Sometimes we find ourselves feeling of flood of emotions when certain song comes on because it reminds us of something or someone from the past. Something about that specific song brings us back to a certain time and place and many people seem to think it’s inevitable but is there actually a science behind why music can trigger certain memories. 

After a series of studies people began to realize that music triggering memories has to do with triggering certain neurons in our brain.  In 2013, a study  was published from Amee Baird and Severine Samson, from the University of Newcastle in Australia where they would play music for people with brain injuries in order to help them remember some memories from the past. Since they have trouble recalling memories due to their brain injuries it was interesting to see how the music impacted their ability to remember. During the study, they tested both people with brain injuries and a control group by playing top songs from throughout the subjects lifetime and with each song they had to state how familiar it was, whether they enjoyed it, and if it brought back any memories. In the end, the researchers found that the number of remembered songs by the brain injury group, 38%-71%, was almost similar to that of the control group, 48%-71%. The results of this study prove that music can trigger some kind of emotions and memories because normally the brain injured subjects would not be able to remember the memories on their own but the music helped them. Also, these two scientistic broke through a medical discovery because with this information they can now use it to stimulate the memories of patients that struggle with the inability to store autobiographical memories. Basically, if music can stimulate memories for a person with brain injuries, it make total sense how when we hear a song it time travels us to a certain time and place causing a overwhelming emotional few minutes.

Music is a huge part of our world, whether its played at a party, while driving in the car, or warming up for a big game, it has the ability to heighten emotions, intensify our moods, but most importantly trigger certain memories. Because of its prominence in our world, people began to investigate and complete studies focusing on the impact of music on the human brain. As seen above, many studies came to the conclusion that music had the ability help people recall certain times of their past life but how?

In 2006, scientists Istvan Molnar Szakacs and Katie Overy published an article  describing their thoughts of how the brain acts in response to music. They believed that when listening to music the human mirror neuron system  is what “runs the whole show.” This system is what helps the brain couple perception and production of hierarchically sequential information, then giving the brain the ability to trigger meaning and emotion.  Overall, the generation of memories when a certain song comes on may just be something you have always experienced but never really thought about but now you know there is a whole science behind it.

Understanding the effects of music on the brain is very important for both doctors and people because as we saw in the study above it can help patients with brain injuries, and who knows if we try it maybe it can help a whole lot more. So now when you’re driving down the highway and the song that reminds you of your ex-boyfriend comes one and you start crying, remember to blame your human neuron system.

Addiction is something many people face throughout the world whether it’s alcohol or drugs and many people question whether it’s actually a disease one can be diagnosed as or is that just an excuse. In March of 2011, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administrations constructed a survey  on people from the age of 12 and up and found that 23.5 million people needed to seek help for a drug or alcohol addiction. The numbers are baffling and still little has been done to rid the world of addiction. Just like any other disease, such as cancer or heart disease, addiction claims the lives of many each year but people still look at it as a personal problem and shed a negative light on the addicts.
Alan I. Leshner came out with his own views on addiction and sparked a new thought process surrounding the cause of addiction. His main idea was that people need to distinguish addiction as a chronic brain disorder with its own behavioral and social aspects that characterize as a disease vs. a choice. In doing so, the healthcare system and the way people view addicts will be forever changed. For example, a standard treatment program  for addicts can cost up to $20,000 a month and it used to not be covered by insurance but more recently insurance companies have come to understand addiction in a truer form so they offer to pay expenses for any inpatient or outpatient treatment. In 2008, the Affordable Care Act, Mental Health Parity, and Addiction Equity Act   were passed and they enforce that all insurance companies must offer financial coverage for any issues involving mental and behavioral health, and substance abuse treatment. The reputation of addicts has evolved extremely and people are beginning to realize that addiction is a disease that unfortunately affects millions of people.

The reasoning behind addiction being classified as a disease all has to do with the human brain. Nora D. Volkow and Joanna S. Fowler published an article, “Addiction, A Disease of Compulsion and Drive: Involvement of the Orbitofrontal Cortex,” explaining the brain science behind a human’s addictive nature. In the shortened version, these two scientists basically said, “the addictive state involves disruption of circuits involved with compulsive behaviors and with drive.” The disruption of these circuits then lead to the dysfunction of the orbitofrontal cortex. Studies show that when drug users are tested closely after their last intake, their orbitofrontal cortex is hyper metabolic, proving that it is not a choice for a person to be an addict but it is something prescribed in their brain and once it’s activated you must fight to suppress it.

Despite scientific evidence, people still choose to believe addiction is a choice and saying it’s a disease is just a cop out. Psychiatrist and professor, Tim Holden believes addiction is not a disease because it doesn’t fall under the right criteria. In his words, “Addiction is self-acquired and is not transmissible, contagious, autoimmune, hereditary, degenerative or traumatic.” At most, Holden believes addiction is just a response to an underlying disease such as depression. It is palpable that people have a hard time seeing addiction as a disease when a person is “voluntarily” doing drugs or drinking alcohol but they need to realize there is so much more that goes into it.

Unfortunately, millions of people face addiction each year and seek medical help for it. It is still up in the air whether it should be viewed as a disease or not, but there is significant research to back up the fact it is a brain disorder. Understanding addiction is very important for the public and doctors because it is something everyone should avoid.

Procrastination, a word that in nowadays are wildly used in the social media by the teenagers, which use mostly use to describe the urge of playing a video game or spend some time with friends instead of doing homework. But scientifically it could be a serious problem, and it will not just bring you a grounded week for your poor English grade from your parents.

Procrastination does not constitute a new creation from modern society, but a long last bad hobby that inherits from the earliest human ancestors. However, it was never being valued as a huge problem for the society until late 1970. While then, procrastination is already being an unalterable that swiping through the human society. According to research that 80%~95% of college students are dealing with the procrastination but without a proper method (Ellis & Knaus, 1977; O’Brien, 2002, as cited in Steel, 2007). Since then most countless research tries to solve this mysterious psychological phenomenon.

Medically speaking, procrastination is a syndrome that combines anxiety, stress which is potentially caused by mental disorder. By definition, procrastination has three stand rules for evaluation:

1, it will stop patients from achieving their per-set goal, with no actual effect, only stall the time.

2, procrastination will bring the patient’s stress, guilt, panic and low efficiency, along with failing other’s truth, cause an impression of unable to assume responsibility.

3, phenomenon mentions before will become a cycle, will have a further impact on patient’s life.

It supposes to be a serious mental health issue, however most of the people who have it or even the psychologist will deny it’s existent, but those who are suffering a profound impact on life do need help and assistance. Nonetheless, before that, we have to indicate that what was your course of one’s procrastinate occur—-physiological, or just huge stress. From my point of view, the only way to solve the procrastination is to attend therapy, plan ahead and want to do everything right with help.

Most of the researcher find that the highest rating reasons that trigger procrastination is “the task was unpleasant, or that was boring and uninteresting”. Also this might trigger “well is the nature of our hunter-gatherer brains: By their design, more interest is expressed in urgent tasks than abstract tasks in the future”. These types of people are unable to have a clear concept of the impending deadline. Therefore, they have low self-efficiency and low self-esteem that put them in a tough position when they are assigned to a non-immediate task. Also depression can be the trigger of the procrastination. In the following passage, I’m mainly going to focus on 2 types of causes: A.D.H.D., a neural mental disorder; and which is more prevalent, stress and anxiety.

A.D.H.D., as known as A.D.D., or full length name “Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder”, one of the most common disorders that will be diagnosis in kids’ childhood. The syndromes include inattention, impulsively, and hyperactivity. Most of the time it will genteelly disappear while people grow up, however some percentage of adult still suffer from the A.D.H.D. and some scientists believe that this might also the cause of procrastination, but officially not was recognized. The A.D.H.D. has a lot of in common with procrastination, but it was diagnostic base on neural pathology, and can be controlled by medication. The biological reason for someone to have A.D.H.D. is mainly due to its cerebellum’s malfunction.

Stress/anxiety/academic cause procrastination is very different from the A.D.H.D.procrastination. Although both of them link to dopamine secretion malfunction, Stress/anxiety/academic cause procrastination is from nurture. Opposite of with A.D.H.D. procrastination, these types of patients are usually from the procrastination of a complicated task.

Despite the fact that there are medications for procrastination cause by A.D.H.D., most of these medicines are strictly controlled neural enhancer, such as amphetamine and Modafinil. These medications can significantly enhance your cognition, memory and study ability. However, such a strong performance will cause drugs abuse. Experiment indicates that in taking these medications without doctors’ prescription will lead to panicking, hyper active, even schizophrenia. As I say at the beginning, the best way to overcome this problem. Is through therapy and certain technique.

Attend therapy is always a good point to begin. Licensed therapist can assist you in determining the cause of your procrastinations. They will have specific solutions for most of your stress or anxiety. Even will have medication to assist in. Most of them will put you through a test to indicate your stress level. Anxiety level and about your problem, then tries to talk you through it. They will help you draw a plan which will apply back on your feet.

If you can’t get a hold on a therapist, another very effective approach that could help you to overcome the problem is call pomodoro technique. It was developed by a man named Francesco Cirillo in last 1980s. It works as a method that could help people organize their time and task. It can be imagined as a board with blank square, which you can break down your big task in to several small task to complete.

Since the winter weather has finally set in and we are facing below freezing temperatures daily, UGG season has officially started. I have been wearing these comfy, but ugly shoes for almost 10 years now and this year all of sudden they brought along with them back aches, sore knees and even foot cramping. It got me thinking, are my favorites comfortable shoes bringing me pain?

UGGS is a monopoly of unisex sheepskin boots and slippers. Although they are by far the most comfortable shoe you have ever put on your foot maybe they are not the best for your feet. In fact, UGG boots have zero support for your foot and ankle; many people have complained of pain while/after wearing the shoe.  By wearing shoes with limited to no support doctors claim that this could lead to swollen ankles, foot pain and even arthritis.

James Woodburn, Sharon Barker, and Philip S Helliwell conducted a randomized controlled study to investigate if placing orthotics in people’s shoes would prevent them from continuing on the track to get arthritis. They had a control group of 48 received foot orthoses and demonstrated an immediate clinical improvement. The results continued to improve over a 30-month period and the trial concluded that custom designed foot reduced foot pain by 19.1%.

I thought this was a really good study and highly suggested that we should not just continue to walk in our non-supportive UGGS but we should put orthotics in them so that we can prevent ourselves from having foot pain later on. I think increasing the sample size and trying to control for the confounding variables could improve this trial. The variables I would try and control for would be; activity level, age, gender.  However, despite looking at the roomy shoe as the cause for the feet problems, one could blame other shoes with a lack of support for the issues as well for the majority of people’s pain.  Also, it is important to note the arch is non-existent, affecting many as arches vary.

After researching more I found that Taylor Carroll of SC200 in 2012 wrote an article called “the Truth about UGGS”. She suggested that we do not have to give up on these comfortable shoes but we can modify them to not damage your feet with every step you take. Carroll brought up the point of excessive sweating in UGGS because they are installed with fur. She mentioned adding powder to your socks to provide your foot with extra protection. Protection from what exactly? Foot Fungus.

Considering UGGS barley gives your foot the ability to breathe this is a perfect opportunity for fungus to grow and make your feet itch. Dr.Gregg Cohen is in agreement with this statement and adds that the UGG boot “traps in heat and moisture”.  The best way to prevent foot fungus from growing in UGGS is to wear socks and get over the counter medicine if you find your feet are starting to itch.

Through all of my research I have not found sufficient evidence to convince me to stop wearing my favorite shoes. I believe that a controlled randomized study needs to be conducted of a large sample size of both men and women, old and young to compare the effect UGGS have one a person’s feet. I believe that after a study like that is conducted we will be able to find more convincing evidence as to whether we need to kick our favorite boots to the curb.

Women, have you ever found yourself at a point where you sit and think, “Why aren’t all guys caring, romantic, falling in love with me, deliciously attractive, and willing to do anything for my love?” We have all been there. Personally, I am obsessed with romantic movies for how the girl gets the dream guy in the end. I feel that women can relate with me. However, are these movies messing with our perception of love and making our standards impossible for guys? I quickly started researching to see what I could find.

Dr. Holmes Study Summary

Researchers believe that the influence of Hollywood films is implanting a sense of “perfect” relationship within society and providing unrealistic expectations about romance. A team at Heriot Watt University in Edinburgh studied the top 40 box office films released between 1995 and 2005, to establish common themes. The team produced a study in 2008. They asked hundreds of people to fill out a questionnaire to describe their beliefs and expectations when it came to relationships. The results showed that the fans of films such as You’ve Got Mail, The Wedding Planner, and While You Were Sleeping, frequently fail to communicate with their partners effectively. Many of them held the view that “if someone is meant for you, then they should know what you want without you needing to tell them.” Dr. Bjarne Holmes, a psychologist who led the research, told that Marriage counselor’s often meet with these people that have this mindset and also believe that sex should always be perfect. The team drew conclusions from the studying suggesting that the popular media plays a role in putting these ideas in women minds.

Dr. Holmes spoke that the team spent a year “thoroughly analyzing” and discovered a number of common themes that were unrealistic. The idea of “the one” soul mate that we all are predestined to meet and know us well instinctively was included. Dr. Holmes expressed, “People feel like if their relationships are not like a Hollywood film, then it is not any good. Time and energy needs to be invested for it to work.” I found that others (both male and female) felt this way also by expressing their viewpoints though posts. Several people showed that they too felt like women’s view on relationships are fictional and intangible. However, others wrote about how they do not believe in such thing and how it can actually benefit the relationships. Ph.D. assistant professor of Communication studies at Chapman University, Veronica Hefner, led a study that believed showed that Romantic Comedies do not cause “unrealistic expectations.”

Veronica Hefner Study Summary

Hefner surveyed 335 students at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Campaign in 2013. The results found that there was not a strong relationship between believing in “soul mates” and “love at first sight” and the idea that “love conquers all” from watching romantic comedies encourages these “unrealistic expectations.” Hefner told ScienceDaily that and I quote, “These findings discredit the popular assumption that exposure to romantic comedies is a major source leading to unrealistic relation expectations among young people.” Her study contradicted Dr. Holmes’ team study conclusions drawn.

Studies Analysis

Dr. Holmes’ team study needed perfecting all around. The study could have been stronger in specification. Listing that hundreds of people participated is not accurate data. The number of participants is missing and it did not tell the gender or age of those who completed it. The number of participants could help in showing statistics in making a decision whether or not Rom-Coms affect these women.  Including the gender in this study is crucial for you do not want male point of views mixed in with female point of views in a study that is testing what females think. The study conclusions are showing to be less accurate because of these vital pieces of information missing. Additionally, the age of the participants is essential for the study because younger females do not have the same mindset as matured women do. The study did not tell if the group of respondents were controlled or randomized in any way. I believe after all of this, the study shows to be false positive. Dr. Holmes’ team believed that they are onto giving insight in how women are having “unrealistic expectations” when really they are the ones with the unrealistic precise study. The team was onto a good start until they consequently left out vital information that made it hard to believe.

Veronica Hefner’s team study was stronger than Dr. Holmes’ team study but still had shaky parts to it. Hefner’s team also left out gender in the study. As stating before, it is very important to a study that needs only female responses to leave of male answers. Hefner very briefly mentioned in her statement about “young people’s expectations” so I took that she surveyed young students. However, since we do not know, I cannot fully assume this so I can say that Hefner should have reassured by stating that young people were the ones responding to the survey. I find that both studies are less reliable than an observational study because they are questionnaires. I consider that more studies are needed to prove one study fully right and the other wrong.

Conclusion

After all that was researched and told, there is no complete answer to the question. Dr. Holmes’ team suggested through their findings that Rom-Com is to blame for this reoccurring “high standards” in women. He was years later thought to be proven wrong be Hefner’s team findings in suggesting that Rom-Com actually is good and not linked to “high standards.” We all love a good sappy Romance Comedy here and there. The take away message here, said best by Huffington Post journalist, Emma Gray: “Feel free to continue your Rom-Com binge-watching without guilt. Do not actively look for realistic lessons on love from fictional accounts of romance. If you like to indulge in a little on the weekends–and why wouldn’t you?–you’ll be just fine” This quote best fits both studies conclusion in the sense that they want you to take life lessons from life and enjoy entertainment as entertainment.

Caffeine

Coffee, tea, soft drinks, and energy drinks are the most widely consumed drugs in the entire world. It’s strange to consider those beverages drugs, so more precisely, caffeine is the most consumed drug in the world. Caffeine can be found in all of those drinks. According to CBS news,  “More than 50 percent of Americans drink coffee everyday — three to four cups each, more than 330 million cups a day and counting….When you add in tea and caffeinated soft-drinks, more than 80 percent of Americans get their morning fix.”

Now that we know that caffeine is an immensely popular drug, how exactly does it affect the body? Most people hold misconceptions about how caffeine works, commonly thinking that it simply speeds up the body and central nervous system. As one naturally goes about their day, there brain is constantly active, producing chemicals, and byproducts of chemical reactions in the brain. One byproduct the brain produces is adenosine. Adenosine is what tells your brain that you’re getting sleepy and need to relax. “Caffeine…functions as a supremely talented adenosine impersonator…because of its similarities to adenosine, it’s accepted by your body as the real thing and gets into the receptors” (Life Hacks). Effectively, what is happening is your body is tricked into accepting caffeine as adenosine. When caffeine fills the adenosine receptors, your brain is prevented from getting a feeling of tiredness.

Are there any benefits or risks associated with consuming caffeine? The answer is yes and no, depending on who you talk to. Let’s justify our caffeine usage and start with the potential benefits of caffeine. Medical News Today reported on a study suggesting that “consuming three cups of coffee a day may reduce the risk of liver cancer by 50%, while another study suggests that drinking four cups a day could halve the risk of mouth and throat cancer” (MNT). “A study from the Harvard School of Public Health suggested that drinking between two and four cups of coffee a day may reduce the risk of suicide in adults” (MNT). Furthermore, according to a study published in the journal of nature science “research suggests that a dose of caffeine after a learning session may help to boost long-term memory” (MNT). Now let’s move on to the notions that no avid caffeine consumer/coffee drinker wants to consider: the health risks.

My research has demonstrated that there aren’t really any definite, black and white risks associated with drinking coffee. However, excessive consumption can lead to certain health risks. For example, according to Caffeine Informer “More than 4 cups of coffee linked to early death. A Mayo Clinic partnered study found that men who drank more than four 8 fl.oz. cups of coffee had a 21% increase in all-cause mortality” (Caffeine Informer). Caffeine Informer also cited a study suggesting “Caffeine could reduce fertility in women. A study from The University of Nevada School of Medicine showed that caffeine can reduce a woman’s chances of becoming pregnant by about 27%” (Caffeine Informer). I found many studies suggesting health risks associated with drinking caffeine/coffee excessively. I cited these two because it’s interesting that they are gender discriminate, and one or the other of the studies applies to everyone.

Caffeine is quite an interesting drug, considering how widely it’s consumed and accepted by societies all over the world. With that in mind, it’s worth knowing how caffeine physiologically affects you, and whether or not it’s dangerous.

Sources:

http://lifehacker.com/5585217/what-caffeine-actually-does-to-your-brain

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/271707.php

(http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/267825.php/http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/253904.php).

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/270963.php

http://www.caffeineinformer.com/harmful-effects-of-caffeine

As technology has advanced over the last fifteen years, reading books online has grown in popularity. This in part is due to its overall convenience of having thousands of books accessible in one tablet or other electronic device. In the long run it could save someone money by investing in a tablet to purchase readings through websites or apps instead of paying for hard copies of each book. On average, the price of a new book when it comes out is twenty-nine dollars, but for eBooks usually ranges from ten to thirteen dollars. This has led to rumors and the belief of the possibility that one day the education system will rely on tablets to have all textbooks on, but will this affect the education of the reader?

In a 2012 study, scientist let eighty undergraduate engineering students choose whether they want to read five articles from a computer screen or paper. Before the test each person had to guess how well he or she would perform on the test. For two of the articles they were put under no time restraint. For the other two they were only given seven minutes and for the last test they assumed they had no limit but were interrupted after seven minutes. When the students predicted how they would do, those who were reading online generally predicted that they would have a lower score than those who made predictions before the read the articles on paper. This is an immediate indicator that this could be a physiological issue rather than an actual one. If people believe they will do worse they generally will do so. Those who read the paper books did better on the tests with the time restricted and unrestricted time limits. The interrupted readings led to similar scores with both online and paper readings.

Another story conducted did not give the readers their personal choice, but instead they were assigned either a kindle or paperback to read. Fifty readers were told to read a short story by Elizabeth George, and then they were tested on different aspects of the short story. The area that showed the greatest significance in results was the questions asking readers to put events in critical order. This could be due to the fact that eBooks do not recreate an image in the same way that paperbacks do. When someone reads on a digital screen, is it more difficult to get an image in his or her head other than a screen? Paper is a boring sight, which could make it easier to think about and picture what the author is portraying. In comparison, an eBook screen is exciting. It lights up, and has many features and adjustments that can be made. made.

It appears as though from educational standpoint, the only true advantage of eBooks is convenience and long-term price. In a survey conducted asking people whether they concentrate better with eBooks or paper books, 92% said they concentrate better with paper books. Obviously surveys can be full of bias but those results are pretty staggering that over 9/10 people surveyed believe they can concentrate better on paper books. books. Humans can easily get distracted by minor things such as a pop ups or having access to the Internet and apps with jus one click or swipe.

Based off these studies I fail to reject the hypothesis that paper books are the better option for learning. This is due to human response on different tests and the indications made clear by the studies.

urlpicture 1

When two scientists, Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov, inventors of Graphene, the science world started a “graphene Fever”, almost all of the physic scientist started some study of the Graphene. However, same year in China, something call Graphdiyne was invented in a national lab, which can value as much as the invent of the Graphene. Why? Because for the last several decades, most of the research of the carbon is synthesis and isolated new form of carbon, which people are getting pretty good at it. After people found Fullerene—the ball shape, carbon nanotube—the tube one and the flatted, paper like Graphene. All of these new develop material was be consider as good electricity use, good of light conduct, most of these material will going to play a huge part of the next evolution of the human society—the information innovation. But what does Graphdiyne feet in all these? Because this new toy that made from carbon has better property than all of above.

In 1968, Baughman calculated that Graphdiyne could exist in a stable form, but no one has been able to synthesis it. Until 2010, the China National science institute use a specific type of benzene and copper as catalyzer, successfully synthesis this new product, Graphdiyne on a small piece of copper. It has a lot of carbon bonding, a massive conjunction system, wide surface gap, very stable chemistry property, it was known as one of the most stable carbon-base man made material. This material was so miracle that it just has all of the cool properties include a excellent enhancer of a modern day battery and good elastic, which makes it also step on the stage of future.

http://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2014/CS/C3CS60388A#!divAbstract

Cracking knuckles seems like a such a small thing.  There are many misconceptions about cracking knuckles, one of the most famous being that if you do so you will develop arthritis.  It’s something most people do, however it is more of a mystery than you might think.    Scientists disagree on how exactly cracking knuckles works.  Some scientists theorize that it is caused by a joint or tendon resettling.  Another theory is that it is a result of carbon dioxide either popping or forming in synovial fluid (the fluid that lubricates a person’s joints).  However, Dr. Robert Boutin a professor of radiology at University of California Davis developed a different theory.

Boutin divided the people participating in the study into two groups.  The first group was thirty men and women who cracked their knuckles.  Boutin estimated the amount of times the participants had cracked their knuckles and recruited 10 non-knuckle crackers.  Next, the subjects cracked their knuckles at the metacarpopphalangeal joint, while the joint was scanned by an ultra sound.  Out of 400 trials, only 62 produced an audible crack.  In all of the cases were an audible crack was produced, researches observed a flash.  The flash seems to support the bubble theory.  Boutin claims that he remain uncertain about whether or the crack comes from a bubble popping or forming, and says that more research is needed.  However, he did state that the crack proceeded the flash, supporting the idea that the crack comes form the bubble forming.

The study seems to have been well conducted, however the sample size is a little small.  The researchers did end up submitting the sonograms to radiologists who were not involved in the study, and thus did not know which knuckles cracked.  Nevertheless, they predicted which knuckes cracked with 94% accuracy.

http://time.com/4130607/knuckle-cracking-bubble/

http://time.com/3529225/cracking-knuckles-arthritis/

Deciding whether to breast feed their newborn children or bottle feed them is a controversial issue and between mothers that has been going on for many years. Mothers want the best for their children, so they will pick the best option. So, what is better: breast feeding or bottle feeding? Which has greater health benefits on the baby and the mother?

According to the Oregon Health Authority, breast feeding is the healthier for your baby. Breast feeding leads to both short term and long term benefits for the baby. Some of these short term benefits include less infections, decreased risk of diarrhea, decreased risk of SIDS, and less likeliness of hospitalization. Some of the long term benefits include decreased risk of obesity, decreased risk of cancer, and decreased risk of diabetes. Oregon Health Authority also that there are health benefits for the mother as well such as reduced risk of cancer, easier weight loss, and even self-confidence.

However, Dr. Cynthia Colen from Ohio State University, states otherwise. She conducted her own experiment in which she studied 7,319 sibling pairs that were both breast fed, and 1,773 sibling pairs that had one breastfed and the other bottle fed. Colen measured the BMI, obesity, asthma, behavior, and academic scores such as vocabulary, math, and reading. Of the 8,237 children, breast feeding did have better results. Although, the scores among just the 1,773 siblings that had one breast fed and the other bottle fed, the results were close to 0, meaning that it could have been due to chance. Therefore, Colen believe that the 7,319 siblings who were breast fed resulted better because of other third variables such as economic status. I believe that Colen makes a great point in that this could be due to third variables.

Oregon Health Authority is able to provide direct health benefits of why they believe breast feeding is better than bottle feeding, while Dr. Colen is able to give evidence to believe that breast feeding may not be significantly better than bottle feeding (it could be due to chance). However, Dr. Colen is not able to provide clear and direct benefits of how bottle feeding is healthier for the baby and mother. More information would help strengthen Dr. Colen’s research and voice.

The death penalty is the penalty method for the deprivation of the criminal’s life.It is including Lethal Injection, Electrocution, Gas Chamber, Firing Squad, Hanging.  Nowadays, the topic of it is the right time to abolish death penalty is becoming more and more popular. Some people believed that it is the right time to abolish death penalty. They think many countries abolished the death penalty; USA should do the same. While others think that we should not to abolish death penalty due to lots of reasons.

First, from the picture above we can clearly see that the majority of states still agree to enforce death penalty. Most people have a deep-rooted fear of lawlessness and chaos. Citizens desire a strong government that maintain law and order and promptly and forcefully metes of severe punishment to law breaker. From the chart below we can tell that

for murder. dealth penalty is a little bit of lower than life without parole & restitution.  However, the rate is still high. Clearly, It is necessary to maintain social stability with the death penalty.

Second, the main reason is appease effect. The biggest effect of the death penalty is to appease the victim. According to deathpenalty web, “The death penalty is often justified in the name of the victim’s families” (Parents).The death penalty is a serious offense maiming criminals. They not only deeply hurt the families of victims, but also caused a very bad social impact. Appease refers to the victims and their relatives. For the individual, the execution of the death penalty is the respect for the victim’s life and the emotional remedy, and The murderer bring harm to the victim and the victim’s family It will make them desperate, even a family may be destroyed. So, under the existing conditions, if law does not sentenced to death, government cannot appease the victim and the victim’s family. The death penalty is punishment that the serious prisoner should get, the murderer killed the others with the cruel means should be executed. According to sina web, “The former Chief of Chongqing Municipal Bureau of Justice Wen Qiang was executed on July 7. The Supreme Court firmly believes that he accepted huge amount of bribes, the circumstances are serious and causes great social harm” (Head). The news was cheered by local people for a long time, especially the innocent people he has persecution.

Third, the main reason is deterrent. Death penalty has great deterrent effect on those potential criminals. May be it worked too well. Th graph above shows that the life span of prisoners in a state with death penalty is lower than without death penalty. The more severe the criminal law, the more frightened of potential criminals. According to Death for Business Criminals, “Presents varying views on whether those convicted of economic-related crimes in China deserve capital punishment. Necessity of retaining the death penalty for nonviolent criminals jeopardizing national security; Value of the death penalty as a deterrent for grafters and the corrupt; Relationship between the death penalty and corruption” ( Death). When a murderer was sentenced to death, the other person heard the news and they considered the consequences when he was impulsive. The deterrent of the death penalty is very important.  Only the fear of death can deter criminals and maintain social stability. ( Another Look At The Deterrent Effect Of Death Penalty, )

Above all, death penalty is still necessary in our society.

References:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/methods-execution

Head of Chongqing Municipal Bureau of Justice executed – the last moments of his life. sina.com.Web. 10 June 2015.http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_

Methods of Execution. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/methods-execution. 10 April 2014. Web. 11 June 2015. http:/

. Web. 10 June 201

The deterrent effect of the death penalty- from an econometric point of view.  dieip.hu. Web.12 June 2015. http://dieip.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012-1-10.pdfhttp://dieip.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012-1-10.pdf

Click to access 2012-1-10.pdf

Recently, I was told by my coaches that if I want to become a stronger, faster, better athlete than I need to create a regular sleeping schedule with a consistent 7-9 hours of sleep.This comes in the wake of him learning that I usually get 4 or 5 hours of sleep  a night and then I take long naps throughout the day. One of the coaches claimed that my body wouldn’t recover if I continued in that matter. I was completely baffled by this suggestion because I show no signs of being tired and when I played I felt fine. But, this could simply be another case of my intuition pointing me the wrong direction. A study was done by Tel Aviv University, shows that “full night of interrupted sleep is equivalent to no more than four hours of consecutive sleep, in terms of how you’ll likely feel and act the next day”.

Now that I know that a lack of consistent non-interrupted sleep can hurt my time  recovery from the day before. I try to get to bed at a reasonable time that allows a full night of rest. However, recently I have notice that I wake up in the middle the night. As you read above instructions during sleep is extremely bad for your overall health, so how do I get rid of this tendency. From this article I learned that it is actually a disorder called sleep-maintenance insomnia in which for many different reasons such as stress or stimulants. Some of suggestion to fixing this problem are to do things such as turning your bed to a sanctuary. This means that you stop doing active things while laying in your bed. As a result your brain will begin to situate lying in the bed with sleep which should not only help you stay asleep longer but also put you to sleep quicker.

Work Cited

Millian, Amanda. “Can I Break Up My Eight Hours of Sleep a Night?” Outside Online. N.p., 30 July 2014. Web. 04 Dec. 2015.

The Better Sleep Council. “Physical Performance & Sleep.” Physical Performance & Sleep. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Dec. 2015.

Komaroff, Anthony. “I Fall Asleep Easily, but Wake in the Middle of the Night. Do You Have Tips to Help Me Stay Asleep? – Ask Doctor K.” Ask Doctor K RSS. N.p., 22 July 2013. Web. 04 Dec. 2015.

For all the weight lifting enthusiast winter is among us and with that comes bulking season.The stretch of time were lifters try to pack on as much muscle as possible before cutting down to that summer bod. During this time people are going to be doing more lifting, less cardio, and increasing their calorie intake. The biggest macronutrient that people will try to increase is grams of protein in their diet. This is done by eating lean meats such as chicken, steak, fish and sometimes protein supplements.  If you look online you will see sources that say your protein intake while trying to gain muscle or bulk should be anywhere on the spectrum of 0.5 grams per pound of body weight to 1 gram per pound of weight. While they all for the most part agree that protein intake is different for each person and based on current weight the scales are completely different.

This made me question, is there a point where your body will stop using protein to promote muscle growth? So I began to look into protein absorption and just like the number of grams of protein per pound, there is a huge divide in the weightlifting community. For instance, Michael Matthews, suggest that the protein in your system will slow down the gastric emptying long enough for protein to be turn to amino acids to be absorbed. While Helen Kollias claims there is no mechanism that allows proteins to do such there we must limit or per meal protein intake. Kollias’ study show that if you were give someone whey vs normal protein pack food that you will see the same peak in enzymes in both people. This is because the added protein in the shake is never manages to get to your small intestine to be used as building blocks. So based on Helen Kollias research we should eat multiple small meals fill with protein in order to get the best results in the gym.

After reading numerous articles on the subject, I decided that for my personal protein intake I was going to need to just go by trial and error to figure out what was around a good amount of protein to get to promote muscle growth. I’ve been eating around 120 -150 grams of protein a day and seeing good signs of muscle growth.

I made the decision because one thing that stuck with me from Michael Matthews’s article was his comment on the diets of hunters and gathers. “How, then, did the human species survive the hunter-gatherer days, I wonder?” asked Matthews’s. They were very limited on their food supply so 5 small meals in one day was not a feasible task which would lead high intake of protein in one sitting.If their is a set time for protein to be absorbed there is no way early hunters could maintain the muscle needed for their daily lives.  

Work Cited

Matthews, Michael. “The Truth About Protein Absorption: How Often You Should Eat Protein to Build Muscle.” Muscle For Life The Truth About Protein Absorption How Often You Should Eat Protein to Build Muscle Comments. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Dec. 2015.

Kollias, Helen. “Protein Supplements: Is Protein Absorption the Problem? | Precision Nutrition.” Precision Nutrition. N.p., 04 Dec. 2008. Web. 04 Dec. 2015.

After a 8 games of ultimate frisbee in a single weekend my first reaction is, “OMG I’m going to take a nice ice bath as soon as I get home.” The reason for this is because athletes have come to think that by emerging our bodies in ice water we will speed up recovery time thus getting rid of the our soreness. For those who are unaware of ice bath practices, it is when you fill a space usually your bathtub with cold water and ice enough to get the temperature between 54 and 60 degrees fahrenheit. You then submerge your body from the waist down (more of your body once you get use to the cold) for 10-15 minutes. Afterwards most people refreshed and better then they started, even though there hasn’t been a substantial evidence to back up the effects of ice bath and speeding up recovery.  

However, a recent study has found some evidence about the effects of ice baths.The findings shown that not only does a ice bath not speed up recovery but it greatly hinders the process.  I find this information to be extremely interesting, as a person that has been using ice baths as apart of my recovery routines after competitions or long practices I found that I personally feel alot better after ice baths then I did before. However, as stated by Dr. Mirkin “About all icing is good for is a placebo effect”.

The healing feeling that I am getting may simply be my intuition playing a trick on me due to my belief in ice bath practices.This is caused by numerous sources whether it be athletic blogs, Strength and Conditioning coaches or seeing professional athletes ice bathe as apart of their training, that point to the idea that it works.

So why do all of these health professionals recommend it to their athletes even though there are multiple studies saying this doesn’t help and a few saying it’s actually making matters worst? Its pretty simple, it’s because ice baths do in fact work depending on the circumstance. Athletes should do whatever they think makes them feel great so they are ready to go back on the field and compete the next day. Feeling great and being ready for competition is better than not using the ice bath method of recovery and starting a game off sluggish. However, if for training purposes slowing down your recovery time is not in your best interest.

Works Cited

“How Beneficial Is a Post-Workout Ice Bath?” Shape Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2015.

“A Recovery Ice Bath Isn’t (Always) Such a Good Idea.” Outside Online. N.p., 30 Apr. 2015. Web. 22 Oct. 2015.

Have you ever found yourself pulling an all nighter trying to study every little detail that you’ve learned on a topic to then take a big exam? Almost all college students go through at least one night of cramming excessively for an exam and hated it during and after it happened. What are the actual results to this? Are our brains tricking us into thinking it is actually okay to do such a thing?

Nate Kornell, a student at the University of California, Los Angeles, found that “spacing out learning was more effective than cramming for 90% of the participants who took part in one of his experiments.” Even after realizing this , 72% still thought they benefited from cramming. Why is it that so many are in denial? This is because we have a worrying tendency to “on our familiarity with study items to guide our judgements of whether we know them”. Little do we know this isn’t actually true and reliable. Many people think that while cramming for exams and actively thinking throughout the night about what you’re learning will benefit you and can help yo remember everything. That idea is very wrong. Rather than reading it and trying to memorizing it, writing it down and going over the material is much more effective.

I think students should space out their time and even research ways or tips to help them study for exams and not cram it all in one night. A student at the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown wrote several different tactics to an effective alternative to cramming. She says her method is space practiced, an integrated approach to learning, task-oriented study, build in repetition, and flexible and easily modified.

Starting next semester im going to try my best to get my time management right and not cram for any tests or finals at all. I now know the consequences and alternatives to a healthier way of getting enough sleep and still acing a test.

I’m sitting here wondering how much sleep on which the human body is able to function.  Not only function, but perform at and maintain a high level.  In order to understand how much the body and more importantly, the mind can withstand, first understand the purpose and necessity of sleep.

Sleeping is more than just a passive activity to kill time until morning, it is a regenerative process in which your brain waves and neurotransmitters change making a person feel tired or awake.  According to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke “scientists are still trying to learn exactly why people need sleep” in some animal studies conducted, rats which normally live 3 to 5 years that are prevented from any stage of sleep live for 3 weeks.  It is believed that sleep is essential for a properly functioning nervous system.  Without sleep, nerves that usually are rested during sleep work improperly and result in a sensory overload.  This is usually manifested in hallucinations and mood swings.

Additionally, after yesterday’s class I’m confident in saying that many of the side effects of lack of sleep are in congruency with the behavior of the zombie ants that are poisoned by fungus.  Human behavior becomes erratic, people become extremely forgetful, similar to the ants inability to find their way home.

PTSD is very well known disorder that is seen in 8 million Americans. Out of those 8 million 81 percent of them are women. Other victims of this disorder are veterans or sexually abused people. People with PTSD usually experience flashbacks, bad dreams or frightening thoughts. This could lead them to losing weight, becoming emotionally numb, avoiding certain places, or being easily startled. It can take a normal human being and slowly turn them into a helpless troubled person.

In the 60s through 80s MDMA, also known as ecstasy or molly, had been used on patients going through therapy sessions. Then in the mid 80s it started to be seen in clubs or “raves” by adolescents. In recent studies MDMA, also known as ecstasy or molly, has been tested on people with PTSD. It’s been testing in four FDA- approved clinical studies in Boulder; Charleston, South Carolina; Vancouver, British Columbia; and Beer Yaakov, Israel. The study uses 98 participants, 54 of them being women, to take 75- 188 milligrams of MDMA. This was done throughout a 3-5 day period then continued with a 20 hour non-drug talk therapy. In the study the drug does not behave as a medication but rather a catalyst to psychotherapy. The drug is known to break down emotional barriers, improve communication skill and also focus. This video explains the effects of MDMA on the brain as a drug.

After just two sessions of this treatment, 83 percent of the people participating no longer had a PTSD diagnosis. If other studies like this become a high success like this one was, then MDMA may be approved as a prescribed treatment drug for PTSD. Hopefully the other trials that are taking place in other countries have the same positive results because this could cure one of the most common disorders in all of America. People have suffered enough with PTSD and they shouldnt continue their lives living in fear and stress.

I’ve become particularly interested in artificial sweeteners such as Equal, Sweet’N Low and Splenda packets that you may find to add to your morning coffee. While I always listened to my dad warning me that the artificial sweeteners “caused cancer” and were so much worse for my health than tale sugar (mostly to avoid any pointless disagreement), I began to think it was something worth looking into. These products are available on the shelves of almost any general store, so why would the FDA allow that if they were really so bad as to cause cancer?

So I first began digging into studies and the correlation of artificial sweeteners and cancer. But there wasn’t a correlation. In this study, 3 Italian hospitals accumulated a total of 230 patients with stomach cancer and 547 corresponding cases, 326 cases of pancreatic cancer and 652 controls, and 454 endometrial cancer and 908 corresponding cases for a large sample size of 3,117. This will allow for an assumed randomized control trial. The cases and controls were interviewed and given the same questionnaires regarding lifestyle habits and diet. The study used odds ratio and a corresponding 95% confidence interval to classify data. The results can be seen on a table in the link provided above, and it is instantly clear that this is a case of the Texas Sharp Shooter problem. The article also describes on page 2 how “analyses across strata of selected covariates (i.e., sex, age, education, BMI, total energy intake, history of diabetes, smoking status, and hot beverages) were also conducted.” With that many factors to measure, there is an increased chance to find a correlation which may not actually be a correlation. However, the results do not provide much correlation at all. After adjusting for confounding variables, the data seems to have no conclusive evidence to support a risk of gastric, pancreatic or endometrial cancer for users or nonusers. This conclusion is actually consistent with numerous other studies and researches by other scientists. This is simply one of numerous examples of scientists challenging and searching to prove or disprove other scientific work, whether it is accepted knowledge or not.

However, another study provides data to help disprove this conclusion. It is thought in this specific study that certain factors “disrupt or degrade” the ability humans and animals possess to predict consequences of caloric intake, ultimately leading to an imprecise intake and add to weight gain. The article outlines possible degrading factors to be tested as sweet substances that are calorie free and low-viscosity foods and beverages, often high in calories. This hypothesis is also consistent with a societal increase in consumed sweet substances and low-viscosity beverages as well as the obvious weight gain throughout the country.

Two separate studies were conducted on rats, the first study including two groups of  rats per group. Overnight, the rats were given access to ml of a cherry or grape flavored solution with lab chow. One of these groups, categorized as “Group Consistent,” was assigned one solution 10% sucrose sweetened and one solution 10% glucose sweetened. The other group, categorized as “Group Inconsistent,” had sweetened and flavored solutions of noncaloric 0.3% saccharin and 10% glucose. This process ensured that only Group Consistent had sweet taste as a factor of calories. Rats of both groups were then given one day with only lab chow before testing. The next day, after a food deprived night, a pre-meal was offered containing 4 grams of a sweet and high-calorie chocolate flavor. After the pre-meal, the rats were given the lab chow for the next hour. As expected, the mean pre-meal intake (open bars) did not differ between groups, but Group Consistent ate an average of significantly less lab chow (striped bars), as shown below and on the left. This is consistent with the hypothesis that “Group Consistent was better able than Group Inconsistent  to anticipate the caloric consequences of eating the sweet pre-meal and thus was better able to compensate for the calories contained in that meal by reducing subsequent intake of lab chow.”

The second study included two groups of 8 rats each. The rats were given 15 grams of a relatively low calorie supplement along with lab chow daily. One of the groups was categorized as “Group Low” and had 3% water added to lower the viscosity, creating more of a milk fluidity. The second group, known as “Group High,” included 3% nonmetabolizable guar for a viscosity with the thickness of pudding. Over 30 days, the above right graph displays how Group Low gained significantly more weight than Group High as time continued, a little over 5 grams. According to the article, this data suggests there may be evidence of sweet tastes and viscosity influencing weight gain, though there is much more research to be conducted.

And so with all of this information in mind, it is time to ask yourself whether you believe a study with less than 40 rats should affect your health decisions? There is an obvious relation…. in rats. My personal belief is that while this is definitely an interesting study that may deserve more follow up studies (preferably with humans), and there is definitely a relation between high calorie beverages and sweet substances and weight gain, this information does not directly affect me and my lifestyle at the time since I don’t indulge in many substances that would fall under the tested categories. Besides the previous complaints, I thought the study was very well thought out and executed and should be further researched.

With society becoming very health conscious as well as more technological and scientifically advanced, it is encouraged now more than ever to be fully aware of what is being put in our bodies. One highly discussed and studied example of this is artificial sweeteners that is used daily, especially for avid coffee drinkers like myself.

One study tested subjects after an intragastric infusion of either sucrose dissolved in water, sucralose in saline (two separate solutions of different amounts of sucralose), or simply normal saline. The study went on to analyze blood glucose, plasma levels of insulin, gastric emptying, plasma levels of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, and plasma levels of glucagon-like peptide 1.

If you are anything like me, that’s probably a lot of crazy words with no meaning to you. Let me try to clarify, with credits to much smarter people. Glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP for short) and glucagon-like peptide 1 (often referred to as GLP-1) are both incretin hormones that are significant in the process of glucose homeostasis. Previous studies have shown that sucralose will stimulate a release in GLP-1 on certain cells in mice. GIP is released from the small intestine and enhances release of insulin after the intake of food. The hormone is also responsible for stimulating the release of insulin from cells in the pancreas to sustain low blood sugar levels after consumption. An increased level of GIP has been linked to obesity and type 2 diabetes, but it is unclear as to whether a higher level is a cause or consequence.

GLP-1 is actually the product of a molecule called pre-proglucagon that splits into hormones. This hormone is also found in cells in the small intestine and encourages the pancreas to release insulin. It is responsible for increasing the “feeling of fullness during and between meals by acting on appetite centres in the brain and by slowing the emptying of the stomach.” It is also thought that not enough of this hormone may increase the likelihood if not worsen obesity.

With all of that wonderful information in mind, back to the study!

The results can be seen in the chart above. While a more detailed analysis can be found in the article, the main point is, for the most part, sucralose and saline did not differ with the exception of plasma GLP-1. Sucrose, or table sugar, seemed to peak very early and very high before returning to approximately normal levels. While it was almost expected for the molecules sucrose, sucralose and saccharin to set off a response in receptors of sweetness, the study has no sturdy result that can support that sucralose would stimulate GIP or GLP-1 release. The study then claims that with this information, it may be possible that artificial sweeteners only benefit in that they are a carbohydrate substitute and do not help with diet.

In my opinion, this study is interesting but definitely has areas to be improved upon. For example, the study tested only 7 humans. This is a significantly low sample size and makes it impossible to assume it is a randomized trial. The study was also over a very brief period of time. It may be interesting and possibly beneficial to continue the study in a long term format and analyze how repeated exposure to sucralose at different levels would affect the hormones and their stimulation. While I don’t quite believe third variables can be ruled out, the study has definitely ruled out reverse causation, since the idea of hormones affecting the sucralose or sucrose infused in the body is illogical.

So what does this all mean to you? Well, this study shows that sweeteners are no more harmful than they are helpful to your pancreatic hormones. In another post to come, however, a study will challenge sweeteners and their affect on caloric intake.

We have all been aware since we were young how important blood is for the body. I’ve recently been trying to keep up with donating once ever 56 days, as recommended, because it can give me a short break out of my busy day and make me feel good about helping someone. Studies are now showing that this hour process to give blood can not only save other lives but also help to improve your own. American Red Cross reports that over 41,000 blood donations are needed daily. Of the 1.6 million individuals diagnosed with cancer last year, many will likely need to be given blood during chemotherapy. Another 70,000 affected by sickle-cell disease will frequently need blood transfusions. Of the estimated 38% eligible Americans, less than 10% donate each year.

One of many significant benefits in donating blood is that each donor is required to partake in a brief checkup before donating. This process will often include taking your temperature, pulse, blood pressure, blood-iron level and hemoglobin level. A sample of every donor’s blood is also sent for testing for infectious diseases like HIV, syphilis and Hepatitis B before it is able to be used in a hospital. The process is also confidential, so only you will be notified if you are in fact sick without even knowing.

An interesting study also resurfaced the idea that an excessive amount of iron can create a risk to one’s health, more specifically regarding acute myocardial infarction and coronary disease. Donating blood is often connected to balancing iron levels and allowing better blood flow. Individuals studied a previous experiment of 2,682 men in Europe who had all recorded any acute myocardial infarctions (classified as insufficient data, no AMI, prolonged chest pain, possible AMI, or definite AMI) between January of 1993 and December of 1995. Information was retrieved from Red Cross about who had donated blood in the previous 24 months. Various risk factors were checked, including smoke exposure, cholesterol, family history of coronary disease, etc.

Their results showed that 153 of 2,682 men had donated blood at least once in the preceding 24 months. Of the 153 men, only one male was confronted with an AMI, which is a mere 0.7% of donors. Of the 2,529 other males, 316 experienced an AMI, which is 12.5% of non-donors. This data is extremely strong and somewhat surprising. While the sample size of donors was significantly less than the sample size of non-donors, the evidence cannot be ignored. While one may argue that those who donate blood are often more health conscious and in the hospital less, this study provides numerous tables showing their results after attempting to take into consideration confounding factors so as to avoid any doubted correlation. The confounding factors considered range from biological factors like age and oxygen uptake to behavioral risk factors like cigarette exposure and arsenic intake and even to psychological factors like depression, social isolation and cynical hostility.

While I knew donating blood was healthy, I was oblivious to just how much I may be benefitting my body. Not only does one donation save 3 lives, but donating may lower my risk of AMI over 80%!

(photo credit.)

With drug science and administration improving constantly, children and adolescents have become exposed and increasingly administered antidepressants. As a doctor and a parent, we allow children to take these antidepressants because it is what we believe to be best for our kids and what will benefit their health and stability. Except it is now being reevaluated across the world just how beneficial these antidepressants are for adolescents and youth.

According to this source, a study was conducted in 2000 regarding use of antidepressant treatment in individuals between 0 and 19. Data was recovered from files from the state-Children’s Health Insurance Program (s-CHIP) in the United States to measure a total of 125,383 youth, the pharmacy files under the inter action database that holds information of 72,570 youth in the Netherlands, German health insurance company Gmuender ErsatzKasse which covers approximately 480,680 citizens and the Odense University Pharmacoepidemiologic Database (OPED) contributing information on 111,452 Danish individuals under 20. For an adolescent to be considered administered, he or she must have been dispensed one or more prescriptions classified as an antidepressant. The results showed that the United States has the highest percentage of 1.63% of youth prescribed antidepressants. 0.54% of Dutch under 20 were prescribed an antidepressant, 0.11% of German youth, and the Danish had a mere 0.18%.

So what does this information tell us? The observational study had a very large sample size and the results are somewhat staggering, but there is no definite conclusion that can be drawn. The United States may be more careless in how they prescribe youth with intense drugs, or the United States may have better doctors and resources available while other countries cannot provide the drugs needed for a struggling adolescent. What ever you may believe the conclusion to be, it is evident that with a significantly higher percentage of our youth exposed to antidepressants, more research and studies should be conducted on the risks and benefits.

In 2004, the FDA acknowledged and included a warning that the antidepressant increased the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior in those with major depressive and other psychiatric disorders. More recently, the FDA suggested antidepressants to update the warnings about an increase in risk of suicidal thinking and behavior in adults 18-24 during the first two months of starting the trial. Should this arise more concern and skepticism in antidepressant use in adolescents?

Another study performs a meta-analysis of a combination of six different trials found that while antidepressant use decreased overall depression, there are significant other effects. Of 93 individuals using a paroxetine treatment, 11 “had serious adverse events” compared to only 2 of the placebo group of 87. Furthermore, seven of the treatment group were admitted to a hospital, however the reasons were not stated in the article. 17 of 189 individuals treated with sertraline withdrew from the trial due to adverse events. Only 5 of 184 withdrew from the placebo group. It is also mentioned that the trials analyzed might not have studied the full influence of adverse effects. An example described how children and adolescents with OCD tend to “exhibit a variety of treatment emergent effects of fluoxetine including an ‘activation syndrome’ affecting up to half of young patients; self injurious ideation or behavior was seen in 6/42 patients.” A majority of the analyzed trials were, interestingly enough, funded by pharmaceutical companies. This raises concern that the conclusions and analysis may be bias when claiming that all treatments proved to be extremely safe and effective.

I think the previous meta-analysis shows the importance of checking other scientific work and promoting integrity behind scientific work because it will obviously affect a large number of people in society. Also, I think that there needs to be more trials conducted in which effects besides just suicidal thoughts and behavior are tested in adolescents and youth taking antidepressants. We don’t know how much small side effects in a person’s youth could affect his actions and health over a longer period of time. But even as we do uncover more truth behind adolescent use of antidepressants, it is important to weigh out the benefits and risks. It may be the case that the effects in youth is actually miniscule compared to the potential outcome if the individual is not prescribed antidepressants, with the worst case scenario being suicide. As previously stated, however, we will not know for sure until more extensive and in depth studies are conducted.

This time I’m not going to talk about a technology, but a person who’s about the same age with me, but already working on how to change the earth into a better place. A real life inspiration.

Kids can really change the world.

I never believe that phrase before I know Taylor Wilson from the Ted talk he made. He is one hell of a kid. By how, let me ask you a question: What were you doing when you were 14? Me? Watching anime at home and tries to figure how to get my new DS. But Taylor, this amazing kid, build a fusion reactor in a garage and become the 32th and the youngest person who preform a Deuterium Fusion reaction, then he met the president for a science project that he made, which is a nuclear weapon detector that could crush the detector that NSA is currently using.

What’s up with this kid?

Well as far as I know, he just works really hard on fulfilling his dream. His family background was so normal that most of the people who are reading this will have a much more interesting background than him. He was born in Arkansas in 1994. His family has nothing special—not even rich. His dad was a low level worker at the local Coca-Cola factory. His mom was a yoga teacher. He was just a normal kid to everyone else until he was 5 years old. On his birthday, he is a crane. But when his parents brought him to the toy store, he screams at them and asks for a real one.

Fast forward to when he was 11. After he tries to make jet fuel but instead he figures how to build a homemade bomb and create a huge mushroom cloud in his back yard. His grandma decides to bring him back to a life of a normal child. She decide to give him a book. The book was called the radioactive boy scout, their story is about a kid study nuclear reactor at home and at the end the boy scout was picked up by the police. Ironically, this is was in fact the book that triggers Taylor’s “nuclear fever”. Starting with borrowing a Geiger’s meter, he started to scavenge radioactive object. In the end, their garage be come such a dangerous place that when people ask him “is that broken bottle as the same with the one you said that’s going to kill us if it breaks?” he will answer “be cool, not so fast.”

At the age of 13, his father decides to send him to the Davis College. There he met his mentor Dr. Ronald Phaneuf. From that point, he starts to make yellow cake, listen to the high level of physic class, eventually build a fusion reactor. Two years ago, he was graduated from high school and give a Ted talk, review his project of a new, cheap, safe and highly efficient nuclear power plant. Which can last at least 30 years.

All of these begin with a child word with her mom: ”mom. I want to creat a star in the garage”.

EnChroma Glasses are an amazing product of hard scientific work. Though there have been many attempts to aid with colorblindness, none have matched up to theEnChroma Glasses. Many videos have been uploaded to YouTube of wearers experiencing colors for the first time. Many of them were even moved to tears.

These glasses can cost anywhere upward of 350 dollars but are well worth the cost. They yield results like the ones shown above. They function by restoring spectral separation between cones in the eye using a narrow-band notch filter. For someone who is not a colorblind specialist, that is very hard to understand. Essentially, it could be likened to wearing an Instagram filter on your sunglasses, but instead of distorting the colors, it shows their more saturated form. Just like prescription glasses, they fit to your specific eye’s need in order to correct the colorblindness.

Still don’t grasp color blindness? This website does a great job at explaining it at depth. In short, cones in the eye are to respond to blue, red, and green wavelengths. When blue waves come in they activate the blue cone, and you see blue. If you see a mix of colors, it activates a little of more than one cone. For the color blind, when a red or green (or whatever colorblindness the person has) wave comes in, the cones both react, causing the person to see the dull brownish mixture of red and green as opposed to the real color.

It is amazing that we have come far enough that color blind people have easy access to these resources. More research should definitely be done in this field to help make these products more accessible to lower income people as well as continually improve product quality. This work is extremely important as it helps people to perform tasks that are simpler (like sorting or picking out clothes) in a more efficient way, and even keeps people safe (driving).

Bipolar disorder is a brain disorder that causes a rapid or sudden fluctuation in mood.  While we all experience varying degrees of moodiness, bipolar disorder is much more dramatic that the normal ups and downs.  It is known to be a hereditary gene, or is passed on through a family.  Children with a direct family member with bipolar disorder are more likely to develop than those who do not have family with the disorder, but most do not develop the illness.

In a study done by a group of doctors led by Dr. Stephen Strakowski for a peer review, the doctors identified prefrontal activation in bipolar subjects which was not present in healthy subjects.  The study concluded that due to the activation in bipolar subjects was a result of different “functional neuroanatomic approaches,” or simply a different way of thinking.  The figure below is the results of the manic bipolar subjects, the orange indicates increased activation, blue indicates decreased.

When you reach for a glass of water which hand do you use? When you take a test, which hand do you use to bubble in your answers? Is it the same hand? Is it the opposite one? Do you ever give it a second thought? Though which hand you use for everyday tasks may seem simple in nature, there is a vast amount of science being done behind the scenes to see what it all means, and what it could mean for the future.

To start, the American Psychological Association says that approximately 90 percent of the human population is right handed. Only about 1 percent of the human population is born ambidextrous. That also means that the other 9 percent are either left hand dominant or are mixed handed. Mixed handed refers to the idea that one hand is dominant for some tasks while the other hand is dominant for others. This is different from ambidexterity which is the ability to use either hand just as efficiently on any task. Unfortunately, there is currently no consensus in the scientific community on what handedness means, or how many classifications there should be for it. Indiana University recognizes this lack of standards throughout the scientific community. They go on to state that there is a clear difference between ambidextrous, and mixed handedness. So potentially, one can be right handed, left handed, cross dominant (mixed handed), or truly ambidextrous.

In an attempt to clear up some of the confusion, the Department of Psychiatry and Neurology at Tulane University performed a study that measured combinations of hand preference and hand performance to try to better classify groups of handedness. They studied 64 participants and found that more than 90 percent of the time, the hand you performed better with was the same hand you preferred or were more comfortable with. This study basically shows that handedness is not a clear-cut answer and that there is a spectrum of cross dominance between the two hands. This can be due to predetermined parts of the brain (nature), and which hand the person is forced to use at an early age (nurture).

On that note, one’s dominant hand is not determined from strictly nature or nurture but more of a combination of the two. Dana Smith, who has a Ph.D is psychology, reports that there are many genes known to be associated with handedness. So, when a child is born, they have a clear preference. Smith then goes on to say that this preference can try to be switched early on in a child’s life while he or she is still making neurological connections and pathways in the brain. When this happens, they become mixed handed and show signs of both the nature and nurture aspects of handedness.

So right about now you may be asking yourself, “Why does this matter?” It turns out there are many health and psychological problems that stem from handedness. Well, maybe not handedness, but more importantly brain lateralization. Brain lateralization is the idea that the brain has two hemispheres that compartmentalize and perform certain cognitive functions. For example, the left side of the brain is known to handle the use and understanding of language and speech. Though there seems to be correlation, the science is still not conclusive that right-handed people are left-brain dominant and left-handed people are right-brain dominant. However, through brain scans, we can determine which hemisphere is dominant on most humans. Once that is known, this leads to the knowledge of other things. For example, those who are left brain dominant tend to be better at analytical thinking while those that are right brain dominant tend to recognize patterns easier and have an easier time seeing the bigger picture to things.

However, there is a special breed of human that does not have an asymmetrical brain. Instead, they have brains that are much more symmetrical. This leads to the health and psychological problems I mentioned earlier. This breed of humans is the 1 percent: the ambidextrous.

The American Academy of Pediatrics published a study performed by Alina Rodriquez and other researchers that measured these health complications. Rodriquez measured 7871 children from Finland at the ages of 7-8 and again when they were 16. She found that at age 8, those who were ambidextrous were twice as likely to struggle with language skills and academics compared to those who were right handed. Also, at the age of 16, those who were ambidextrous were twice as likely to have these same struggles with school and language. They were also twice as likely to exhibit signs of ADHD compared to right-handers. And when comparing just the 16 year olds that were showing signs of ADHD, the ones who were ambidextrous seemed to have the more severe symptoms compared to those who were right handed.

Reflecting on this study, I would be wary to conclude anything about the whole human population based off of one study with one nationality of subjects. I would feel more comfortable if the study was repeated multiple times and used a broader group of individuals to sample. Also, the study mentions that the data they received was purely based on surveys distributed to people around the subjects like their parents and teachers. For one, parents may be hesitant to answer truthfully about whether or not their child has learning difficulties for various reasons such as pride or denial. That alone can introduce a level of bias. Furthermore, like I mentioned, these results are based off of surveys. Since no experimental variable was manipulated, this was not an experiment. That means there is no definite way of knowing handedness caused the increased numbers in health problems. The study is also not specific with its numbers. It is stated that those who are ambidextrous are twice as likely to have some of the psychological problems compared to right handers but do not provide a baseline risk. By only giving relative risk, it can be deceiving to those who read this study. For example, if 1 righty has ADHD and 2 ambidextrous children have ADHD, it is twice as likely. Not all statistically significant results are practically significant. .

Nonetheless, Rodriquez concluded from her study that her results could be due to “atypical cerebral asymmetry.” She also goes on to state that more research needs to be done on the biological mechanisms to this phenomenon. There is no clear answer as to what causes a brain to be symmetrical. There could be a third variable driving the relationship between brain lateralization and dexterity. If we can learn the connection between brain lateralization and handedness, we as a society can help pinpoint those who may be at risk of these health problems and give them the help they need without using invasive neurological procedures.

As of now, if one wants to know what hemispheres of the brain are specializing in certain tasks, a Wada test must be administered. A Wada test essentially hibernates one side of the brain so doctors can see what cognitive functions the side of the brain that is not hibernated is responsible for. This process can be costly and have health complications. The Department of Neurology at the Cleveland Clinic performed an analysis of 677 patients that had undergone the Wada test. A combined 10.9 percent experienced some type of health complication. 7.2 percent had encephalopathy, 1.2 percent had seizures, 0.6 percent had a stroke, 0.6 percent had transient ischemic attacks, 0.6 percent had a localized hemorrhage at the catheter insertion site, 0.4 percent had carotid artery dissections, 0.3 percent had an allergic reaction to contrast, and 0.1 percent experienced an infection.

Handedness can be a way of knowing about one’s brain lateralization without using this invasive and expensive test. It would be amazing to see if just by running a few tests focused on hand dominance, we can know a plentitude about the functions of that individual’s brain. Science is getting better but it is imperative for more direct studies to be performed. The only way to be certain about anything is to prove causation through repeated experimentation. We know there are links between certain diseases like ADHD and ambidexterity and we know there is a relationship between ambidexterity and symmetrical brains, but how is this all connected? It is still unclear and maybe there is a third confounding variable that has yet to be discovered.

An experiment I would propose would be to manipulate several genes such as PCSK6 and LRRTM1, which are known to be associated with hand dominance, and see how they affect one’s chances of developing a known side affect to ambidexterity such as ADHD. Once we unlock the answer to this question, the possibilities for medicine and science are endless.

Photo URLs

Photo 1

Photo 2

Photo 3

Photo 4