Health Risks of E-cigarettes Emerge

AP Biology George Daskalakis

Current Event 10/30/16

Raloff, Janet. "Health Risks of E-cigarettes Emerge." Science News. N.p., 28 Oct. 2106 Web. 16 Oct. 2016.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/health-risks-e-cigarettes-emerge

        In this article it mainly told the readers on how the thought to be safe, electronic cigarettes, could be a health risk to the human body. E-cigarette, (electronic cigarette) were made a few years ago to help tobacco cigarette smokers, lose their addiction to the cigarettes. The give you a pleasure when in use, and this was thought to be a safe and pleasing pleasure when e-cigarettes were first released. However, recently scientists have discovered that when breathing in the “vapor” of the e-cigarette, you are taking in toxic chemicals into your body, and into your lungs. This includes the chemical carcinogens, which can make bacterial infections that are impossible to be cured by antibiotics. There are also other chemicals and solvents that enter your body while using e-cigarettes, some that may even cause cancer.

        This article is very important to society because it will prevent those from reading to using e-cigarettes as a solution to quit smoking. There are many healthier solutions for quitting, and electronic cigarettes are not one of them. I chose this article because I had heard about e-cigarettes in the past, and always thought of them as a great invention, and a positive solution to quit smoking. When I saw the title of this article I was thrown off guard and wanted to look into detail on how e-cigarettes could cause harm to the body.

        Some critiques that I have about this article are that it didn’t explain how an electronic cigarette worked. Some who would have clicked on this article would not have known how an e-cigarette worked and what it was even used for. The article just went straight into talking about all the chemicals and scientific stuff without much background information. Another critique I had was that it got more and more confusing as it went on. The beginning was very clear and I got the main idea, but as it went on I had to re-read a lot of information. All together it was a very interesting and informational article

New method of estimating biodiversity based on tree cover.

Sophia Dibbini October 30, 2016

Stanford University. "New method of estimating biodiversity based on tree cover." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 25 October 2016. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161025215703.htm>.

I read the article “New method of estimating biodiversity based on tree cover” by ScienceDaily and I found it was very interesting. In this article, scientists from Stanford University discovered a new way of calculating the biodiversity of an ecosystem: by trees. Historically, conservationists have protected species by placing large swaths of land into preserves and parks. However, only 13 percent of the world's land area is located in protected natural land. Most of the planet's species live in ecological gray areas, located within a gradient where one end is pristine wilderness, the other a parking lot. Protecting species in these gray areas is a challenge because there's no way to measure biodiversity without time-consuming field surveys. With no way to estimate biodiversity, making decisions for protecting habitat and species is difficult. Researchers at Stanford, through extensive observations, mapping and analysis, have now generated a method of estimating biodiversity based on tree cover. The results can be used by policymakers to help protect biodiversity and endangered species. "We've created a framework for counting something previously uncountable," said Chase D. Mendenhall, a postdoctoral research fellow in biology at Stanford. Over a series of three- to six-month field sessions across 10 years, Mendenhall's team of 15 researchers hiked across the hilly tropical agricultural landscape of Coto Brus, an area in Costa Rica. The scientists then plotted their plant and animal observations on detailed, fine-scale maps from Google Earth aerial photographs. When they analyzed the results, the importance of tree cover became clear. For four of the six species groups (plants, non-flying mammals, bats and birds), scientists saw a significant increase in the number of species with increasing tree cover visible on Google Earth maps. The analysis showed adding a single tree to pasture could boost, for example, the species number of bird species from near zero to 80. After this initial sharp increase, adding trees continues to add new species, but more gradually. As the stand of trees approaches 100 percent cover within the area of interest, endangered and at-risk species like wildcats and deep forest birds begin to appear. There are two general ways to value biodiversity: the total number of species and the number of at-risk or rare species. This study shows that planting single trees or regenerating large tracts of forest increases both values of biodiversity, both rely on adding more trees to the landscape. This article was very interesting and informative, and I enjoyed reading it.

This article is very relevant to today’s society because it takes a basic principle, biodiversity, and makes the readers look at it from another viewpoint. Scientists have studied biodiversity for a number of years, and having a new method to study it, using trees, can change ecology. These scientists are impacting communities because they are giving people a way to measure biodiversity, so they can place their own value on it. This model produced in the study can impact governments around the globe, like influencing policymaking. Along with securing clean water and removing carbon from the atmosphere, the ability of trees to support life could be included in planning decisions. "We know that planting trees along rivers protects water and sucks up atmospheric carbon. Now we're also showing how many species you can add in the process," Mendenhall said. Overall, this finding can greatly impact communities around the world and can further studies in all branches of science.

This article provided much information on this new study, and harbored many good and bad aspects. First, I liked how the author of the article gave a very descriptive background of the investigation the scientists at Stanford did to discover this new process, the details helped the reader understand the case thoroughly and made it more interesting in general. Also, a strength of this article was talking about how this discovery will lead to many new labs and tests, making it easier for people in communities and people working in governments. However, a weakness of this article is that the author did not clearly state how the scientists used these tree cover maps and on-the-ground observations to measure biodiversity, they simply stated that it could and gave a long description of the investigation. The article would have been better is the author discussed the process more in-depth. Even though this article had its weaknesses, it was very interesting and informative and I look forward to hearing about this new found process in the future.

How the Brown Rat Conquered New York City (and Every Other One, Too).

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/28/science/brown-rat-new-york-city.html

Zimmer, Carl. "How the Brown Rat Conquered New York City (and Every Other One, Too)." The New York Times. The New York Times, 27 Oct. 2016. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.

            For my current event review, I read the article "How the Brown Rat Conquered New York City (and Every Other One, Too”) by Carl Zimmer. As the title would suggest, the article covers the rise of brown rat populations in New York City – a subject pertinent to population ecology and ecological niches. The rats are a major in problem, as they are a source of contamination and spread harmful viruses and bacterial that can potential threaten other species with extinction. Generally, the species is a pest. According to the author, the scientific community has been unable to pinpoint the rise of the brown rate from a wild rodent to its current standing as an unwanted companion to humans across numerous cities. Recently, Dr. Jason Munshi-South of Fordham University has completed a genetic study on brown rats, and has found surprising results. The new study suggests that once brown rats settle a city, they repel additional species from inhabiting the area; this finding has significant implications for human health. In his study, Dr. Munshi-South obtained DNA samples from brown rats across the world and compared them with those native to New York City. In his findings, Dr. Munshi-South published the origins of the brown rat. The brown rat is native to northern China, and once fed on wild plants and small animals in the cold plains region. As farming became prevalent in China, the brown rats adapted and began to live on farms and villages. At some unknown point in time, the rats began to migrate initially to southeastern Asia according to the study. The rats ultimately began to spread in all directions across the globe, in slow and scattered waves. Their spread picked up speed as a result of European imperialism and expansion: the rats spread across the globe on European ships. One major finding of Dr. Munshi-South’s study was a lack of genetic mixing, which implies that there are few migrant rats arriving and reproducing as the result of some force – this force quite possibly being the territoriality of brown rats. The main theory derived from this research is that the first brown rats to arrive in a city rapidly fill it up, and eventually defend the city from later arriving brown rats.

            Though seemingly insignificant, this study revealed important information regarding population dynamics and the ecological role of brown rates. The main finding from the study – described in the last sentence of the first paragraph – suggests that brown rats in fact protect cities from the emergence of new diseases. As such, the preservation of brown rat populations in major cities may be of paramount importance. Furthermore, it is important to be able to analyze the population dynamics of a community and the spread of a community in order to be able to make predictions regarding the future of an area’s ecological composition. Furthermore, the ability to make accurate predictions regarding an area’s future ecological compositions allows scientists to better maintain ideal conditions for an area, as they are more aware of imminent threats to an area. More specifically, in some instances scientists may be able to prevent the harmful spread of a certain species in an area. Population ecology is an important branch of science that is all too often overlooked.

            The author wrote a generally well written article. The content was concise and to the point, and the author did not stray at all from the main focus. However, I thought that the article was lacking in depth. Zimmer failed to make connections to society and explain the importance of the study, instead opting to merely review the broader points of the study. Aside from this one flaw, however, Zimmer accomplished his task and left no questions unanswered.

Two Drugs For Adult Migraines May Not Help Children.

Saint Louis, Catherine. "Two Drugs For Adult Migraines May Not Help Children." New York

Times. N.p., 27 Oct. 2016. Web. 29 Oct. 2016.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/28/health/migraines-drugs-children.html>.

“Two Drugs For Adult Migraines May Not Help Children”

Sometimes, drugs used for adults do not help for the needs of children. The two most common frequently used drugs to prevent migraines in children are “more effective than a sugar spill”. Recently there has been a trial but it was stopped early since researchers said that the evidence was clear and that the antidepressant and epilepsy drug topiramate had been shown to prevent migraines in adults. Scott Powers, the lead author of the study and the director of the headache center at cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center said, “The medication did not perform as well as we thought it would, and the placebo performed better than you would think”. A migraine is an illness in the brain identified as major headache pain that can have symptoms of nausea, vomiting, and sensitivity to light and noise. This is common in children. The aim of this research was to find out which drug was more effective at reducing the number of headache days and which one helped children to stop missing school or social activities. Some of these drugs would prevent side effects on children as well. One child when taking the drug “topiramate” attempted suicide. Three others taking “amitriptyline” had mood changes and another told his mother he wanted to hurt himself. This lead to Dr. Powers and his colleagues questioning whether the benefits of the drugs outweighed its risks. They have data in adults that is effective but less convincing data in children and adolescents. Last year, a trial published discovered that taking amitriptyline and learning coping skills in a cognitive behavioral therapy program would more effectively reduce headache days for those suffering between ages 10 to 16.

Headaches amongst children and adults is a very common thing. People suffer from them all of the time and it is not rare. The fact that they found out that certain migraine drugs for children only work on adults is very beneficial to society. All of this time, children could have been taking drugs to cope with their symptoms and not understand why it was not working. This could help advance children’s medicine. The trial that they did was very smart. Luckily, through this, they realized that some of these drugs had bad side effects and could risk a child’s life and have affect on their brain and their emotions creating mood sings and desires for suicide. Today, because of this children in the near future could have pain killers that would work well for them and not only for adults. This could also help change society’s medical creations on pain killers and help people advance it.

I thought that the author did a very good job writing this article. I liked how she incorporate statistics and data as well as quotes from the doctors who were working on this trial. I think that the author could have incorporated more quotes from those researching the different drugs and how to improve them and to see if there were different point of view on this research. I think that some of the words that she used were a little confusing as well and could have defined them but overall I think that this was a very interesting article.

10 Infant Deaths May Be Related to Teething Remedies, F.D.A. Says

Louis, Catherine Saint. "10 Infant Deaths May Be Related to Teething Remedies, F.D.A. Says." The New York Times. N.p., 18 Oct. 2016. Web. 20 Oct. 2016. <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/19/health/teething-remedies-infant-deaths.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fhealth&action=click&contentCollection=health®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=8&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0>.

The article that I read discusses ten recent infant deaths that may be linked to homeopathic teething objects. Many reports have been sent into the food and drug administration stating that after giving their child homeopathic teething products, seizures, difficulty breathing, lethargy, excessive sleepiness, muscle weakness and agitation occurred. This past month, the agency warned consumers to get rid of, and stop buying homeopathic teething products. The agency does not have the power to recall these products. Hyland, the company that produces these teething products, stated that their customers can choose whether or not to listen to the agency, but they are not going to recall their products. Many parents fear that their child will not be able to sleep without the homeopathic teething products, so they continue to buy them. Many also do not understand the real harm that the products could do to their child, since no one they know has encountered this problem. This article should open the eyes of parents to what they could potentially be harming their children with. It is important for parents to be extremely careful with what they give to their children, especially things that they put in their mouths.

This article did a very good job stating the facts and stating the point of the article clearly and concisely. It was easy for someone who knows nothing about homeopathic teething products to read and understand, fully, the purpose of the article. The author did a good job stating that the investigation is ongoing and that more information will be given in the future when more is discovered on the topic, sothe reader is not left confused. I would have liked to read about why the F.D.A. has not banned the products since they have the ability to and the products seem to be something that they would ban. The author also could have included more statistics to make her point clearer and more credible. Overall this article was very informative and helped me understand more about an important topic that I knew nothing about before.

Barack Obama: America Will Take the Giant Leap to Mars

Allison Barker

Current Event Review

October 21, 2016

Obama, Barack. "Barack Obama: America Will Take the Giant Leap to Mars."CNN. Cable News

Network, 11 Oct. 2016. Web. 19 Oct. 2016. <http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/11/opinions/america-will-take-giant-leap-to-mars-barack-obama/index.html>.

The article that I read, “Barack Obama: America Will Take the Giant Leap to Mars,” was a statement by President Obama about new plans to send Americans to Mars in the coming years. In his writing, Obama first recounted his vast respect for the Space Program and reminded the American people about his first actions to aid the Space Program in his first years as president. Obama recounted to the public NASA’s discovery of flowing water on Mars and evidence of ice on one of Jupiter’s moons, further emphasizing the importance of the US Space Program. He also described the growth of US companies’ role in space development, with more than a third of the global commercial launch market owned by private businesses. Obama then announced a meeting of American scientists in Pittsburgh to figure out their goal of sending Americans to Mars by the 2030s and returning them to Earth, with the end goal being leaving the astronauts up there for a long time. Private businesses, he stressed, will play an important role in achieving this goal. Scientists are also working to build habitats that can sustain and transport astronauts on long-duration missions in deep space, which will aid in the journey to Mars.

This news has large implications for American society. One large impact is that we will be attempting to colonize Mars in the near future. That is a big step forward. This means that a lot of things can be done to improve life on Earth, and we will have more space to go to if Earth ever becomes uninhabitable. Further, privately owned companies are playing an increasingly large role in the space program as time passes. As Obama stated, in order for this plan to work, scientists will have to work in collaboration with private businesses instead of disregarding them, as they had in the past.

I enjoyed that the article covered a wide range of issues regarding the space program, and I liked that it was a statement by President Obama. However, I thought that the article would have benefited from an explanatory blurb by a journalist of what Obama was talking about and the significance of this news. I also did not like that the article did not talk that much about the plan to go to Mars, which was the title of the article. Overall, though, I thought the article was an informative and hopeful look at the possibilities that space discovery has to offer.

Nations, Fighting Powerful Refrigerant That Warms Planet, Reach Landmark Deal

Isabel Caton October 21, 2016

Current Event AP Bio D block

Davenport, Coral. "Nations, Fighting Powerful Refrigerant That Warms Planet, Reach Landmark Deal." The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Oct. 2016. Web. 20 Oct. 2016.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/15/world/africa/kigali-deal-hfc-air-conditioners.html

In this article “Nations, Fighting Powerful Refrigerant That Warms Planet, Reach Landmark Deal” by Coral Davenport, she talks about the meeting on Saturday in Kigali Rwanda, in which negotiators from more than 170 different countries reached a legally binding accord to counter climate change by cutting the worldwide use of a powerful planet-warming chemical that is used in air-conditioners and refrigerators. This talk in Kigali was similar to the climate change accord forged in Paris last year, which was an agreement that included pledges by nearly every country to cut emissions of heat-trapping carbon dioxide from the fossil fuels that power vehicles, electric plants and factories. Instead the new Kigali deal has a single target: chemical coolants called hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, which are used in air-conditioners and refrigerators.  HFCs are only a small percentage of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere but they function as a supercharged greenhouse gas, with 1,000 times the heat-trapping potency of carbon dioxide. Secretary of State John Kerry said, “It is likely the single most important step we could take at this moment to limit the warming of our planet and limit the warming for generations to come.” This Kigali deal is a compromise between rich nations and poorer, hotter ones.  There was an agreement by the rich countries that they would help finance the transition of poor countries to the costlier replacement products. The Kigali deal includes specific targets and timetables to replace HFCs with more planet-friendly alternatives. Given the heat-trapping power of HFCs, scientists say “the Kigali accord will stave off an increase of atmospheric temperatures of nearly one degree fahrenheit.” That would be a major step toward “averting an atmospheric temperature increase of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit”, the point at which many experts the the world will be locked into a future of rise sea levels, severe droughts and flooding, widespread food and water shortages, and more powerful hurricanes.

Greenhouse gases are important to absorb some of the energy and radiate it back towards the surface, and the rest is radiated into space. These play an important role in keeping the Earth’s surface warm but hydrofluorocarbons have 1,000 times the heat-trapping potency of carbon dioxide. Which makes them increases the global temperature and is a major gas associated with climate change. Overall this deal is expected to lead to the reduction of 70 billion tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which is two times the carbon pollution produced annually by the entire world. The final deal will divide the world economy into three tracks. The richest countries, including the United States and the European Union, will freeze the production and consumption of HFCs by 2018, reducing them to about 15 perfect of 2012 levels by 2036. A small group of the world’s hottest countries will have the most lenient schedule, freezing HFC use by 2028 and reducing it to 15 percent of 2025 levels by 2047. This will have a big impact on the generations to come in the future and will slow climate change.

This article was really helpful in understanding what happened in this meeting and also comparing this new deal to the one in Paris a few years ago. The author included many quotes from different people and countries who attended the meeting, which was helpful to understand how the countries feel about this new deal and how they are going to fix the issue and switch from HFCs to a new environmentally friendly gas. The author switched back and forth between the meeting in Kigali and meetings and other compromises in the past, which was helpful for understanding background but also confusing at times. But overall this article was very interesting and I would like to learn more about it once the situation is fixed in the future.

"Kaakutja, Perhaps the First Known Boomerang Victim" Report

St. Fleur, Nicholas "Kaakutja, Perhaps the First Known Boomerang Victim." New York Times n.d. Kaakutja, Perhaps the First Known Boomerang Victim - The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 17 Oct. 2016. Web. 17 Oct. 2016. 

<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/science/first-boomerang-victim-australia.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront>.

“Kaakutja, Perhaps the First Known Boomerang Victim” by Nicholas St. Fleur describes a skeleton found in Australia’s Toorale National Park in 2014 and how scientists concluded that he was killed by a fighting boomerang or club. The skeleton was named Kaakutja by the people who discovered him, and they sought out Michael Westaway, a paleontologist, to help excavate the skeleton. Westaway and his team performed optical analysis tests on sand grains embedded in the skull and sediment from the pit to determine the last time that the sediments were exposed to light. The results indicated that Kaakutja’s burial occurred between 1305 and 1525, which showed that the killing was probably committed by another aboriginal person because Europeans had not yet arrived in that area by 1525. From the unusual and extensive trauma on the bones of Kaakutja, the scientists concluded that he was probably killed using the Lil-lil, a type of club, or the Wonna, a fighting boomerang. As a result of the scientists’ examinations and conclusions, Kaakutja has been identified as perhaps the earliest victim of a boomerang attack.

The trauma sustained by the skeleton was unlike any evers seen in Australia’s archaeological history. “This research is important because it increases our ability to identify the types of wounds caused by the fighting tools of Aboriginal people in the past,” said Claire Smith, an archaeologist. In addition to this, the discovery of the skeleton can provide clues to the fighting styles and burial rituals of the Australian aboriginal people of that time.

The New York Times published article was well-written and provided an excellent summary of the discovery of the skeleton and a detailed explanation of how the scientists’ reached their conclusion. Nicholas St. Fleur also did a good job of creating an emotional side to this article describing the moving final burial of Kaakutja by the aboriginal community and the man who discovered him. I also loved how the author included detailed and labeled photos which made it easier to visualize the trauma. The major problem with “Kaakutja, Perhaps the First Known Boomerang Victim” is that it lacked details that could have provided background and color to the article. This article could have been improved if St. Fleur included more details related to the culture of the aboriginal people and how that may have influenced the murder or the way that it was carried out. He also could have included more quotes from anthropologists or experts who are well-versed in the techniques and technologies that were used to reach the scientists’ conclusions.

I’m a Doctor. If I Drop Food on the Kitchen Floor, I Still Eat It

Carroll, Aaron E., Dr. "I’m a Doctor. If I Drop Food on the Kitchen Floor, I Still Eat It." The New York Times. The Upshot, 10 Oct. 2016. Web. 12 Oct. 2016. <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/upshot/im-a-doctor-if-i-drop-food-on-the-kitchen-floor-i-still-eat-it.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fhealth&action=click&contentCollection=health®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=8&pgtype=sectionfront>.

The article I read by Aaron E. Keller, addresses the recent study which disproves the popular “five-second rule”. This piece is written from the perspective of a doctor, as he explains the recent findings which show that floors, in comparison to other items and places, really aren’t that dirty after all. The counter and handles in kitchens actually contain many more germs per square inch than the floor, and this is true throughout the house. Even in bathrooms, the counter, faucet handle, and more contain more bacteria than the floor or even the toilet seat. The author discusses how this common misconception has led to a lot of misplaced worry. We handle dollar bills, cell phones, atm buttons, gas pumps, and other public things that have a staggering number of bacteria per square inch. In fact, according to the article “One study, for instance, found that about 95 percent of mobile phones carried by health care workers were contaminated with nosocomial bacteria. Of those contaminated with staph aureus, more than half were contaminated with methicillin resistant bacteria (MRSA).” People worry about dropping a bit of food on the floor for more than 5 seconds, yet we constantly use our cell phones without ever cleaning them, and accept food handled by others with no knowledge as to if its been contaminated. Also the idea that food will be clean as long as it’s only 5 seconds has no validity either. Even the quickest touch will have the same effect, but it’s nothing to worry about in the scheme of things. Considering the filthy objects we handle daily with no problem, we shouldn’t be fussing over even cleaner things touching our food.

The article “I’m a Doctor. If I Drop Food on the Kitchen Floor, I Still Eat It.” is extremely relevant to society. This “five-second rule” is known by a great majority of the population and the amount of worry surrounded around dirty floors or toilet seats, has in fact, been in a way uncalled for. It’s important for people to be aware of the cleanliness of these daily, household, and public items. Most of society never cleans their phones or money, wipes down their keyboards, or washes their handles, when these things are actual contaminated with the most bacteria. Staying healthy is directly connected to washing your hands and such, so it is relevant and important for people to be educated on what poses the greatest threat to their wellness. Also, it is good to assure people that they don't need to worry or stress over little things like the five second rule. The author explains the strength of our immune system and our ability to fight off germs. We live on our cell phones every day which are covered in different bacteria, yet we never clean them and don't even consider the effects. But people need to recognize that we're still fine despite that, and a chip laying on the floor for a couple seconds isn't going to kill you.  

Overall I felt Keller did a very good job with this article. He kep the language and tone personable throughout and easy to understand. Considering the information applicability to so many people the basic, welcoming level of writing is the right choice. The author also includes a lot of numbers and data which helps to increase this pieces credibility and convince the reader more easily. This article also was good about addressing the fact that one still needs to wash their hands and be cognizant of harmful germs, but that there are other alternatives to cleaning every little things or being overly cautious. The only things I found missing from this piece was acknowledging the fact and clarifying that not all floors are clean and can be eaten off of when u drop somethings. In this sense, I found that some of Keller’s points were a little bit too generalized which could lead to some misinterpretations by other people. If he just went and tightened a few things up and clarified a couple ideas, this would be an even stronger article.