Category Archives: Issues in Science

Clean Water Crisis

Some people view a glass as half full, and others see it as half empty, but sometimes the water is just too dirty for it to matter.  Flint, a city nestled between three of the Great Lakes in Michigan, is facing a critical water crisis causing serious concern amongst the residents. In a city that already has a 13.6 year lower life expectancy than the rest of the Michigan state,  solutions and action are needed immediately.

A water sample study, carried out by Virginia Tech, revealed alarmingly high levels of lead, with readings ranging from 200 parts per billion (ppb) to 13,200 ppb. To understand the magnitude of these findings, let’s take a look at the recommendations and effects of lead.
According to the Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality, the maximum acceptable concentration (MAC) of lead is 10 ppb, while the Environmental Protection Agency has a lead concentration regulation of zero in drinking water, as there is no safe lead consumption level. Therefore, Flint’s water samples exceeded the MAC by 20 to over 1,300 times!

Clean drinking water is an essential part of our lives

Clean drinking water is an essential part of our lives. Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As a result, the citizens of Flint have been exposed to dangerously high levels of lead, which cause toxicity and a long list of health problems. No body system is spared from lead poisoning, as severe damage to the kidneys, joints, bone marrow, and cardiovascular system is debilitating and permanent. Additionally, the digestive and urinary tract, brain and nervous system, and reproductive organs are also highly susceptible to irreversible damage.
The video below contains a brief overview of what occurs when lead is ingested.

YouTube Preview Image
Courtesy of YouTube Video: Discovery Channel’s “HowStuffWorks”

Perhaps even more concerning, is the vulnerability of a child’s body to lead ingestion. Since lead tricks the body into thinking it is an essential element (such as calcium, for example), a child’s absorption is four to five times higher than that of an adult. In fact, a study published in December, 2015, found the levels of lead in children’s blood to have doubled in concentration compared to the levels recorded in 2013 in Flint residents under the age of five. In addition to the effects previously mentioned, a child can also suffer from delays and disturbances in development, both physically and mentally, such as a low IQ.

Evidently, the water in Flint is not suitable for drinking, and according to pediatricians involved in the care of patients in this area, only time will tell the full extent and consequences of this massive lead contamination. Ensuring that successful, cost-effective, and easily-implemented water treatment systems are available and functioning at acceptable standards is clearly a crucial aspect to the well-being and health of a community.

 

Kerrie Tsigounis

Is What You’re Currently Doing, Killing You?

Chances are, while reading this blog post, you are seated on a chair in a posture that’s unhealthy for your body and some of you may even have back or neck pain.

Back and neck pain. Source: Flickr Commons

Back and neck pain.
Source: Flickr Commons

Sitting: An Unknown Assassin

Nowadays, it seems pretty much anything can kill you and astoundingly, this includes sitting. Sitting has become the new smoking as awareness of the adverse effects it has on our health increases along with the difficulty to ‘quit’ this subtle comfort. Unfortunately, most of us are bound by our lifestyle that revolves around a chair. Whether this is at work in an office, on a desk at school, during our daily commute, eating a meal, or relaxing at home watching television – we are bound to a habit that’s silently killing us.

Health Risks From Sitting

Sitting, termed sedentary behaviour, by the scientific community has shown to lead to cardiovascular diseases such as a heart attack or clogged arteries, type 2 diabetes, cancer, muscular pains, weight gain; all of which significantly raise your mortality rate despite exercising.

It is estimated that one loses 7 years of life expectancy if they’re sedentary compared to a physically active person. This makes anatomical sense as our bodies were not designed to be constantly stagnant as evidenced by our elastic skin, many joints and muscles, and how blood flow slows while sitting.  This is better explained by Murat Dalkilinc of Ted-Ed:

YouTube Preview Image

What Can We Do?

Sit with an exercise ball. Source: Flickr Commons

Sit with an exercise ball.
Source: Flickr Commons

The solution is simple! While it may not always be practical, try to be more active if you have sat for a prolonged period of time. It’s best to get moving for every thirty minutes of sitting and there’s many different methods to try. Experiment sitting on an exercise ball; this works your core muscles giving your body a better balance. Also try yoga poses for a few minutes or a brisk walk in between commercial breaks.

As a reminder to staying healthy, why don’t you move around a bit right now. Whatever you do, just get moving!

Henry Liu

 

Antibiotics aren’t always the answer

Have you ever gone to the doctor’s clinic and asked for a prescription of antibiotics to treat a cold, a sore throat, or a flu? Did your doctor agree and willingly provide you a prescription? In both instances, you probably shouldn’t have asked and your doctor should have probably refused.

Antibiotics are the most commonly prescribed drugs and are praised for their life saving abilities. However, according to the Centres for Disease and Prevention (CDC), 50 % of the time they are poorly prescribed. This has resulted in the rising emergence of antibiotic resistance, which has been described as a global health crisis by the World Health Organization.

Antibiotics

Image Courtesy of: Flikr Commons

Antibiotics, first used in the 1940’s, are strong medicines used to kill or inhibit the growth of bacteria in order to subsequently treat bacterial infections. Bacteria can cause infections such as:

Although antibiotics are powerful medicines, they are ineffective against illnesses caused by viruses. A few examples of common illnesses caused by viruses are:

It is best advised to just allow most viral infections to run their course and to allow your own immune system to kick in and fight the infection.

However, one may ask, “why not just take antibiotics just to be on the safe side?” The problem with this is that the overuse of antibiotics, especially when they are not the approapriate treatment, promotes antibiotic resistance. This term is synonymous with bacterial resistance, in which bacteria are no longer inhibited by an antibiotic to which they were previously sensitive to. The video below provides an excellent explanation as to how antibiotic resistance arises.

YouTube Preview Image

YouTube video courtesy of: TED-Ed

Antibiotic-resistant bacteria are harder, take longer, and are more costly to treat. In the worst-case scenario, no antibiotic will be available, resulting in a life-threatening bacteria strain. In fact, according to the CDC, “at least 2 million people become infected with bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics and at least 23,000 people die each year as a direct result of these infections.”

Exercise caution and be sure to talk with your doctor when determining whether antibiotics are the right option for you. Remember, only take antibiotics if absolutely necessary!

Thanks for reading.

 

Concerns About Nuclear Fusion

Nuclear fusion is not usually subject to ethical scrutiny, since it promises to replace fossil fuels and nuclear fission as the main power source. It is much cleaner and safer. However, there are concerns.

There have been some major advances in the field of nuclear fusion last week. If you don’t know much about the subject, I recommend you watch the video bellow before reading the articles.

YouTube Preview Image

The theory behind fusion has been understood for nearly a century, and controlled reactions have been achieved as early as 1950’s. But all those experiments required more energy than they produced, making them useless for power generation. However, this changed recently, when scientists in Germany successfully operated a fusion reactor that they say is able to produce net energy gain. Further, just last week, researchers at MIT made important discoveries about how the hot plasma behaves inside the reactor.

JET fusion reactor in England. The torus is designed to hold the heated plasma suspended in air, without touching the walls. Source: Flickr, by aglet

JET fusion reactor. The torus is designed to hold the heated plasma suspended in air, preventing it from touching the walls and thus losing heat.
Source: Flickr, by aglet

 

Now, to the ethics part. What could possibly be ethically controversial about a power source that does not pollute our atmosphere with carbon and does not produce radioactive materials, that is safe and practically limitless? Well, it’s the fact that it’s not limitless.

Like Dr. Cowley, I worry about the Sun swallowing the Earth when it expands. Another realization that struck me very hard was the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The entropy of the universe is constantly increasing and so even if we get off of our planet in time, there will come a day when all the universe is in thermodynamic equilibrium, at which point no life will be possible. And although these events are billions of years away, they worry me. I don’t understand why. I know there is nothing we can do about them and I hope that, despite our best efforts, I’ll be dead by then.

What we can do something about is the first thing Dr. Cowley talked about, our consumption of natural resources. And what fusion is, is the consumption of Earth’s most precious resource: water. They tell us that there is enough water on Earth to last 30 million years, but obviously, we can’t use all of it. Even if the only thing we care about are our own anthropocentric little selves and let all other life on Earth perish, we can’t use 100%. We probably couldn’t even use 50% and I don’t think we should use any, because the process of fusion is irreversible. As a source of energy, it is completely unrenewable (which even fossil fuels are, to some degree).

I understand, it is the lesser evil, but it is an evil nevertheless. It is a treatment of symptoms rather than the cause, which is simply that we use too much. What we should focus on, is reducing our consumption, which we will eventually have to do anyway, be it now or in 30 million years. We should reduce our consumption so that renewable sources (wind, solar) would suffice. Or better yet, we should all go live in the woods and be merry. 🙂

– Jan

 

 

Energy Drink Commercial: Minimizing the Bad and Maximizing the Good

There is currently a huge market for energy drinks in which young teens and adults consume them on a regular basis. In particular, the five-hour energy shot, having zero sugar content and only four calories, certainly stand out amongst the crowd. However, does this product really cure tiredness and give us energy and nutrition with no side effects? Are the advertisements conveying all the necessary information for viewers to make an informed decision?

In this commercial, there are some misleading and hidden messages in the claims of the product. For instance, a side effect of caffeine is crashing. Nonetheless, the bottle says “no crash!” To resolve this confusion, users need to pay attention to the flashing fine prints that are significantly less noticeable during the commercial. One of which says, “no crash means no sugar crash.”

a snapshot from the YouTube commercial

The use of fine print and repetition in the commercial might not be enough for a client to make an informed decision. Technically, the company did not lie. During the commercial, they did display and mention all the necessary information. However, the way they aggressively minimized the negative factors, and amplified the positive factors are truly misleading. It is really up to the users to interpret the information given, and use their existing knowledge to be informed about the product.

Furthermore, the nutrients added in the five-hour energy drink such as vitamin B6 and B12 do not have any values in boosting energy. It is the caffeine added in it that is giving the feeling of alertness. Vitamin B6 has functions in neurotransmitter, histamine, and hemoglobin synthesis as well as in metabolism and gene expression. On the other hand, vitamin B12 serves the normal functioning of the brain and nervous system. Although both are essential in the human body, none of them attribute to increasing energy. By associating these nutrients with an energy drink, the advertiser again left an open-ended scenario for the viewers to interpret. Most often, people would assume the causal relationship between vitamins and energy-level improvement.

5

five-hour energy drink via flickr

The commercial and product emphasize the positive effects of the energy drink but fail to point out any risks. Aside from developing tolerance and physical dependence on caffeine, cardiovascular, psychological, digestive and other symptoms can develop with long-term use. Cardiovascular symptoms include: high blood pressure and arrhythmia. Psychological issues include: anxiety and nervousness. It can also lead to increased urination, loss of water-soluble nutrients, and dehydration. Other adverse effects include nausea, restlessness, drowsiness, and insomnia.

Overall, users should take the time to do research on any information given before using a product. We shall always seek for scientific evidence that have been supported by experts in the field, peer-reviewed and supported with raw data before believing anything. We should also use our existing knowledge to interpret information.

-Brigette Wee

Zika virus, the next big pandemic?

Recently, there has been a lot of talk in the media about the new disease, Zika. Words seen in association with Zika tend to be “deformed brain in babies”, “mosquitos”, “south America” and “pregnant women”. But how does this all connect and with illness causing symptoms that seem very mild why is it becoming such a big deal recently?

Transmission & Symptoms

Zika virus is transmitted through mosquitos that are active during the day time. Specifically, the type of mosquitos that carry the disease are the Aedes genus of mosquitos that are known to carry other viruses such as dengue. The mosquito gets infected with the virus from biting an infected person and begins to spread the disease. Other methods of transmission include from mother to child during pregnancy, and through sexual contact.

mosquito in genus Aedes- transmitter or Zika virus

Mosquito in genus Aedes– transmitter of Zika virus. Image from wikipedia

When a person gets infected with the virus, he or she may show symptoms such as fever, joint pain, rash or redness of the eyes. Other common symptoms include headache and muscle pain, but most people show no symptoms at all. Studies show that only 1 in 5 people infected with Zika virus will become ill so it is very hard to prevent the spread of disease since it is likely that infected people will not seek medical attention.

So why is this such a big problem?

With such mild symptoms and cases rarely resulting in deaths, why is this illness becoming such a big deal? To most people it may not be a big concern but the threat it poses on pregnant woman is worrisome. Although not proven, Zika is thought to be linked to a birth defect called microcephaly, which is when the infant is born with an unusually small head. This irregular development leads to problems after birth such as seizure, developmental delay and even death. Brazil previously reported 150 cases per year but since October 2015 to January 2016, there has been a dramatic increase in microcephaly reported. An alarming number of 4,000 cases just in those 4 months.

baby with microcephaly (left) compared to typical baby head size. Image from wikipedia

Baby with microcephaly (left) compared to typical baby head size. Image from wikipedia

What now?

To prevent this virus from spreading further, WHO has declared Zika virus a Global Health Emergency. This means that resources will be put into more research for vaccine against this virus, for prevention of infections especially for pregnant women and for mosquito control to stop the virus from spreading. In addition, people should exercise caution when travelling to the countries where Zika has been reported by wearing long sleeves and pants outside. Also women who are pregnant or are considering getting pregnant sometime in the near future should postpone their travel to South America since no vaccine has been discovered. With the Brazil Olympics coming up, WHO estimates that up to four million cases of Zika virus are to be expected by the end of this year and there is a high chance that transmission could be happening in the Unites States very soon.

YouTube Preview Image

video by World Health Organization

Alana Lee

Link

Hospitals: More Dangerous Than You Think?

If someone suffered a heart attack or was involved in a car accident, the first place we would turn to is the nearest hospital, right? It happens almost every day; someone is carried into the ER on a stretcher and leaves smiling, walking on their own two feet. Generally, hospitals are perceived to be a safe place of medical assistance, treatment, and recovery, however, there is growing data to suggest that a stay in the hospital may actually come with risk.

Health care-associated infections (HAI), also called nosocomial infections (from the Greek word nosokomeíon, meaning hospital), are classified as infections that occur during a hospital admission and up to 3 days after discharge. They are a growing cause of lengthened hospital stays, medical complications, and even death in patients. In fact, it is estimated that these infections rack up a cost of one billion pounds for England’s National Health Service and over $35 billion for U.S. hospitals.

The intensive care unit (ICU) has one of the highest rates of HAI. Courtesy of Wiki Commons

The intensive care unit (ICU) has one of the highest HAI rates.
Courtesy of Wiki Commons

In 2011, the United States had almost 722,000 cases of HAI, ranging from surgical site infections to pneumonia. The Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program also found an increase in the incidence of a specific bacterium, called C. difficile, from around 42 cases per 100,000 in 1992 to 160 per 100,000 in 2003. Additionally, the severity and reoccurrence also spiked, with more severe outcomes recorded, including perforated large intestines, shock, and death.

A common misconception is that only the elderly are at risk for HAI due to their weaker state of health. This is untrue, as studies find increasing numbers of these infections in children’s hospitals, maternity wards, and in the young adult population. A study published in 2014 found a more than triple increase in incidence of flesh eating disease, known as necrotizing fasciitis, in pregnant women that were admitted to hospital for delivery over the past decade. Children also experience a high prevalence of HAI, with the highest percentages recorded in intensive care (19%) and transplant units (27%).

So what can be done?
Unsurprisingly, poor hand washing has been attributed to 40% of infection transfers in hospitals, thus focusing on improving hand hygiene habits can have a positive impact. Increasing compliance of wearing protective accessories including gloves, masks, and aprons is also critical. As well, creating a system that immediately isolates patients who have contracted a severe infection is key to prevent further spreading.
Careful attention to sanitation must also be emphasized, as it was found that an antibiotic-resistant bacteria that attacks the intestinal tract can also be transferred between patients through the use of  thermometers.

The issue of HAI is a global problem, however it is not all doom and gloom when it comes to the future of patients’ well-being. Much research is currently underway to find new methods to decrease the prevalence. Take a look at the video below from the Mayo Clinic, where they tested the effectiveness of UV light disinfection. They found an impressive 30% decline in C. difficile infection in the UV-treated rooms!
YouTube Preview Image

Kerrie Tsigounis

Multivitamins- A waste of money ?

It’s common understanding that maintaining adequate levels of essential vitamins and minerals is crucial for good health. For this reason, it comes to no surprise that the popularity  of multivitamins has surged over the past few decades and that they are now the most commonly used dietary supplement in the world. At the same time, there has been growing attention at the potential role these multivitamins may or may not play in improving overall health.

Multivitamins: Should You Take One?

Image Courtesy of: Flikr Commons

Like many others, I was under the notion that consuming 1-2 multivitamins a day would help satisfy any shortcomings of important nutrients my body may be lacking. “It’s reassuringly simple!” I would tell myself. ” Consume a pill and instantly have your bad diet turn into a healthy one.” Now if only that was the case…

As I look online, it’s evident that over the past few years, there have been several debates amongst scientists over the effectiveness of  multivitamins.

Do the promised claims on labels such as increased energy, increased cognitive functions and increased illness recovery hold any merit? One interesting find I came across was that dietary supplements such as multivitamins are not regulated by the FDA. This means that certain claims can be misleading since companies can imply that their products have greater capabilities than what the actual scientific evidence shows.

Recent studies have also even claimed that multivitamins may even be harmful. In particular, an editorial that appeared in the Annals of External Medicine, “Enough is Enough: Stop Wasting Money on Vitamin and Mineral Supplements“, made widespread coverage in the news media. The authors behind this research concluded with a bold statement, ““[W]e believe that the case is closed- supplementing the diet of well-nourished adults with (most) mineral or vitamin supplements has no clear benefit.” However, many scientists are arguing that the case is far from closed and that these studies completely disregarded their unique patient samples, none of which had nutritional deficiencies.

So what is the real answer? Just how effective are these pills of nutritional insurance to our overall health?

I think the best response to this question is that it is “short-sighted to think your vitamin or mineral is the ticket to good health- the big power is on the plate, not the pill”, as stated by Roberta Anding, a spokesperson for the American Dietetic Association.

So, unless you’ve discussed vitamin supplementation with your doctor, the majority of us are better off investing our time and money into acquiring nutrients the way nature intended, with a well balanced diet.

Check out this video below for another interesting take on the effectiveness of supplemental vitamins!

YouTube Preview Image

YouTube video courtesy of: BrainStuff- HowStuffWorks

Thanks for reading!

Posted by: Sahil Mann

 

 

Celebrity Advocacy: The “Experts” Weigh-In on the Vaccine Controversy

Have you ever purchased a product because you saw your favorite celebrity on television use it? The idea behind this marketing strategy is called celebrity endorsement. Celebrity   endorsement involves a well-known person using their fame to advertise and promote a product, service or idea. To a certain extent, this is not bad at all. However, it takes a toll in society when a celebrity advocates for their belief on a controversial topic that is beyond their field of expertise.

Jenny McCarthy is an American model, actress, television host and as some may say, an anti-vaccine activist. She claimed, Time magazine’s article on the autism debate reports that the experts are certain ‘vaccines don’t cause autism; they don’t injure children; they are the pillar of modern public health.’ I say, ‘that’s a lie and we’re sick of it.’ ”

Jenny McCarthy via buzzfeed

Jenny McCarthy via buzzfeed

Since Jenny McCarthy is under great public attention in the media, she brought attention and awareness to the vaccine controversy but in all the wrong ways and for all the wrong reasons. She failed to realize that, if we stop vaccination, many diseases would come back. This bad publicity could result in reduced vaccine uptake and the return of many diseases.

dis

Picture from Toronto Public Health Data from the Public Health Agency of Canada

Instead, social media coverage and the public should focus their attention on reliable sources regarding the vaccine controversy and any future scientific topics.

Dr. Gregory A. Poland, a health care professional who holds a MD from Southern Illinois University, claimed that no credible scientific evidence supports the idea that Measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccines cause autism; More than 20 carefully-performed scientific studies supported this claim. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also concluded that there is no relationship between MMR vaccine and autism. The American Academy of Pediatrics made similar conclusions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83Af9rgAL-0

In this video, Dr. Gregory A. Poland talked about the importance of vaccines and the diseases that have been eradicated and controlled by the use of vaccination. He also addressed the dangers of opposing vaccination.

False beliefs and biases have lead to parents deciding not to immunize their children with vaccines because of the fear that autism is associated with Measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccines. This puts children in the likelihood for acquiring measles and other diseases. The health of numerous children is at great risk because of continued misinformation and unscientific beliefs.

The way forward is that public health concerns should be addressed more carefully by the media. Claims that have no credible data must be ignored no matter how passionate an individual is about their belief. Social media should stop giving celebrities who comment on scientific controversies more attention than scientists who are experts in this field.

The public should not misunderstand celebrity status and fame for authority. We shall always seek for scientific claims that have been supported by experts in the field, peer-reviewed and supported with raw data before believing anything. Thus, we should not be quick to believe Jenny McCarthy’s campaign.

Brigette Wee