With a rising divorce rate in the America, I was curious to see just how marriage actually effects people long term, and how the experiences of people who are married, divorced, widowed, or never married differ. I found an article that surveyed men and women of all ages and backgrounds, that asked if they were married, divorced, widowed, or never married. The survey also had the participants rate their current level of happiness; a spectrum of very happy, to unhappy.

The results were very surprising and raised a lot of additional questions for myself. As some may assume, people who were currently married generally reported to be happier than the other participants in the study. However, it was also found that women at the age of 60 or older who have never been married were just as happy as women of equal age who are married. Also, the survey concluded that men at the age of 60 or older who never married reported to be significantly less happy than married men of equal age.

This makes me question the amount of happiness that is directly caused from marriage, and why older woman who never married will experience just as much happiness as those married, unlike men. I am not a guy and not married so I lack perspective on both opinions, but I am extremely fascinated as to what causes this. Maybe woman have an easier time finding happiness in other outlets such as their friends, family, or career but ultimately I do not know. Or maybe since men usually propose to their partners, they later regret deciding not to marry more than women do. Taking away the main concept of this study, those married are generally happier, but any ladies who end up not getting married are more likely to find happiness elsewhere when older in age.

Every morning, the first thing I do is pour myself a bowl of cereal with ice cold milk along with a cup of coffee with half and half cream. Milk is a necessary part of my diet and I can’t imagine not having any dairy. From a young age, we have been taught that milk contains important vitamins and sources of calcium that is vital to intake. However, it is now being seen that milk is not as good for you as what you’ve been told.

In the article, “Milk is Dangerous for your Health”, by Doctor Mark Hyman, it is shown that milk might have more bad effects on your body than good. The article shares Dr. David Ludwig and Dr. Walter Willett’s findings that milk lacks the health benefits that the government promotes. Their studies found that milk can cause a wide variety of different problems from acne, constipation and weight gain to extreme effects such as cancer (Hyman 2016). Milk has also been found to cause sinus congestion, allergic reactions, diarrhea, and a lack of energy. In addition, Hyman explains how dairy contains proteins that are harmful to the body, such as casein, a phosphoprotein, according to Merriam-Webster. Many genetically modified proteins, such as casein, can cause many harmful diseases (Hyman 2016).

Even organic milk, that is not genetically modified, can be dangerous to your health. Hyman recommends some alterations in peoples’ dairy filled diets, such as taking a break from consuming dairy for a few weeks to see is any health issues get resolved. He also suggests having any dairy that does not come from a cow (Hyman 2016). It is crazy to think that milk can have so many bad effects on your health and body. From now on, I know that I am going to try to consume less dairy from cows and try maybe soy milk or almond milk.

Sources:

http://drhyman.com/blog/2013/10/28/milk-dangerous-health/

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/casein

http://az616578.vo.msecnd.net/files/2016/05/08/635982769649978790925639291_Glass-of-milk-2009.png

Very recently a friend of mine changed her life in two drastic ways. 1: she became a vegetarian. 2: she went off to a college 8 hours away from home. These two things seem to have no correlation whatsoever. Unfortunately, my friend is experiencing extreme homesickness and can’t seem to figure out how to feel better. Out of nowhere my friend called me the other day and shared how her mom thinks her newfound “depression” is stemming from the lack of meat going into her system. We found this to be extremely strange and bursted into laughter, but now I am actually taking this preposterous suggestion into consideration.

It is no question that we feel hungry which leads to anger and anxiousness, we eat and we feel satisfied and happy again. Our moods, more often than not, depend on our hunger and more specifically what we are eating. So what about depriving ourselves of the essential nutrients meats possess? The potential sadness, fatigue and overall bitterness a vegetarian might experience can very well be due to the lack of vitamins. Or more commonly known as a vitamin deficiency. By depriving the human body of meat you are ultimately depriving yourself of vitamin B12. This is not like catching a cold and downing a glass of orange juice for that compensation of vitamin C. Lacking Vitamin B12 can seriously lead to depression, paranoia, delusions, and even loss of memory.

So maybe my friends’ mom was not so far-fetched like we thought. Perhaps by taking a vitamin b12 pill on the daily will suffice, but if not it is probably best to introduce meat back into her life.

Sources:

http://www.mindbodygreen.com/0-14383/vegetarian-depressed-you-might-be-low-on-b12.html

http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/guide/vitamin-b12-deficiency-symptoms-causes#1

One of my best friends back at home is the epitome of an American looking girl – blonde hair and blue eyes. Yet, something that has always mystified me is not her looks, but her parents. Her mother has jet black hair, naturally, and brown eyes. Her father also has brown eyes and brown hair. Somehow, both her and her brother ended up blonde haired and blue eyed. Was something going on here? What were the odds that not just one of them, but both of them, ended up looking so different than their parents? Being naturally nosy and curious, I looked to the internet for the answer. I knew it had to do with dominant and recessive genes, but beyond that I felt pretty uneducated. As for the blue eyes, eyes color is dictated by a pigment called melanin. Eye color is also a polygenic trait, which means there can be multiple variations of one color, or a mixture of more than one color, such as hazel. If both my friend and her brother had blue eyes, it is likely that her parents both had a recessive gene for blue eyes. There’s also the chance that one of their grandparents had blue eyes, which skipped a generation in their parents, and has now shown up in the generation of my friend. There is even the chance that my friend’s grandparents simply had the recessive gene that was then passed down to them as a recessive gene. Turns out that the likelihood that my friend and her brother would look so different than their parents is a lot more common than I thought, and considering the fact that two parents could produce 64 trillion different combinations of offspring. 

Some traits don’t depend entirely on genetics, however. Weight, personality, and even height can also be manipulated by the environment. This makes sense to me, as I generally feel that my funny friends have pretty funny parents, and my heavier set friends tend to have heavy set parents. But I was confused about the height portion of this fact. I figured height was like hair color or eye color, it was something that was simply coded into your DNA and couldn’t be manipulated. This article lent me a little more information on the situation. Height is controlled by both genetics and the environment. For example, yes, you’re more likely to be tall if your father is 6’5. Where the environment comes into play is more in terms of geographic location.  In countries that are poverty stricken or less developed, children are less likely to grow as much because they do not receive the proper nutrition they need to grow stronger and taller. For example, the height of an average child in the United States is likely going to be higher than a child in say, Ghana.

All in all I was pretty surprised by my findings on genetics. Who knew that something as random as crooked teeth could be inherited? As it stands, my blonde haired blue eyed friend may not be such a genetic miracle after all.

Photo Credit: http://www.everydayfamily.com/how-late-can-my-babys-eyes-change-color/

Upon looking for a topic to right about, I came across an article Polar bears dwindling in numbers due to their habitat rapidly disappearing.  I thought I would be cliche and write about climate change but no. I like Polar bears better because they are fluffier and more intriguing than climate change and are in some way connected.

As we all know, Polar bears rely on the ice in polar regions that have an Arctic tundra climate as their main environment.  The bears use the ice to roam, hunt, and live their lives as a whole. While climate change a few years ago wasn’t even a thought, it seems to today that the futures of these bears is not looking to good. Which is very sad. Some studies say that Polar bears home could be ice free my the middle of the century, which you can find here. 

According to The Cryosphere, “The time span between the sea-ice maximum in March and the sea-ice minimum in September has lengthened by up to nine weeks since 1979 when satellite observations began”.  In simpler terms that means our bears a screwed. Absolutely screwed. “THE SEA TO ICE MAXIMUM HAS LENGTHENED BY NINE WEEKS” Ya bye Polar bears. How are Polar bears supposed to live if their habitat is gone? They cannot. That is exactly why climate change is such a big deal. Think about all the wildlife that is on the final string of life do to this drastic change.  Nine weeks longer of having no place live just sounds like something unBEARable. HA.

In conclusion, the habitats of our precious Polar bears is dwindling due to climate change and that is a topic that needs to continue to be addressed in the spotlight of mankind.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/no-safe-haven-for-polar-bears-in-warming-arctic/

Today, we saw photos of beagles forcefully inhaling cigarette smoke to determine whether cigarette causes lung cancer. Sure enough, the benign dogs were diagnosed with the disease. But why did we have to use dogs to test this? Why couldn’t we have done the same tests with humans? Well, most people would say: “You can’t do that to a human.” But why not? Why do we value the life of a dog over a human? The correlations between cigarette smoking and lung cancer were astounding. It’s not like we needed to test this through dogs.

But somehow, humans value the life of dogs over humans. I honestly can’t think of a justifiable counter-argument. Why would a human be considered ethically superior to a dog? Is it because our highly developed brains? Is it because we are the dominant species on the planet? Perhaps. But that doesn’t account for our lack of morals in suffocating animals which carcinogens. Dogs are equally capable of compassion, empathy, and love just as humans are. They feel physical pain and suffer in basically the same way that humans do. Can you imagine waking up every day to be forcefully and unwillingly suffocated with cigarette smoke so some ‘superior’ species can determine whether it negatively affects them? Imagine a species more intelligent and capable than humans doing this. Yes, they are ‘superior,’ but we have feelings too. This would be considered utterly reprehensible and downright evil. Yet, we don’t bat an eyelid when it comes to putting species other than our own under these tests.

I feel that we should reevaluate our position when it comes to animal testing. Quite frankly, this is simply unnecessary. There are ways to achieve knowledge and understanding of science without subjecting animals to torture.

People often see PETA as bleeding-heart liberal idealists, who are overly sympathetic with animals. However. I don’t understand how someone could watch this video and still support animal testing like what was done to these beagles, and countless other innocent animals. Look, I’m not telling you to empty your refrigerator and ‘repent for your sins,’ but where is basic human dignity these days? How can something be so important that it is worth taking the lives of those who never asked to be involved. This isn’t a matter of science anymore. We are locking these animals up in cages just to obtain some sort of superficial knowledge that could be easily accessed otherwise with all the latest advancements in technology.

I am always being told that green is good for my eye, so we have to look at green things once in a while to keep our eyes relaxed. But how does it works?

To talk about this question, we will have to talk about colors first. The reason we can see a color is because the reflection of the light. An object will absorb some light between a certain wavelength and reflect the light that can not absorb. Since we know that blue light and the color of light that are related to blue is harmful to our eyes, looking at green can do less harm because the object has already absorbed them. What’s more, if we calculate the reflection into percentage, it will turn out that red reflects 67% of light, yellow reflects 65% while green only reflects 47% of lights. Among all the colors green has the most even reflecting and absorbing rate, so our eyes doesn’t need to work hard to adapt to the color.

Another explanation to this question is where the image formed in our eyes in different colors. The color red focused behind of our retina. That means we have to use our Ciliary muscle to make the image clear. On the other hand, the color green will focus image in front of our retina, so the Ciliary muscle can relax.

Although green is said to be good for our eyes. It doesn’t mean that we can improve our eyesight or won’t get near sighted by just looking at green things. The most important is to really let your eye to rest after working. And looking at something green in a long distance will be a good choice!

Sources:

http://endmyopia.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ciliary-muscle-myopia.jpg

http://www.eyewearlibrary.com/answers/why-is-the-color-green-good-for-your-eyes–q–654/

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/light/Lesson-2/Light-Absorption,-Reflection,-and-Transmission

While reading a Forbes article, I found out that Americans between the ages of 13 and 18 spend approximately one third of their day looking at screens. When I first heard this statistic, I had a hard time imagining how someone could actually spend a third of their day looking at mobile or computer screens. However, after taking into account how often teens use technology to keep in touch with each other, stay up to date on social media or news applications, and even take notes; the eight hours teens spend looking at screens daily started to seem more and more realistic.  

Photo Credit

In this post I will not be attempting to persuade you to look at your cell phone and other electronic screens less frequently; I will simply inform you about some of the effects that staring at an electronic screen for a prolonged period of time could have on your eyes. While doing some research, I found a News Medical Article that highlighted some of the issues that could arise from prolonged screen exposure. The symptoms that stood out in this article were eye discomfort and headaches. According to AllAboutVision.com, there are some easy tips to help reduce eye strain and headaches from computer screens. The first tip is to make sure that the brightness of your screen matches the light levels around you. This comes into play at night when you are looking at a bright screen in a dark room. While doing research, I came across an app for Mac and Windows called “Flux”  which will automatically adjust your screen brightness and color based on your location and the ambient light in your environment. Even if there is not strong proof showing that inappropriate brightness directly causes headaches, downloading an app like Flux takes almost no time and could save you time and money in the future. Another tip for reducing eye strain while looking at a computer screen is to increase that size of the text you are reading and if possible, make sure you are reading black text on white background. The last tip to prevent eye strain and headaches is to give your eyes a break. The article stated that a good practice is to look away from your computer monitor every 20 minutes and to stare at an object at least 20 feet away for 20 seconds. This practice is a good way to protect your eyes from accommodative spasm, a condition that locks your eye into one focus.

Photo Credit

Because the development of devices which rely on backlit screens is fairly recent, it has been hard to gather information on the long term effects of spending so much time looking at electronic screens. Just think about how some of these tips could save you time and money in the future. Good habits today could protect your eyes later in life.

Sources:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jordanshapiro/2015/11/03/teenagers-in-the-u-s-spend-about-nine-hours-a-day-in-front-of-a-screen/#5a789bc37c34

https://justgetflux.com/

http://www.allaboutvision.com/cvs/irritated.htm

https://www.verywell.com/accommodative-spasm-3422175

http://www.news-medical.net/health/Does-looking-at-a-computer-damage-your-eyes.aspx

Pictures:

http://theseptemberstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/7160239.jpg

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/25716151.jpg

The other day when I was sitting down and watching an episode of The Big Bang Theory, I wondered how accurate all the facts and references to science were in the show. I wondered if these shows lack real evidence-based, scientific facts and are actually misleading their viewers with false information. This subject was also touched on a few days ago in my Psych 105 class. We spoke briefly about how the media, if they are not careful, can spread false or very poorly concluded “facts” about the world and claim it is “science.”

http://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/bones-bosses-on-season-12-and-wrapping-up-the-fox-series/

After searching for a good article on the subject, I came across THIS. This article is about three individuals whose jobs are to keep television shows scientifically accurate. One of those people is a woman named Donna Cline who is responsible for keeping the show Bones scientifically accurate. She works closely with the writers and actors to ensure that every aspect of the show is up-to-date with current scientific theories, discoveries, and vocabulary.

I learned from the article that some shows are better than other shows when it comes to being scientifically accurate, but ultimately it is entertainment. Entertainment is more likely to sacrifice scientific truth than it is to sacrifice viewers and ratings. Although people like Donna try their best to keep shows informational as much as they are entertaining, she cannot make them perfect. For example, the article previously mentioned says that Bones must stay time-relevant. Some DNA and blood tests can take weeks to get analyzed, but for the sake of speed, they will cut that time out of the show to keep the plot moving and keep their viewers happy. Another example from the article is that the show Bones will have the FBI and the lab analyst interact regularly because they are both friends and main characters on the show. When in real life, those two cogs in the criminal justice machine would never interact that often. In conclusion, I learned that some “facts” on television shows are true and that some are fake, but it is probably smarter to assume the latter without doing any individual investigation on the subject.

I am alone in a plain, white room. The room contains multiple doors aligned on each wall of the room. There is nobody, and nothing in this white room except a clock. The timer counts down from 30 seconds, and I need to pick the right door. For 20 seconds I yank at every door except one left that must be the right door; except that it’s across the room from where I am standing. With 10 seconds to spare, I attempt to sprint towards the door, but suddenly I am moving in slow motion and don’t seem to be getting anywhere. I know that one door is an escape, but I can’t seem to get there because I am unable to move anymore. I continue to struggle in slow motion until one second is left, then I wake up to the real world. I always wake up confused as to how and why I had a dream with that exact scenario multiple times before. I looked up the ideas behind recurring dreams to investigate.

Psychology Today claims that the idealistic theory behind recurring dreams is that the dreamer must have some unfinished business, whether it be current (or past) conflicts or perhaps loads of stress. This is of course related to recurring nightmares. An article from The Huffington Post provides an example of how a past conflict could impact recurring dreams: a PTSD suffering veteran could have nightmares from war in the past. Recurring dreams are rather interesting as they can show impact from the past and present. The feeling of being stressed is not a crazy theory behind this, as I can recall having the recurring dream (more like nightmare) before when I was under a fairly stressful time. However, when the dreamer is not feeling stressed or does not have a current issue to solve, the dream/nightmare could not come again until the dreamer starts to re-experience stress or conflict.

I now know that if I wake up with that nightmare again, I need to evaluate how I am feeling and make sure to take care of myself; because this recurring dream I have is a form of my unconscious mind telling me that I am stressed or need to fix whatever is unresolved in my life.

Photo Sources:

thenextweb.com

todayspeopleblog.wordpress.com

As one would expect, arriving at college comes with its fair share of life changes. Living with a roommate, adjusting to life without parents around, and making an entirely new group of friends are among the list of many lifestyle adaptations we face. For me, one of those major changes was sleeping with the lights entirely off. I’m usually good about turning the TV off, but I don’t usually sleep in complete darkness. Ok, a little embarrassing, I admit, but I just simply prefer to sleep with the lights dimmed. My light switch at home allowed me to dim my lights, so I would every night. I had a friend tell me once that you can never get a good, proper night’s sleep without a completely dark room, but I refused to believe her. My way was better, obviously. Yet, now that I am forced to sleep with the lights off out of courtesy, I have encountered some slight changes to my sleep schedule. Perhaps I am more tired as a college student, but I do seem to be falling asleep faster and my FitBit tells me I am lest restless in my sleep. I started to wonder- could she be right?

I read this article that delves into the reason why really any source of light, even the little glow of my alarm clock or the sun that comes in through our dorm window, could be affecting my mental health. Essentially it has to do with a chemical in our brains, Melatonin. You may have heard of melatonin from our reading in class the other day, but melatonin basically relates to our mental health and controls our mood. Lack of melatonin, which can be caused from light in our rooms while we sleep, could in turn cause depression. We saw this in the mice experiment that Andrew showed us in class – the mice who slept with a glow on in the background were more susceptible to becoming depressed. In addition to messing with our melatonin levels, allowing light in the room also screws up our internal or “biological” clocks. . Our body, through the help of Suprachiasmatic Nucleus, can sense light even when we are fast asleep. This means our brain may be trying to tell our body to wake up when it senses this light, even though we should be sleeping .

The article suggests taking, in my opinion, rather drastic measures to ensure complete and utter darkness in our bedrooms. Buying light cancelling curtains and putting a towel at the bottom of our door is not something that I will be doing any time soon. But I will definitely be sleeping with the lights off from now on. Even though I have not experienced any drastic change in my mood (yet), I have noticed that I’m sleeping a little better. That’s enough for me to be convinced.

Picture credit: http://chiro-first.co.uk/Sleeping-with-the-tv-on

Sleepwalking sounds like a funny subject at first glance. It’s certainly an ironic and interesting subject, how does one sleepwalk? I wanted to figure this out for myself since I have sleepwalked multiple times in my life. The worst instance is when I walked outside the hotel room my family was staying in while sleeping. When I awoke I realized I had locked myself outside the room at four in the morning. Since I have done it multiple times I was curious to see if there are any direct causes that make a person sleepwalk.

To start off here is one of my favorite movie scenes, that just so happens to involve sleep walking.  Now, surely not everyone who sleepwalks puts their moms purse in the freezer, or couch pillows in the oven. However, sleepwalking is a real thing that happens. Sleepwalking is formally know as somnambulism, and it is described as a behavior disorder that results in the individual performing tasks such as walking, talking, and sometimes other complex activities while being asleep. Early stages of sleep walking could involve just talking in your sleep, or sitting up in bed, as it progresses it could involve standing up, walking, and eventually performing tasks (Sleep Foundation). Over 8.4 millions, or 3.6 percent of adult americans sleepwalk each year. Sleepwalking usually occurs when the individual is in a deep sleep, in the middle of the night when their eye movement is not rapid or the non-REM part of a person’s sleep cycle. Sleepwalking creates great injury risk to both the sleepwalker and anyone around the sleepwalker. As the sleepwalker is not aware of what they are doing during the moment, and probably will not remember what they did when they wake up the next morning (Jaslow, 2012). Overall, sleepwalking is a dangerous act for all involved, but what causes it to happen?

There are many possible causes that would cause someone to sleepwalk. For example, according to the Mayo Clinic there are many causes of sleepwalking that align with a prolonged period of a lack of sleep such as fatigue. In addition some psychological problems such as anxiety and depression can cause sleepwalking (Mayo Clinic). In fact, this article from CBS states that people with depression are 3.5 times more likely to sleepwalk than someone who is not depressed (Jaslow, 2012). There are some ways you can help someone who is sleepwalking to either prevent it, or prevent the damage they do if they happen to do it.

Because of the dangers of sleepwalking it is recommended to lock all windows and doors if it is thought a family member is in danger of sleepwalking. The best way to prevent sleepwalking is to get a substantial amount of sleep every night, and keep a consistent sleeping schedule. The Mayo Clinic has an entire list of possible things to do if you feel like someone you live with, our yourself is in danger of sleepwalking (Mayo Clinic). The thing I’ve always heard is that you aren’t supposed to wake up a sleepwalker as it can be dangerous to both parties involved. This is in fact not true, it is indeed harmless to both you and the sleepwalker in most occasions; the sleepwalker just may be non-responsive or disoriented as a result of it (Soniak, 2013). As a person who has had multiple episodes of sleepwalking I can attest to the fact that my episodes have happened when I have been on an abnormal sleeping schedule, or when I have been extremely fatigued. It is on the person who has a sleepwalking problem to get their proper sleep to decrease the chance of it happening. However, the people around them can set up and environment so that if they happen to sleepwalk; they can minimize the damage.

There are a few things that I really enjoy doing. One of those things is watching baseball and researching baseball. As any baseball fan can tell you, one huge issue that as been facing Major League Baseball players recently is the increase in Tommy John surgery for professional pitchers. For those who do not know what a “Tommy John” surgery consists of, it is a surgery used to replace a pitcher’s UCL or ulnar collateral ligament. The surgery was created originally in 1974 for pitcher “Tommy John” hence the name. The tearing of a pitcher’s UCL has become more and more prevalent in the MLB as of late. The question I would like to answer: What are the factors responsible for this recent uptick in Tommy John surgeries?

http://www.thenationalpastimemuseum.com/article/tommy-john-pitcher-surgery

The first thing you have to look at when examining this question is: What usually causes ligaments in the arm to tear? As per Dr. Ken Fleisig, he cites torque on the elbow as the reason for tearing ligaments in the arm, especially the UCL. Now obviously professional pitchers put an incredible amount of torque on the elbow as they are throwing the ball anywhere from 90-100 mph. This torque is so great that hypothetically, any given pitcher’s UCL should tear on every pitch. Fleisig states that a typical pitch puts 100 newton meters of force on the elbow. About half of this force is placed on the UCL. That puts around 50-55 newton metres of force on the elbow. In tests on cadavers, it has shown that a typical UCL can not withstand more than 32 metres of force. Obviously the ligaments of cadavers are not at the same strength as professional baseball players, this however does not make up for the huge discrepancy as to what your UCL should be able to withstand and what professional pitchers are making it withstand. So for pitchers we are able to see a strong correlation between torque placed on the elbow and the likelihood of tearing one’s UCL. Our next question would be to ask: What causes an increase in torque on the elbow? Increased torque on the elbow can be seen by an increase in arm speed and the use of a curveball. The use of a curveball becomes especially dangerous in younger arms as many young baseball players ligaments and joints are not fully developed and can not withstand this incredible amount of torque placed on their UCL. (Flesig)

Now that we see the causes for UCL injuries, the next question that would need to be answered is: Why are we seeing more UCL injuries now? One possible explanation could be that simply pitchers are throwing harder now than they used to. Research done by FanGraphs‘ Julien Assouline, would suggest that an increase in velocity does seem to increase the likelihood of Tommy John surgery. After looking at average velocity thrown by a pitcher and comparing it to if they had Tommy John surgery or not, Assouline was able to conclude that a pitcher who throws 90 mph is 7-10% less likely to have Tommy John than a pitcher who throws 96 mph. It appears that velocity is a factor, what else could be a looming factor in this recent Tommy John epidemic? Many would suggest that the overuse of little league pitchers. While pitching any young baseball player too much will have an obvious impact on his arm, this does not necessarily equate to a higher risk of Tommy John. The main study people like to point to as proof that youth baseball overuse leads to Tommy John is this longitudinal study by the University of North Carolina. This study actually seemed to conclude that prior shoulder injury is actually the best predictor of future Tommy John surgery, closely followed by pitching a slider. Pitching in travel baseball is actually the 13th best indicator of future Tommy John surgery based on this study. This is not to say that over-use of youth pitchers has no effect on future injury, it just does not appear to be the biggest factor. In short, extreme over use of pitchers at a young age will lead to an increased injury risk but this is not the explanation for the increase in Tommy John surgeries we have seen recently in the MLB. One last possible explanation is that there are not actually any more UCL injuries than before. It is possible that modern medicine has made it easier for us to detect these injuries and that pitchers before were not able to properly identify their injury as a UCL tear requiring Tommy John. This explanation is the hardest to prove or to disprove because there is no way to go back and see how many injuries went unnoticed.

After going through this research, it is apparent that there is no one sole factor of the increase in Tommy John surgery. Our best guess is that it is a combination of the overuse of arms from a young age combined with the increase in velocity that has been recorded as of late. The Tommy John epidemic appears to be one without a clear solution. Pitch counts and reducing pitch velocity seems like a possible route to take but one that may or may not be effective. Overall, elbow injuries are a natural cause of throwing something as hard as professional pitchers do and a problem that will continue to exist for as long as pitchers are throwing 90-100 mph.

Sources:

The Tommy John Epidemic: What’s Behind the Rapid Increase of Pitchers Undergoing Elbow Surgery?

http://www.littleleague.org/media/llnewsarchive/2011/May-Aug/YouthBBPitchingStudyShowsOverusePrimaryCauseofArmInjuries.htm

http://www.fangraphs.com/community/velocity-and-the-likelihood-of-tommy-john-surgery/

When you discuss ballparks with casual fans of baseball, the discussion is usually centered on the aesthetics of the park or some new crazy food the ballpark has adopted, like a burger with pizzas for the buns (no, this is a real thing). One thing many fans do not realize is that the ballpark a team plays in has an impact on their performance. Many people may not understand this because every ballpark seems to be the same thing : 4 bases, a pitcher’s mound and an outfield fence. How is it that a ballpark could change anything that is happening between the players in a game?

Ballparks affect the game in a multitude of ways. The easiest effect for fans to see is the distance of the outfield fences. Every park has differing distances from home plate to the right field, center field and, left field fence. This has an obvious impact on performance as the closer a fence is the easier it is to hit the ball over this fence. One of the biggest examples of this is at Yankees Stadium in New York. The right field fence is only 314 feet out, making it the shortest porch in baseball. This allows for left handed power hitters to thrive in Yankees Stadium because players tend to pull the ball (lefties hit it to right field and righties hit it to left field).

http://www.teresco.org/pics/yankees-19980830/

Another slight ballpark factor in performance is the dimensions of the outfield. Bigger outfield dimensions means more distance for outfielders to cover and gives more space for hitters to hit the ball. Coors Field has the most outfield acreage which makes it one of the most hitter friendly parks in baseball. This however is not the only factor that makes Coors Field one of the most hitter friendly parks in baseball. The last ballpark factor is the one most fans do not know about but also a very crucial one.  Altitude. The altitude of a stadium may not seem very important to most baseball fans and it would be hard to see how altitude could effect performance. Altitude effects multiple parts of the game. It first effects the pitch that is being thrown. Pitch speed will slightly increase due to the lowered air pressure but the bigger impact is seen on breaking pitches. One of the forces acting on a pitch is frictional force. Due to the lower air pressure there are less air molecules present. This means a baseball has less air molecules to rub against and less friction acting on it. The basis of a breaking pitch is to have friction act on the ball in a way that makes it fall or curve in a direction. The highest stadium altitude is seen in Colorado at Coors Field. According to Alan Nathan of Illinois University, a breaking pitch at Coors Field will only break 85% as much as a breaking pitch at a regular ballpark. This is one reason Coors Field is widely considered the best hitters park in baseball. The other reason is the effect altitude has on batted balls. Friction on a baseball also acts to slow the baseball down. This lack of friction at Coors Field means batted balls simply cut through the air and are met with little resistance. This makes it incredibly easy for batters to hit home runs in this park. Alan Nathan also states that a fly ball travels 5% further in Coors Field than a regular park. Coors Field is the most extreme example of this as it is in the “mile-high” city but even the slighter changes in altitude shows the same correlation.

Sources:

http://baseball.physics.illinois.edu/Denver.html

Football has slowly surpassed baseball as America’s pastime. The high powered, violent, and exciting sport has pushed its way into the national spotlight and many players find themselves some of the biggest celebrities this country has to offer. The high scores, hard hits, and amazing fans seem to make football a perfect sport, or is it? There appears to be one glaring issue in the NFL. Safety. More and more players are starting to get concussions and even more former players are coming forward with lasting effects from these injuries. There were 199 NFL concussions in the 2015 season according to Frontline’s Concussion Watch. One of the NFL’s main plans of attack on the concussion epidemic is to try and improve the effectiveness of helmets against head injuries. My question is: would NFL players actually be better off without helmets?

http://sharpbrains.com/blog/2016/03/24/new-nfl-concussion-scandal-is-this-the-end-of-american-football-as-a-popular-youth-sport/

Taking helmets off may seem counter-intuitive but it makes more sense than you would think. For one, helmets make players feel invincible. A player tends to hit more with his head and initiate contact that would other wise seem unsafe without a helmet. Removing the helmet would make players more conscious about using their head to hit others and hitting others heads. This is best exemplified in the sport of rugby. Rugby is arguably just as physical of a sport as football, with minimal padding and no helmet. Most Rugby players do not lead tackles with their head because they do not have this false sense of security that most football players do. One would hope that this false sense of security would be offset by the safety that helmets bring to players. The main goal of helmet’s are to reduce the violent crashing that occurs in a football tackle. The foam in a helmet is there to control the crash and hopefully lessen the strain on the nerves of the brain (helmets.org). The goal is to reduce rotational force placed on the brain, but a study presented at the American Academy of Neurology’s 66th annual meeting suggests that modern helmets are not actually reducing this rotational force placed on the brain. The study used crash dummies and placed 12 mph impacts on the heads of the dummies. They tested 10 different helmets to see if they reduced any of this rotational force placed on the brain. The study showed that helmets only reduced the risk of brain injury by 20 percent compared to not wearing a helmet (American Academy of Neurology).  This is no where near the safety players think they are receiving from these helmets. So the question becomes, would players not wearing helmets reduce these traumatic brain injuries? One study at the University of New Hampshire showed that implementing regular helmet-less drills decreased the number of head impacts among those in the study by 28 percent. This just shows that taking helmets off of players would make them think twice about colliding head to head with another player but it may not change the style of play quickly enough which could create an incredibly dangerous atmosphere. The slamming of heads into the ground would also become very dangerous. Also the whole game of football would have to be changed. Players would have to line up in the upright position, something that would not be easily adopted in the NFL. Maybe taking off the helmet completely is not the right answer, but it is interesting that it is even a discussion. Helmets are looked at as the only thing keeping players from concussions when in reality they may be doing more harm than good.

Before I came to school, I only thought charcoal had two purposes – drawing and teeth whitening. My roommate, who is originally from Ukraine, woke up one day with a hangover that ended up lasting until 3 p.m. She asked me if charcoal pills were a thing in America and explained that they can soak up all the bad stuff in your system and make you feel as good as new in an hour or so. I was really interested in this, but wondered what makes charcoal do the trick.

According to WebMD, charcoal can be used to help drug overdoses and poisonings, and helps clear out the body. Activated charcoal can also be used to prevent high cholesterol, hangovers, and gas. Charcoal is considered “activated” when combined with high temperatures to spread the surface area. When charcoal is consumed, the process of adsorption allows elements to bind to a surface – making the charcoal useful.

Referring to an article by Dr. Axe, activated charcoal use has more benefits than drawbacks overall. It can whiten teeth and actually change the pH balance in your mouth – which works to prevent gum disease and bad breath. The article also states the point that people don’t typically think of mold growing in their bodies, but mold can thrive anywhere. Activated charcoal can help cleanse the body of mold – overall prohibiting the side effects of mold before they get bad. The side effects of toxic bodily mold are depression, heart disease, nausea, and more.

What does this look like?

Above is a picture from an article called Combat Bloating with Activated Charcoal. You can purchase activated charcoal pills online or at a store like Natures Way. It was even noted that the pills can help clear up acne and prevent body odor – it does it all! A digestive cleanse is also one of the many convenient things activated charcoal can do. It can boost your immune system, remove the toxins that can cause allergic reactions, and boost mental function and energy.

So this pill that isn’t very popular seems like it should be the new craze – but are there any disadvantages of consuming activated charcoal?

Constipation and vomiting are a couple of side effects that come from activated charcoal according to drugs.com. Some more severe side effects are allergic reactions, metabolic effects, respiratory problems, and ocular and hematologic issues. Is it worth it?

All in all, activated charcoal seems like it can be your best friend some of the time, but your worst nightmare other days. I would like to try it to whiten my teeth before I digest it – I think it can do more good than harm!

For years one of the most talked about topics in sports is the dangers of football. Specifically the head trauma involved for players, and concussions. In just five years from 2010 to 2015, the number of youth football players in America dropped from 3 million to 2.16 million (Moore, 2016). This 28 percent drop shows how much the new data and information about concussions is affecting the sport, and its perception around the country. The issue of concussions was widely overlooked by the football community for decades. In the past decade, leaps and bounds have been made to prevent concussions. From rule changes, to new technology in equipment everything has been tried, and still there were 271 concussions in the NFL last season (Seifert, 2016). Concussions seem inevitable in the sport, but how much can a new helmet made help dwindle the issue?

Picture from https://blog-blogmediainc.netdna-ssl.com

Head trauma, and concussions are a natural part of the sport due to the violent nature and consistent contact that the culture of the game emulates. The problem is, the issue of concussions was scoffed at for many many years. Given the nature of the game, the players are looked upon to be tough, and fight through injuries. This thought process proved detrimental to many players health prior to concussions really being looked upon as a serious problem in the sport. The NFL ignored the issue of concussions entirely until 1994 when they formed the Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Committee. Even then, concussions were looked at as part of the game, and it came with the territory of being a football player. A 2000 survey of former NFL players concluded that 61 percent of them had suffered a concussion at one point in their career. Of these players 79 percent said they were encouraged or forced to stay in the game despite their concussion symptoms. Finally, in 2009 the league acknowledged the dangers of head trauma and concussions (Petchesky, 2013). From then on, many changes have been made in attempt to make the game safer.

One of the newest changes that have attempted to help with the concussion epidemic in football is a new helmet that has been introduced this year. A company called Vicis has made a football helmet unlike any before. The company has been working on a helmet called “Zero1” for over two years now with countless amounts of research, design, testing etc. and it is set to unveil throughout the 2016 football season (Vicis, 2016). With a price of $1,500 it may seem like a price that is not worth it, but the numerous benefits it could bring to each individual player that wears it makes it worth every penny (Soper, 2016). All football helmets to this point have been similar in the fact that they have had a hard outer shell, the Zero1 is the first to have a deformable outer shell. To create this multi-layered outer shell Vicis used the same technology used by automotive safety engineers (Artefact, 2016). There are four layers of the helmets shell material, the deformable outer shell is made up of two parts the Lode Shell, and the Vicis RFLX. These allow the helmet to absorb and deflect the impact of a high speed collision, that happens numerous times in a game. The core layer has the same function of reducing impact with the use of vertical struts.  The helmet has twelve different sizing combinations, all aided by the Vicis Axis fit system in which the individuals head length and breadth are both measured to find the perfect sized helmet. The distinguished team that helped create this product has all types of people from neurosurgeons, to engineers, to physicians, and a whole lot more. (Vicis, 2016). This video goes into detail about the helmet as described by the inventors themselves

Picture from: http://cdn.geekwire.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Screen-Shot-2016-01-11-at-9.43.19-AM-630×488.png

The helmet is a very good concept, it is something that could pioneer a very beneficial change for the game of football. Overall, there may never be a helmet that can completely prevent concussions from occurring on the gridiron. But, the goal should be to create the best technology so that the risk of concussions is minimal compared to what it currently is. I think this helmet is a step in that direction.

For every child that has gone to school k-12, we always dreaded the 5-day school week, felt like we were being held in a prison sentence and there was no possible way of getting out. I don’t know about anyone else but I personally can say I always wondered what it would be like to go to school for only 4 days a week. But if we decided to go with that, a more difficult question would have to be answered, do we want a Monday or Friday off? Do we want to get to the weekend quicker, or do we want to make it feel like a little longer? But are school districts  going to cut down on the amount of days without knowing there might be a possible benefit. If schools cut the week to four days, are the performance of the students going to go up also? This is a question that a lot of districts are starting to think about, and even experimenting with today.

More and more schools that seem to be on the western part of the United States are attempting to adopt the 4-day week and ultimately judging whether there any positives as a result. Some teachers have begun to speak about some of the benefits for them about only teaching for 4 days. It gives them more flexibility with their personal lives, but more important on the Fridays, they are able to design far better lesson plans then they could ever before. A lot of them found themselves working on the weekends to try to come up with plans for the following week, but could really never find the motivation to do so. With the possibility of not having classes on Friday, they could use this time to effective produce lesson plans, mostly because they are still in the working mindset from the prior days.

In addition, with the kids being in school per day much longer because of the shortened week, they are able to take advantage of being in each class a little longer. Have you ever been in a science class where you are working on a lab, but unfortunately you run out of time and don’t get to finish? This happens to everyone and by the time you return for the next class, there is a good chance that you have forgotten a portion of what you learned. Because of this now you have to go out of your way to relearn everything, when that extra time could be used towards learning a new topic. This slows down the education process and could possibly be one of the reasons for lower test scores. Teachers say that personally they have seen a lot of positives that have come from this, like attendance and students overall being more focused during the class. As of right now, roughly 40 percent of the states have at least one school that has adopted a 4 day. Researchers from Montana State University decided the study the results of changing to a 4-day week and see if there any impacts to the academic performance (See Study Results Here). The results of increased performance didn’t seem to surprise me because all the benefits that come along with changing to a 4-day week.

So once the performance goes up and stays consistent, you would think that it would stay like that? But despite this popular belief, that might not be the case as shown by results of schools in Montana, where initially there was as spike in grades but then a drop off.  Why might this be the case? Personally I believe this might be because kids are slowly getting used to the new system, and once it becomes second nature, it starts to feel like 5-day weeks. They maybe go back to their old habits, and aren’t as productive as they were once.

So in the big picture, is switching to a 4-day really worth the time? If you think about it, at first the initial results show a benefit, but over time they start to return to its old fashion. They need to decide if it’s really worth the transition over if it won’t have a positive impact in the long term.

Sources:

http://neatoday.org/2016/01/14/four-day-school-week-pro-con/ ( For Picture also)

Have you ever hung out with that one person that just won’t stop complaining about getting attacked by mosquitoes? Well for my friends, that person is me. After long summer nights spent outside, I always somehow find myself having (approximately) 70000 more bug bites than I had prior. What always seems to puzzle me is that my friends would come out with one, two or maybe no bug bites at all. I’m sure they are all sick of hearing me complain over getting “attacked”, but it just does not seem fair to me. I mean could these bugs actually be biased?

Though I would get significantly more mosquito bites than others, I always thought it was just by chance with no reasoning behind it. I had never known that mosquitoes could be so picky when it came to their meal preference. That is why when I discovered the article “Why Mosquitoes Bite Some People More than Others”, I was immediately intrigued. This article posted by Meredith Melnick includes reasons ranging from size to metabolism to even smell. All of these factors play a role in the possibility of getting bitten by a mosquito. It all started to make sense to my 5’8” tall, fast metabolism-having self. What stood out to me the most when reading this article was that mosquitoes also love feeding on people who have just worked out; they are drawn in to the lactic acid and carbon dioxide produced. The reason that this stood out to me, in particular, was because I could recall the countless amount of times that I would go on a run to Beaver Stadium over the summer and return to my dorm with dozens of new bites.

For me and the many others out there dealing with this annoyance, it has been a looooong summer. Luckily, the cold weather is approaching which means no bugs—at least for a few months. Until then, I guess there is nothing I can really do except continue drowning myself in bug spray and hope for the best. See ya’ next year, stupid mosquitoes.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-mosquitoes-bite-some-people-more-than-others_us_57c9c258e4b0a22de095e6a4?hieqjanjvck1n61or&section=us_healthy-living

Pictures: http://cdn.orkin.com/images/mosquitoes/mosquito-illustration_360x286.jpg

https://vwellhealth.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/bug-spray.jpg

Yesterday, I was standing in the communal bathroom, waiting for my Brita Pitcher to fill up. Since it takes a decent 5 minutes to filter all of the water through, it gave me time to think. Was I wasting my precious time as a busy college student, or do Brita pitchers actually work? And if so, how? I mean, sure, we all know that the filters take out some chemicals out of tap water, but in the end, is it really that different from regular tap water?

To answer my questions, I did some research…and this is what I found:

According to Brita’s website, the filters supposedly remove thirteen chemicals found in tap water.

What Brita claims to remove (this chart can be found on Brita’s website)

Brita’s website also includes a list of negative effects that can result in drinking unfiltered water. Some of the side effects include nausea and liver, pancreatic, and kidney damage (A list of these can be found here  )

How it works:

The filters work by extracting the harsh chemicals found in the water. As the molecules pass through the filter, they cling to the surface area due to the help of the carbon that is found within the filters. This is also why we are told to change the filter ever two months. Once the surface area of the inside of the filter is full, the process will not work anymore (Brita.com).

Other Viewpoints:

An article from The Daily Beast sates that general water filters do less than we think. In fact, according to this article, after a taste test, most people can’t tell the difference between filtered water and tap water. In general, water filters are only qualified to extract a small percentage of chemicals. Common chemicals found in tap water, such as lead or pesticide remains, are not typically removed from filters.

According to Raymond Letterman, a civil engineering professor at Syracuse University, some filters can even add extra bacteria into our water. He mentions that because of biofilm, which is some of the residue left from the filters, there is always a chance for a layer of bacteria to be on the surface of our filtered water (Schulson).

Furthermore, a study conducted in Germany found that filtered water more often than not has more bacteria than unfiltered tap water. This study tested the Brita filter in a household setting and found that the percentage of bacteria increased in 24 out of 34 filters. Furthermore, in a lab setting, after one week of use at the same temperature, 4 out of 6 filters tested had more bacteria. Even more shockingly, groups of bacteria present in filtered water were 10,000 times higher than regular tap water. In short, because of biofilm, filtered water produced more bacteria compared to unfiltered water.

So, since filters clearly don’t remove all of the toxins found in our water, what other safe solutions are there?

Although boiling water has been around since, well, the beginning of time, it doesn’t necessarily kill all of the toxins found in water. According to this article, boiling water still may not remove 100% all of the chemicals found in regular tap water.

In conclusion, do water filters really work? Is drinking tap water just as safe as filtered water? Well, after making correlations from observing the data we have collected thus far,  it’s safe to say that filters (usually) can take out some common molecules found in your water pipes. However, studies still found that sometimes filters can cause more harm than good, by creating even more bacteria over time. And, although boiling water may work, there is never a 100% guarantee that all toxins will filter out of your water. So, you will never truly take out all the chemicals found in tap water (unless, of course, you purchase a thousand dollar filtering system). And that’s okay, because usually, the water that comes out of our kitchen sinks isn’t too harmful anyway. Most people simply opt to use filters for personal taste.

Image 2 

Image 3 

We’ve always heard the saying that you should wait a half hour after eating to go swimming. When we were little we just accepted this idea, even though as toddlers we would get annoyed that we couldn’t jump right back into the water. However, they were no questions asked how these two things were even correlated. Now being older, I’ll eat a chipotle burrito and go right back in the water with no second thought. But, I was interested in seeing where this saying came from and if there is any actual truth behind it or not.

Where did this idea come from?

This article talks about the origins of this story. David Mikkelson, the author, parallels this story with that one the boogieman. It was basically made up as a tall tale to scare kids from eating on a full stomach. The idea of doing this was said to lead to cramps, according to this article. If you ask me, parents made up this myth so they wouldn’t have to deal with their kids in the pool. I worked at a camp this summer and had to watch second grade girls in a pool for one hour a week. Even though this doesn’t sound like a long time, it felt like eternity. As a parent, I would most definitely make something up to keep my young child out of the water.

Is it really a myth?

HERE is a New York Times article that looks into this claim and the truth behind it. The article shows that the claim is that the cramps that come from eating then going in the pool, can increase the risk of drowning. Dr. Roshini Rajapaska that explains that these cramps are possible, but there is no statistic that show you are more at risk of drowning if you go in the water after eating. He explains that these statistics could change if alcoholic beverages are involved, but for the most part this myth is just that. A myth.

Sources:

http://www.snopes.com/oldwives/hourwait.asp

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/health/the-claim-never-swim-after-eating.html

Picture:

http://aquaattack.ie/images/newlayout/swimsteps/step02.jpg

I currently have a raging headache. I feel completely fine, it’s not like I am sick, but my head is pounding. I texted my mom and asked what I should do. She said to take Advil and drink water; the common “cure” you hear for most things these days. I am curious as to what made my head hurt first place? Where inside my head is it hurting? And how can headaches actually be cured?

Everyone in this class has probably experienced a headache. If you haven’t, then consider yourself lucky. Headaches can range from mild to chronic. Mild headaches, can be cured with Advil or will just eventually go away with some water and sleep. Others, can be chronic. My friend, for example, is prescribed 800 mg ibuprofen because she gets such bad headaches. She has to sit in her room with all her lights of and no sounds for hours, in order to cure them. These headaches are typically referred to as migraines.

Some say that stress can cause headaches. I believe that, but I don’t exactly understand why stress would cause your head to hurt? I have also heard that not enough sleep can cause headaches as well.

The most common type of headache is a tension headache; where it feels like you have a constant pressure or ache on both sides of your head. Researchers suggest that these headaches are caused by altered brain chemicals and or mixed signals in the nerves that lead to the brain. These types of headaches are considered mild, and can be cured with an Advil.

On the other hand, people suffer terribly from the pain of migraines. Some migraines can even make people nauseous to the point where they throw up. Most migraines make people very sensitive to light and that is why they have to sit in a quiet dark room. Staring at a computer screen or your phone can also lead the cause of a headache. Researchers have recently found that migraines are due to the excitation of a nerve responsible for sensation in the face. When the nerve is interrupted, it can cause the blood vessels that surround the brain to expand and inflame.

I wonder if there is a way to prevent getting headaches and migraines considering many people suffer from them.

Sources: http://www.health.com/health/gallery/0,,20596594,00.html

http://www.health.com/health/condition-article/0,,20327068,00.html

picture – https://innovativehealthandwellness.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/headache.jpg

Whenever someone asks me what my favorite food is, I don’t hesitate at all. Ever since I was a little kid the answer has been the same, popcorn. My favorite kind is the movie theatre kind, all buttered up and salty. So much so that when I finish I have to wash my hands. Outside of the movie theatre the most convenient place to find “movie theatre” type popcorn is by buying microwavable bags at a grocery store. Whether it’s Orville Redenbacher or Pop Secret I’ll devour the bag in less than five minutes. My Mom is a very healthy person, and is always looking out for her kids health wise. So years ago when she glossed over an article pointing out the health concerns of microwavable popcorn, she relayed this information to me. I immediately disregarded this information as my Mom just being “crazy” and trying to deviate me from enjoying my favorite snack. This blog assignment helped me recall this, and look further into it. In doing so I realized there are real health concerns in consuming microwavable popcorn, backed by science.

Much of the problems found with microwavable popcorn involves the chemicals that are added into the bag. The artificial flavoring products including butter added to the bags contained diacetyl. Despite the fact that this chemical is FDA-approved it reportedly caused workers at the manufacturing factory of a microwavable popcorn brand to develop a lung disease named bronchiolitis obliterans. Hundreds of factory workers have sued the flavor makers in recent years claiming that they developed lung damage caused by the added in flavor ingredients (CBS, 2007) the flavor addThis was found following a study conducted by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (Shukla, 2015). On top of this, another toxic chemical is found in the bags and is linked to causing numerous types of cancer. Perfluorooctanoic acid is an acid that can remain in the human body for prolonged periods of time, and has been linked to cause numerous types of cancer such as prostate and liver, as well as fertility problems (Hendrickson, 2015) (Orecchio) . Some of the top microwavable popcorn brands like PopSecret still use trans fats which can give your arteries and your liver problems. According to the Center for Disease control on an annual basis, trans fats are related to 20,000 heart attacks, and 7,000 deaths (Orecchio). In an extreme case, a man developed a rare lung disease called “popcorn lung”. The man, Wayne Watson claims he ate two bags of microwave popcorn every night for approximately ten years. Not only eating the popcorn, but also inhaling the steam from the just opened package when it was freshly out of the microwave. Now, surely these effects don’t happen to everyone who eats microwavable popcorn. In fact, Watson’s case is the only known case of popcorn lung outside of a factory in which the popcorn is made (CBS, 2007) However, it is concerning to those who eat the product often such as myself. This video details the dangers of microwavable popcorn.

Found at findersfree.com

For people who enjoy popcorn as much as I do, they might still want to enjoy the tasty treat without the adverse health effects. Fortunately there are many other ways you can enjoy popcorn, and not have to worry about your health. This is because the problems involved with microwave popcorn aren’t problems with the popcorn itself, but rather problems with the bag, and the chemicals added to that. Other ways you can consume popcorn are by buying bagged popcorn at the store, such as Herr’s popcorn. In this case you are able to see exactly what you are consuming on the nutrition label, without the worry of toxic chemicals lining the bag. Another alternative is to microwave popcorn is to make it yourself on the stove. There are some very good recipes for stove popped popcorn like this one I found (Trantham).

Overall, this should at least raise the awareness of frequent popcorn eaters. For the past month, being a lazy college student I probably have consumed at least on bag of PopSecret microwave popcorn a day. This is due to the fact that there has been a box of sixty bags sitting under my bed since the start of the semester, I am probably halfway through. I without a doubt will cut down my consumption of these due to these facts. I don’t however feel it is totally necessary to completely cut it out of my diet, but rather monitor the amount of times I consume it. Every once in a while is okay, but not at a once a day rate. I certainly however will never pick up a job at a microwave popcorn factory.

Who doesn’t want to be ripped? I mean come on gentleman, we all wish we looked like we were on steroids, without taking them. The reason why we don’t do it is because of it’s effects on the body. Although it can severely hurt your health, many individuals still use it. I have been a witness of people using steroids. No, it wasn’t a grown man, it was kids in my HIGH SCHOOL. Unfortunately, teenagers are using steroids at such a young age and it is certainly diminishing their health. From being around people who use it, it can make you go absolutely insane. Then I come to think of it, aren’t people insane just for using?

The effects

-kidney problems, liver damage, shrinkage of testicles(in men), baldness, increased risk of prostate cancer, stunted growth(teenagers).

Forget about the looks, worry about your health

Some people may never listen to these effects, just because they want to get jacked. Individuals are forgetting about their own health, and proceeding to do steroids. Yes, looking good at the beach this summer may help you out socially, but is it worth the risk you are putting your body into? I strongly disagree with the usage of steroids. Not only is it cheating, but it can end one’s life. According to Health Research Funding, about 85% of teenagers don’t learn the effects of steroids in school. Have I? No. My high school faded away from the talk of steroids rather than attacking it. I believe, we must discuss this in all high schools before students become sophomores. After a student’s freshman year, they start to follow the older kids. For me and my friends, that’s when we started to develop into the kids that were having more “fun”. We must teach people about this topic so that they don’t get involved in it.

In this day and age everyone has a cellphone.  We all text, call, facetime, and do everything else our phones have to offer.  They have integrated themselves into every aspect of our lives, even in class. The average person touches/checks their phone one million times a year, or 2,617 times a day.  We make calls, send texts, and send tweets without a second thought, but could it be slowly killing us?  New studies show that this might be true.

There have been several different studies on humans and rats, both drawing different conclusions.  The human study showed no growth in cancer or tumors in the time of the study, but the it was only performed over two years. Also several different types of bias were found in their data.  They found people overestimated, underestimated, and flat out lied about their true cell phone exposure.  The studies on rats have drawn different conclusions.  The early study showed no increase in tumors after exposure to the RF-EMF (the radiation put off by your cellphone).  The rats were either exposed to a high amount for short periods of time or lower amounts for long periods of time.  The next study exposed the rats to high amounts for long periods of time (9 hours a day).  This study had significant evidence that the exposure did indeed cause cancer.  There was a 3-4% change, which wouldn’t usually be that scientifically significant, but because of the rarity of the tumors, it is.

Like we have learned in class, correlation does not equal causality.  I have found this to be much like the smoking issue.  We simply do not know if cancer and phones are related at all.  Phones are relatively new, only having been used for about 10 years. We simply haven’t had enough time to see the true effect of phones and their radiation on our bodies.  Plus, the phone industry makes BILLIONS a year, why invest money in research when everything is working out for everyone just fine now?Experts suggest to limit your close contact with your phone.  For example, when on a phone call use headphones and keep your phone on a table or away from your body, or store your phone in a purse or backpack rather than your pocket or hand.Will we all come down with brain tumors in 10-20 years? Possibly. Is it likely? No, but why not do the simplest tasks to reduce your exposure and potentially add years onto your life.