Image

Is Your Gel Manicure Increasing Your Risk for Cancer?

Not long ago, I was a nail biter. It was a nasty nervous habit: I would do it in class, before a test and when I was bored. This summer I decided that it was actually time to stop and once I grew some semblance of nails I decided to get a gel manicure. Many people prefer gel polish over normal polish because its stronger, shinier and lasts two weeks without chipping. But there may be health risks associated with this polish that consumers are failing to consider.

Gel Nails-Px Here

Conventional nail polish is made of a single polymer, usually nitrocellulose, dissolved in a solvent like ethyl acetate.  When the nail polish is applied, the solvent evaporates, causing the nitrocellulose to form a film on the nail. Gel polish contains a monomer called methacrylate and radical initiators like benzyl peroxide.  Unlike normal polishes, gel polish must be applied and cured with ultraviolet light. The monomers and intiators mix under the UV light, causing the radical initiators gain energy and activate the polymerization process. This polymerization gives gel polish its characteristic hard and shiny look. This processes however, requires up to 8 minutes of exposure to UV rays which leads to the question, can gel manicures cause skin cancer?

Methacrylate-Wikimedia Commons

One study performed by the JAMA Dermatology group in 2014 tackled this question by testing the intensity of different salon UV lamps, evaluating the percentage of UV-A rays emitted. UV-A rays have a wavelength of 320-400nm and penetrates deeper into the skin, causing photoaging and contributing to all forms of skin cancer.The JAMA study randomly sampled seventeen UV-lights from actual salons, which caused them to notice large differences in the immersion of UV light across samples. They concluded that it would only take twelve visits to the salon for DNA damage to occur, increasing one’s risk for skin cancer. For regulars, one could reach this limit in almost 6 months. The study also noted that they standardized their measurements for 8 minutes of exposure per manicure, which may not be the case for many salons where they would rather over cure than under cure. Lastly, UV-A emitted from nail lamps are at least four times stronger than UV-A emitted from the sun which also puts customers more at risk.

Light Spectrum-Wikimedia Commons

In contrast, Paolo Boffetta, the director of cancer prevention at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York stated that being exposed to such a low dose of UV-A for such a short time period, on such a small scale is not something to worry about.  He argued that there is much more risk associated with going outside on a sunny day, especially since gel manicures only expose about 50-60% of the hand. Additionally, those over age 30 are less likely to be affected by the exposure because mitosis is happening less than in adolescence, thereby having less DNA damage accumulating over time.

Whether you believe that this exposure is enough to cause cancer or not, an easy way to protect yourself is to either wear fingerless gloves during the curing process or apply broad spectrum sunscreen. I personally believe that any direct exposure to UV light can put you more at risk for developing skin cancer, no matter how small the amount. Even though gel polish has helped me kick my habit of nail biting, I will definitely be taking a break from it soon!

-Priya

To Vape or Not to Vape?

One of the main causes of disease and death in the United States is smoking cigarettes, which kills 480,000 people per year. Nicotine is the main addictive part of cigarettes and makes users feel satisfied and relaxed. Other parts of cigarettes, such as tobacco, contribute to toxic smoke from cigarettes; breathing in toxic smoke is tremendously harmful. So, alternative nicotine delivery systems were developed to be less harmful while still letting users feel nicotine effects. Some examples of alternatives are nicotine gum, nicotine patches and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). Risks and benefits of e-cigarettes are quite debatable.

Figure 1. Photo of an alternative nicotine delivery system, patches. Photo from WikiMedia Commons.

The effects of inhaling e-cigarette smoke, known as vaping, is still being researched. An article published earlier this year supports vaping as a solution for the decrease of smoking tobacco cigarettes. The study by Zhuang et al. was a longitudinal study, which observes the same people over time. Zhuang et al. surveyed more than 2000 smokers in the USA in 2012, then again in 2014. They found that smokers trying to quit were more likely to be successful using e-cigarettes than using an FDA-approved drug treatment.

Within the same study, quitting smoking was not linked to short-term use of e-cigarettes. Overall, long-term use of e-cigarettes reduces tobacco smoking. Reducing tobacco smoking can slow the rate of disease caused by smoking.

Figure 2. Cigarette smoke drifting through the air. Photo from WikiMedia Commons.

Risks of e-cigarette use are also being studied. In a 2017 study of more than 300 12th graders surveyed in 2014 and again in 2015, Miech et al. found vaping to increase the likelihood of smoking cigarettes in the future. Youth who have never smoked but have vaped recently were 4 times more likely to also have smoked a cigarette within the past year.

The youth were also surveyed on their perception of cigarettes. Those who answered smoking is a “great risk” in 2014 and have vaped recently were found to be 4 times more likely to change their answer to smoking is less risky. E-cigarettes are concluded to pose as a risk for smoking among youth that needs to be restricted.

I think that vaping is acceptable, as long as the goal is to be healthier and not for fun. The benefits of decreasing actual disease and death caused by smoking outweigh the probable risk of vaping as a gateway to cigarette smoking. The best choice would be fully quit nicotine because addictions can impact finances and lifestyles negatively.

Figure 3. Signage prohibiting smoking and vaping at an establishment. Photo from WikiMedia Commons.

 

Alyssa Hui

Vegetarians Versus Meat-Eaters

Fun fact about myself: I used to be vegetarian, specifically lactoovovegetarian. Meaning, I still ate dairy products and eggs. I’m not a vegetarian anymore, but I try to avoid eating meat. One thing my mother would always say to me while I was vegetarian was that I would get a disease because, in her eyes, I wasn’t getting enough protein.

There are other vegetarian sources of protein such as chickpeas. I just ate more of these protein sources than usual. If I stayed vegetarian, would I get a disease?

A study published by Dr. Francesca Crowe, Dr. Paul Appleby, Dr. Ruth Travis, and Dr. Timothy Key in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2013 examined the association of a vegetarian diet with the risk of dying of cardiovascular disease such as ischemic heart disease.

Ischemic heart disease is a disease of reduced blood supply to the heart. Blockages or narrowing of the arteries can cause it.

Clogged Heart Artery
By: Scientific Animations
CC BY-SA 4.0

The lipid profiles and blood pressures of 44,561 men and women from England and Scotland were analyzed and matched to ischemic heart disease cases. The researches found that vegetarians had a lower mean BMI (Body Mass Index), non-HDL cholesterol concentration (bad cholesterol), and systolic blood pressure (pressure in your blood vessels when your heart beats) than non-vegetarians.

One might think that since vegetarians had a lower BMI, this may have been a contributing factor to the risk of ischemic heart disease. However, after adjusting for BMI, the researchers found that vegetarians had a 32% lower risk of ischemic heart disease than non-vegetarians. This result also did not differ by sex, age, BMI, or other health risk factors.

You might be debating with yourself on whether you should start eating grass for lunch. Yes, vegetarians are at a lower risk of ischemic heart disease, most likely because of lower non-HDL cholesterol and systolic blood pressure levels. But what about other diseases, such as cancer? Chicken is my favourite type of meat and I would hate to have to stop eating it.

Another study published in 1999 in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition by Dr. Timothy Key et al. showed that there was no significant difference between vegetarians and non-vegetarians when it came to the mortality from numerous cancers. The only difference between vegetarians and non-vegetarians was the risk for cardiovascular disease. The study also found that this risk was 34% lower in people who ate fish but not meat and in lactoovovegetarians. Thus, a person can still eat a type of meat and have a lower risk of heart disease.

Vegetarian Diet
From: pxhere

So what does all this mean? It means that living a vegetarian diet will lower your risk of cardiovascular diseases, such as ischemic heart disease. However, it is not necessary to go full blown vegetarian to avoid disease such as cancer.

I’m going to stick with what I’m doing and eat meat seldom.

Gale Ladua

Eliminate emission = Saving Human life

India and China are the countries with the largest number of people in the world. There are about 2.7 billion people living in these two countries which are more than one-third of the whole population in the whole world.  As shown below, the population of China and India has almost 40% of people on earth.

The air pollution from these two countries is high as well mainly because of their large population with ranked 4th in China and 5th in India. As shown on this webpage. ,  The real-time recorded air pollution data implies that India and China have serious air pollution.

Credit from @National Park Service source

Recently, a study shows that if we are able to eliminate the pollutants emission of India and China, about 15 million years of life in China and 11 million years of life in India can be saved.  Although there are plenty of articles talking about the hazard effect of particulate matter(AKA PM2.5) to human. However, there is no essay has quantified the impact of particulate matter in a specific region and an operatable strategy of solving this problem.

In this study, the researchers from Harvard calculated the change in mortality and life expectancy in each province in China and India with the help of state-of-the-art atmospheric chemistry modeling. The result shows that Shandong, Henan, and Sichuan provinces in China, and Uttar Pradesh state in India needs to replace coal-fired powerplant into less pollutant power generating technologies like wind or water power generation.

With this study, we can start to identify all the region with high pollutant due to coal-fired power plants all over the world and change them into a more clean and renewable energy source. As the result, the world would be a better place without pollutant from coal-fired power plants.

 

You spend more time on social media when you feel more stressed

Have you ever notice that you don’t want to study when you feel stressed and spend time on the social media platform? Did you ever think of why this happens, and why the vicious circle shows up?

image from https://www.project-meditation.org/how-to-stop-being-stressed-out/

I was curious about this behavior and conducted a research in my first year because, at that time when I feel stressed, I always turned to social media and don’t want to study. I investigated 111 of my classmate and collected a data (graph 1) that showed the more stress they have, the more time they spend on social media platforms.

Graph 1. the number of participants vs. the stress level and the hours spending on social media platforms

credit to the author

The behavior happened may because they began to have an awareness of doing well in the university and tried to adapt the academic life between high school and university. When students feel more stress, spending time on social media is likely to be a way to escape from their study and those things to adapt. The vicious circle might show up when they spent less time on study and got a bad grade and start a new escape.

Eddy suggested that spending time on the social network could decrease students’ stress level. The students probably have the subconscious. If they are unaware of the stress which leads them to spend less time on study, their futures might be ruined.

In addition, students might have bad time management between spending on social media and academic study. They spend more time on the platform instead of study, resulting in an increase in stress level because they might start to worry about they can’t finish their assignment on time or other things relative to study. Indeed, Mustafa Bal conducted research to show that students started to spend a long time on social media without consciousness, wasting their valuable time.

A good way to solve this problem is trying to reduce the stress level so that the time spending on social media would decrease. Because the stress may indirectly affect their study. Students could talk to their friends, parents and even counselors.

It is my fourth year at the university, I get better time management skills and control the stress level better. And now, I don’t feel that stressed and don’t spend a lot of time on social media platforms.

–Catherine Wu

Is a bowl of soup really worth a shark’s life?

Figure 1: shark fin soup (Source: Wikimedia Commons [accessed October 29, 2018])

Have you ever tried shark fin soup? A lot of people say it is very tasty but you know what, killing sharks for some delicacy? That does not really sound appetizing to me. Shark fin trade is the most common cause of shark population decline throughout the years.  It is no surprise that sharks are now considered endangered and we need to do something as soon as possible.

Sharks are at top of the food chain and are considered “Kings of the Ocean”. They help control growing populations of invasive and potentially harmful species. Dr. Stuart Sandin of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and his colleagues concluded that the decline in shark population may result in an ecological cascade that disrupts the marine food chain.

Sharks are natural predators but what makes them so important? They maintain the species below them in the food chain. Their predatory behavior attribute to the movements of different preys allowing variation of diet in the ocean. The decrease in shark population also resulted in the decline in seagrass and coral reefs, affecting many local fisheries.

Sharks mostly feed on rays. According to a North Carolina study, the decline in shark population increased the ray population. This resulted in a higher demand for scallops. The consumption of all available bay scallops forced the rays to find other bivalves for food. Local fisheries were forced to close as supply fails to meet  demand.

Dr. Julia Baum and her colleagues were collecting data on swordfish and tuna from the United States open-ocean longline fleet. While conducting their study, they often caught sharks and recorded the data into their paper: ‘Collapse and Conservation of Shark Populations in the Northwest Atlantic’. This paper is cited more than 500 times and it summarizes the percentage decline of different shark populations in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean since the 1950s. This is shown on the table below:

Figure 2: Graph showing relative percent decline of shark populations in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean (Figure by Jolean Endique; Data source: Collapse and Conservation of Shark Populations in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean by Dr. Julia Baum and her colleagues [accessed October 29, 2018])

According to the data presented, hammerhead sharks turn out to be the most vulnerable and is declining most rapidly than the other types.

[Note: The following image may be of sensitive content]

This image shows dead bodies of finless sharks laying across the ocean floor. Figure 3: Image showing dead finless shark bodies laying across the ocean floor (Source: The Oceana Youtube Channel)

Who would leave these “Kings” lifeless at the bottom of the ocean? All this for a 100-dollar bowl of soup? Where did justice for these animals go? Shark fin soups must not be disguised as “fish wing soup” to raise awareness on shark fin trade. We need to start considering the impacts of harming these wonderful creatures. Those who are responsible for such cruel acts must realize that $100 is not worth a shark’s life. Shark fin trade must be officially banned for the sake of our marine ecosystem. Stricter fishing policies must be urgently implemented. Knowledge on shark fin trade must be disseminated especially to those who are uninformed.

 

 

 

Farming and Climate: Organic or Bust?

I previously mentioned that I have little knowledge of the ocean as I grew up in the Prairies. My understanding of crop science and farming is, however, probably more extensive than the average person’s. Despite this, my grandparents only taught me about conventional farming.

Photo of my grandparent’s farm in Sturgeon County, Alberta. Photo from Samantha Kluthe

Organic farming is gaining more and more popularity with consumers. USA Today reports that the organic food sales hit $43 billion in 2016. It’s important to be aware of organic farming benefits with respect to our global energy crisis. I am interested in how organic farming differs to conventional methods in terms of energy consumption, and if it is a viable alternative in meeting the global food demand.

Whole Foods Market in Union Square. Whole Foods has a large influence in the organic food market. Photo from Aspersions.

I found a study  on the energy efficiency of organic and conventional crop production with respect to two crop rotations. Researchers from the Universities of Manitoba and Saskatchewan discovered a significant interaction between rotation and management systems with respect to efficiency (output energy/input energy). Organic farming methods paired with integrated crop rotations are the most energy efficient. The energy input was 50% less in organic methods compared to conventional farming.

Crop rotation is the method by which farmers switch the type of crop they are growing on the same section of land every year. It seems counterintuitive to not always plant the crop with the highest selling price, but it leaves farmers with higher long-term yields. Although not as valuable, incorporating a legume-based field allows farmers to decrease their chemical fertilizer usage as nitrogen is naturally fixed. Weeds and insects are also discouraged as each new crop disrupts their life cycles and comes with its own biological variation.

The study took data from twelve years of farming with combinations of grain-based rotation and integrated rotation with conventional and organic styles of management. Grain-based rotations used wheat, peas and wheat flax (WPWF) as crops. Wheat alfalfa and alfalfa flax (WAAF) were the crops of the integrated rotation.

Figure 1. The total and output energy from 4 different farming styles. WPWF: Grain-based rotation, WAAF: Integrated rotation, C: conventional production, O: organic production. Data is from Hoeppner et. al (2006). Figure created by Elizabeth Porter.

Crop management and rotation style affect energy output independently. Figure 1 shows that integrated crop rotation produces a much larger output than grain-based. The alfalfa is able to fixate nitrogen, consequently suppressing weeds. The large difference in output energy is also because the crop types in WPWF and WAAF result in seeds and whole plants, respectively.

Figure 1 shows that the energy input is higher for conventional farming, regardless of crop rotation. This is because of the addition of fertilizer and pesticide to fields which increases fuel and machinery use.

The researchers concluded that organic farming is a much more energy efficient management system than conventional. It seems that it should be the direction that agriculture should step towards to prepare for the future energy crisis. However, the energy output is also higher for conventional style crops (Figure 1). It seems unlikely that organic farming will be able to keep food needs met, especially with the ever-rising global population.

From this, I am confident that scientists are headed in the right direction, but am still wary about spending 47% more on organic foods….

Guardians of the Upper Realm: Characteristics of Fighter Pilots

Let’s go back in time and reminisce about the 80’s: when kids watched Top Gun and dreamed of becoming fighter pilots. Honestly, Tom Cruise looked so cool in his jumpsuit and aviators (he really did..)

My 16 year old Dad decided he too would become a fighter pilot because of that movie. He studied aeronautical engineering and entered fighter pilot school in the Philippines. Although, he never finished because he decided to marry my Mom (another love story on its own). Nowadays, he designs and repairs planes, but no longer flies.

It made me think… what does it take to become a fighter pilot? How does the Air Force decide who gets to fly a multibillion dollar jet armed with weapons capable of thermonuclear destruction?

In fact, I don’t know how my Dad passed selection! As a teenager, he loved getting into fights and craved reckless activities. Why would you put someone like that in a fighter jet? I don’t think someone like that should operate such an advanced piece of military hardware!

An F-16 Fighting Falcon flies a mission in the skies near Iraq.(U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Cherie A. Thurlby)

Military leaders and flight surgeons check for specific cognitive abilities that would help students with flying in a high-stress environment.  Therefore, personality tests serve an essential role in assessing pilot candidates.

To my surprise, a study shows that many fighter pilots exhibit extraverted, conscientious and open-minded behaviour.

Yeah… that sounds exactly like my Dad, he can’t stop talking!

The researchers determined that this behaviour actually helps pilots with their challenging and high risk occupation.

Graph illustrates NEO-PI-R scores of USAF pilots vs. General population. Figure by Roj Lising. Data source: https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:180418/datastream/PDF/view

NEO-PI-R serves as a psychological test that identifies an individual’s Big Five personality traits (openness to new experiences, conscientiousness, extraversion,  agreeableness and neuroticism). Data from the graph shows that fighter pilots when compared to the general public, display more extroverted, open-minded and conscientious (achievement striving) behaviour! However, fighter pilots exhibit less neurotic (anxious) and agreeable behaviour ( hard-headed).

In summary, fighter pilots get along with others, but still enjoy heated conversations (friendly, of course). They seek a thrilling, dangerous and fast-paced life (they fly jets that go faster than the speed of sound). They tolerate stress better than the general population (having a nervous breakdown shouldn’t happen) and have a high opinion of themselves (a must).

I guess my Dad really did embody a great candidate. His laid-back attitude would have certainly helped during tense moments (WARNING, missile lock!). His aggressiveness would have definitely given him an edge in dog fights (aerial battles between pilots).

Would my Mom let me become a fighter pilot?

Probably not.

 

Women in Science: From Minority to Nobel Prize

Earlier in October, Nobel Prize Committee announced the list of 2018 winners in all categories, including two women in the fields of chemistry and physics. Do you find this surprising? Well… it is… this is the first time in the history of the award that two women are among the winners of these two categories in the same year.

2018 is the first year in the history of Nobel Prize that two women are among the winners in chemistry and physics. Image from: Shutterstock

Since 1901 when the first Nobel Prizes in chemistry and physics were awarded, 177 people have had the honours to receive the most prestigious award in chemistry. Frances. H Arnold is only the fifth woman. Even more surprising, Donna Strickland is only the third woman out of a total of 207 Nobel Prize winners in physics.

As shown the graph below, we can easily see this trend in all science-related categories of the Nobel Prize.

Does this tell us something about the number of women in of science in general? Or maybe at least the number of women in science who have been successful enough to receive a Nobel Prize?

Relative percentages of men and women winners of Nobel Prize in Chemistry, Physics, Physiology and Medicine, and Economics. Data from: areppim

I think this trend can be explained by the fact that in the 20thcentury women in general have been the minority in all fields of science. Just take a look at the old photos of the faculty members and graduates of chemistry and physics departments hanging from the walls of chemistry and physics buildings at UBC! Women are in absolute minority! I know… this may not be the most precise and scientific evidence, but it gives us a better idea of the men and women active in these fields back then. So, it is understandable that when there were not as many women graduates in these fields in the 70’s and 80’s, there would not be a high number of women prize winners now.

But again, using my scientific method of looking at more recent photos of chemistry and physics faculty members and graduates, I am glad to say that the trend has been changing. Nowadays, we see more women active in all areas of science pursuing their dreams.

Strong successful women such as Dr. Arnold and Dr. Strickland are good motivations for all women in science. Dr. Arnold who is a professor of chemical engineering, bioengineering and biochemistry at the California Institute of technology in a news conference at Caltech predicted that “a steady stream” of future Nobel prizes in chemistry would be given to women. She also added “as long as we encourage everyone — it doesn’t matter the color, gender; everyone who wants to do science, we encourage them to do it — we are going to see Nobel Prizes coming from all these different groups. Women will be very successful.”

Smoking Marijuana Impairs Driving for At Least Five Hours

Common advice for people who wish to drive after drinking alcohol is that you should wait one hour for every drink that you had.* For example, if you had 5 drinks, you should wait for 5 hours after your last drink, then you may be safe to drive. The tip is useful for anyone who wishes to drive home after going out to drink. For young adults who use cannabis, the tip might as well be “don’t even think about driving after having a smoke,” since a small dosage can affect your ability to drive 5 hours later.

A joint being smoked. (Chmee2 on Wikimedia Commons)

In a study published this month at CMAJ Open lead by Dr. Tatiana Ogourtsova at McGill University, it was found that participants’ ability to drive was negatively affected even five hours after inhaling the equivalent of one-fifth of a usual joint.

Participants were asked to take a 0.1 gram dose of cannabis. Five hours later, the participants were impaired on complex tasks and felt their driving ability and safety were lowered. However, the participants were able to complete simple tasks similarly to when they were sober. Impairment was found to be the worst three hours after taking the cannabis.

In the study, the 45 participants were aged 18-24 (the age range with the highest percentage of marijuana users in Canada) and identified as recreational cannabis users.

Usage of Marijuana by Canadians of Varying Age and Sex Groups in 2015 (Data from Statistics Canada)

The participants were tested on 4 different days over a 4-6-week period. On those days, they were tested 1, 3, or 5 hours after taking a standardized dose of 0.1 grams of cannabis, or they were tested after taking no cannabis. On days where the participants took the cannabis, they were also tested ten minutes after taking the cannabis.

Ten minutes after taking the drug, participants were asked questions about how they felt about their driving ability and safety as well as how they felt about the effect of the cannabis.

After the wait time of 1, 3, or 5 hours, the participants completed two driving-related tasks, with the two tasks being done in random order. One task was a driving simulation, and the other task asked the participant to identify an object as a car or a truck under three levels of distraction: no distraction, peripheral distraction, and on-screen distraction.

On the day when the participant took no cannabis, the tests were done immediately.

“The message is simple. If you consume, don’t drive. Find another way home or stay where you are,” said Jeff Walker, chief strategy officer for the Canadian Automobile Association (CAA), the organization that funded this study.

Personally, I was quite excited about the legalization of marijuana in Canada, even though I don’t use it. I had heard a lot about its benefits, and that it was harmless after you sobered up again. However, with this study, and questions that have been brought up about roadside testing, I think that it should not have been legalized so soon.

Additional Source: McGill University Newsroom

Footnote:
* The above advice of waiting one hour for each drink is only a guideline. the actual wait time can be higher or lower depending on the person.