been getting enough sleep and if you’ve been eating real food besides Raman and coffee, she isn’t just bugging you for the heck of it. Many of us forget that in order to be successful, you need to be healthy and up to your full potential. Being that we are all students here, I know that we all strive to be successful. It is important to always take care of yourself, and not to beat yourself up too much if you don’t succeed.
If you’re interested in how to relieve stress and maintain a healthy balance, check out my follow-up blog!

Coloring is an activity used in everyday life. Most of us had to be able to color inside the lines in order to pass second grade. While coloring is an enjoyable activity for kids, it can also be helpful (and enjoyable) in adults lives too.

One of the main benefits that coloring has on adults is its ability to de-stress the human mind. In the early 20th century, psychologist Carl Jung used coloring as a relaxation tool for his patients. It de-stresses the human mind because it changes our focus from our problems to the specifics of the coloring such as colors being used, design, and other details. While coloring, the amygdala is relaxed which allows the brain to rest, and the frontal lobe that controls problem solving is opened up, which allows colorers to focus more. It also reminds patients of their childhood, which was most likely less stressful so it causes the patient to enter a less stressed mode. Connecting with your inner child allows you to reminisce on happy events and feel a calmer life when bills, jobs, stress, tests, and social pressure were not things that you had to worry about. Coloring also improves fine motor skills and vision. Since both hemispheres have to communicate because coloring is both logical and creative, the area of the cerebral cortex involved in fine motor skills and vision are used.

Coloring is also used as a tool for expressing feelings during art therapy. A study done in 2006 compares stress levels of two groups of cancer patients. One group went through art therapy and the other did not. It was found that the group that went through this art therapy had lower levels of stress than those that didn’t. This shows that coloring, which is a form of art therapy, can help de-stress a human and can improve the quality of life. Art therapy also helps people with behavior and mood disorders. In the United Kingdom, there is a program called The Art Room program. Art Rooms provide an environment where children can freely express themselves and find ways to boost their self-confidence which will help them improve social skills and gain confidence. Researchers from Oxford University questioned teachers and students and found that teachers saw improvement amongst student who attended Art Rooms and students who attended them had fewer depression symptoms. Dementia, a form of Alzheimers that affects memory mostly in adults, can be treated with art therapy. Coloring can cause the brain to work and focus. A study that followed over 2,500 adults who attended brain-training sessions showed that the more sessions they attended, the higher their improvements in memory. Working the brain may not cure Alzheimers but it challenges their mind which decreases the gradual decline of memory and thinking patterns that Alzheimers patients experience.

For those of you who thought coloring days were over once you left elementary school, you’re wrong. Adult coloring books are sold everywhere and can greatly improve health. Of course, the pictures in the adult coloring book are far more complex and detailed than the children’s coloring books, but those pictures focus our brain  which allows us to relax and concentrate on our coloring. So, if you’re stressed during finals week or you just want to take a small brain vacation, I recommend bringing out your inner child and color!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iynu7r3xopE

This video interviews a mother and a businesswoman who turns to coloring when she feels stressed.

One thing that men struggle with as they get older is erectile dysfunction. This sexual disorder in men is usually linked to cardiovascular diseases and a lot of men feel as if their erectile dysfunction is a result of something they did. There has even been the release of drugs such as Viagra and Levitra to help men cope with this sexual disorder. But what if the individual male patient isn’t the problem? What if male erectile dysfunction has nothing to do with anything they personally did? What if erectile dysfunction is evolutionary?

The first thing we should go over is how erectile dysfunction could possibly be evolutionary. This article states that because erectile dysfunction negatively effects a male’s ability to reproduce, it is considered to play an evolutionary role. The article states that erectile dysfunction correlates with age which means the older you get, the more likely you are to obtain erectile dysfunction. I think this is because the older a male gets, the more weak his sperm becomes and erectile dysfunction kicks in and prevents the weak sperm from being able to fertilize an egg. Therefore, evolution has created a biological mechanism that prevents weak sperm from being able to create weak and potentially mutated offspring.

Healthy sperm vs. unhealthy sperm.

A different article says that erectile dysfunction can be caused by stress in men but I would have to disagree with that notion. First of all, there are no credible source materials that test the effect stress has on a male experiencing erectile dysfunction. This means that the article is not very legitimate and so I can not help but disagree with the theory. And second of all, there is another article that takes a different approach to my argument that helps to disprove the theory that erectile dysfunction is caused by stress. The article I am referring to says that extravagant physical traits are given to males in order for them to become an ideal mate choice. These physical traits can only be acquired through healthy and strong sperm during the fertilization process. Evolution needs a lot of males with these physical traits in order to keep the population rising steadily. The more extravagant the physical traits that a male has, the more superior they are in phenotypic quality which makes them much more attractive to the women who carry the eggs that must be fertilized. This long evolutionary process of reproduction is what our population has depended on for so long. “In particular, the preferred traits can be expressed only in individuals with superior conditions…” (pubmed.gov). These superior conditions can be defined as healthy sperm from a young male. Erectile dysfunction is the logical next step in evolution in order to keep old and sick men from being able to reproduce males (or even females) with no extravagant physical traits.

There was actually a randomized survey-based observational study conducted in Massachusetts that attempted to figure out just how normal erectile dysfunction was. The sample size was 776 respondents and they all lived in the same community. The age group of the sample size was 40 to 70 years old. The study took place from 1987 to 1989 and many third variables were accounted for such as if the participants smoked, what their medical histories were, and if they had any diseases. Another important thing that they accounted for was the participant’s sociodemographic background. This means that different demographics were represented in the study and that helps with coming to a correct conclusion. This study came to many different conclusions. But the biggest correlation they found proved that erectile dysfunction in males has a strong relationship with old age. So we can conclude that one of the major reasons for erectile dysfunction in males is old age. I will admit, however, that this study could possibly suffer from the Texas Sharp Shooter problem. This is because the study was also looking into many other causes for erectile dysfunction other than just old age. An example of the other causes being tested was heart disease. This could mean that their biggest conclusion could simply be a consequence of them looking at so many different variables at once making them bound to find something.

Different variables being tested in the Massachusetts Male Aging Study.

But, nonetheless, this conclusion (as well as many other scholarly articles) supports my theory that erectile dysfunction is evolutionary. The older a male gets, the less potent and optimal his sperm is. Erectile dysfunction helps keep aged sperm from being able to fertilize eggs and create offspring that won’t have the extravagant physical traits necessary to be an asset to the growth of the population.

Data for the Massachusetts Male Aging Study.

The take home message is that erectile dysfunction seems to not just be a random act of nature. In fact, it is a way in which nature ensures that the population stays growing by increasing the amount of strong males that can create even more strong males. It is a part of the process of evolution. Men whose sperm that is no longer able to positively effect the population experience the inability to have productive sex lives. Viagra and Levitra are ways to only temporarily fix the problem of not getting an erection. There is an actual reason as to why some men are no longer able to get erections and my theory is that it has something to do with evolution.

IMAGES:

http://sites.amarillasinternet.com/marcosrobertovasquez/disfuncion_erectil.html

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/00/slides/3602s1a/sld013.htm

http://www.herballove.com/guide/male-infertility-caused-unhealthy-sperm

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/5702.php?page=2

http://www.akbardawakhana.com/male-impotence-treatment.html

You’ve heard it over and over again but probably never really thought much of it. When caught refilling my plastic Aquafina water bottle at the water fountain, I was asked by my Environmental science teacher if I knew just how damaging this was on my health. Like any other high school student, I was not really in tune with my actions’ effect on the environment or own body for that matter. So, I decided to investigate this problem on my own and research the question of whether or not the reusing of disposable plastic bottles damaging to ones overall health.

One of the biggest dangers of reusing plastic bottles comes down to bacteria. In an article published in the Huffington post, The Canadian Journal of Public Health published a study in which bacteria’s affect on moist, used bottles was examined at a greater look. The experiment looked at 76 samples of water from reused plastic bottles, some of which were not washed. The study found that, “Nearly two-thirds of the samples had bacterial levels that exceeded that of drinking water guidelines, which may have been the result of ‘the effect of bacterial regrowth in bottles that have remained at room temperature for an extended period,’” (Chan 1). The article discusses how the cause of contamination is still unknown, but some factors like lack of hand washing could have accounted for this. In my opinion, this experiment lacked a controlled setting, meaning the condition of each of the bottles differed between each of the groups, ultimately having a great affect on the results. I think the experiment could have been better conducted if the bottles were placed in the same setting, over a period of time and not touched by others to see exactly if it were the bottles’ tight environment that was causing the contamination, or the hands of the children. This experiment had many confounding variables such as the physical setting, germs of the children, and types of plastics, making it hard to determine where the source of contamination was actually coming from. So, can rinsing help?

If I wash my bottles am I good to go? Well, unfortunately you aren’t. According to Scott Belcher, PhD from the University of Cincinatti, “Heating will certainly increase the rate at which chemicals can migrate from the plastic,” (Chan). In another article, published by Belcher himself, he describes the release of BPA, which acts as an endocrine disruptor. BPA has also been linked to breast and uterine cancer. BPA is produced through the heat absorption of these plastic bottles (like when washed or even just in the environment). However, in an experiment performed by Belcher’s team, polycarbonate water bottles were specifically tested. There were two groups, one of which was reused, and one of which were completely new, and unopened. When projected in a natural outdoor environment, over the course of seven days, the amount of BPA released as well as the rate at which it was released were the same within the two groups. However, once washed and exposed to extreme temperatures, the rate of BPA being released increased drastically, by four times as much! While the harm that BPA can cause is not fully identified, it is important to note that it is an endocrine disruptor, which, “alter[s] the function of the endocrine system by mimicking the role of the body’s natural hormones. Hormones are secreted through endocrine glands and serve different functions throughout the body.” (Belcher). In my opinion, this experiment was better conducted and more controlled, and was able to prove causation more clearly than the other one. There is definitely something to be said about the rate of increase in BPA when washed under warm water.

So, what now? Well, in my opinion, reusing plastic bottles every once in a while isn’t a big deal as long as you rinse them out with cold water. It is important to note that correlation does not prove causation, in that, just because you reuse a plastic water bottle, you will develop breast or uterine cancer. Chances may be higher due to BPA production, but still causation cannot be proven. So, I would not make a habit out of this and rather just use it as a last resort every once in a while!

Driving is a typical every day task that as college students most of us have experienced. Although as college students we may not experience as much driving in State College, Google’s new invention aims to potentially eliminate the act of driving around the world. There have been many discussions regarding driving such as driving safety and global warming from gas. These topics have been heavily discussed, but having cars that don’t require a driver is a new topic that Google has come up with. Google has created a self-driving car to revolutionize methods of transportation.

Earlier this week Google received a patent for its self-driving car. This car aims to use technology to increase safety and communication between the car and pedestrians. For example, the car would display a flashing stop sign when a pedestrian should not cross the road and a sign on the bumper would flash to signal that it is safe for the pedestrian to cross the road.

Google claims that these self-driving cars allow passengers to do what they want to do while traveling and these cars can prevent more accidents from happening. According to Google these cars have, “sensors designed to detect objects as far as two football field away in all directions.” These sensors can detect things like bikes, pedestrians, other vehicles, and even things like bags floating through the air. This technology is meant to promote safety and avoid the driver from becoming distracted or tired since the car does everything for the person that would normally be the driver.

The car detects where you are such as where it is in the world, what street it’s on, and what lane it’s in. The car can also detect what is around you such as the size and shape of the object and classifies it such as a pedestrian. Additionally the car can detect what will happen next. For example the car can predict where a cyclist is going to move in the street and whether or not a pedestrian is going to cross. Finally this car is able to determine what to do next. The technology in this car will then chose a safe speed and position in the road in response to what is around it.

As for my thoughts on this new technology, I definitely have mixed feelings. I really appreciate and commend the thought and innovation behind this new car. I can really appreciate all of the things that this car is capable of such as what it can detect and how it responds to other objects. Although the technology behind this car is extremely interesting I don’t know how successful this product will be. Humans love being in control, and this invention takes control away from people that is typically apparent in their daily lives. I love that this self-driving car aims to prevent accidents but it’s difficult to say whether this is an absolute effect of this car. I definitely feel that more studies need to be done on this car for me to believe if its accident prevention and other claims are reliable or not.