Category Archives: Science in the News

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

 

 

My low memory computer is too slow to process this graphics intensive video

Razer Blade Stealth by Razer

The 6th Gen Intel Core i7-6500U processor gives the Razer Blade Stealth 2.5GHz of processing power and Turbo Boost speeds up to 3.1GHz.

Above is a picture with a quote taken from Razer – introducing it’s latest laptop. After reading that, you’ll probably fall into one of the two categories: “What on earth does this mean,” or “Razer is obviously ripping people off.”

It intrigues me that most people still know so little about what they’re using at the palm of their hands on a daily basis. Yet it is understandable as to why this is, the jargons that are supposed to help customers make better choices have become the barriers themselves.

Surface Book and Surface Pro 4 by Microsoft

Does it matter if you laptop can split in half?

And some of the biggest companies (Apple, Microsoft, etc.) intentionally leave out the specifications of their products. Imagine buying a furnished house without knowing the capacity of the washing machine.

Fret not! Hopefully, this “guide” will help you up your game so you won’t need to waste hours of your life deciding on a new computer. Some fun stuff will be lying around so to not bore you.

CPU: Central Processing Unit, the brain of the computer, responsible for processing things in your computer, the speed is measured in Gigahertz (GHz). Below is a video of Steve Jobs holding a CPU.

YouTube Preview Image

You might also have heard of cores. I will leave that to one of my favourite tech YouTuber to explain, take it away MKBHD:

YouTube Preview Image

Fun fact: The evolution of CPU (sounds weird I know), was governed by the Moore’s Law until recently, this means that we will only see a significantly faster CPU every two years.

GPU: Graphic Processing Unit, the visual cortex of the computer, responsible for processing visual information. Things that are graphic intensive include videos, games and 3D modelling.

Fun watch: embedded is a video of the legendary Mythbusters explaining the difference between CPU and GPU, though it is old, it is still very relevant now.

YouTube Preview Image

HDD/SSD: Hard Disk Drive/Solid State Drive, governing the long term memories of the computer. Measured in Gigabytes (GB) or Terabyes (TB). Trust me on this when I say you don’t want to have a small capacity (<250GB), don’t say I didn’t warn you when you have to start deleting adorable cat pics just because you didn’t listen to me.

Fun read: Scientists have found another use for helium, which is to fill them in HDD to give HDD a higher capacity!

RAM: Random Access Memory, the short term memory of the computer. They will help store tidbits used for short time like booting up a computer or the amount of tabs you have on your browser (seriously, don’t blame the computer for being slow when you have 30 tabs opened all at the same time). <– Funny Joke

To sum up: Everything is better with higher numbers.

And that’s it for today! Maybe I’ll expand on each aspect in the future blog posts, but until then!

Ivan

Self-Driving Cars: The future of transportation?

Vehicles, trains, ferries, planes – just examples of the wide range of transportation methods available in the modern day.  All of these methods require a human operator, however, we are soon to be introduced to a method seldom heard of: self-driving cars.  In 2009, Google launched the Self-Driving Car Project and began development of a vehicle that drives itself from point A to point B without the need of a driver.

Google_self_driving_car

Image: Wikimedia (by Michael Shick);  Google Self-Driving Car in Mountain View, CA, USA.

An operating software works alongside the sensor seen visibly on top of the vehicle. The sensor consists of lasers and cameras, and it is able to differentiate surrounding objects by a combination of size, speed and shape. With this information, the software is able to anticipate what happens next (for example, if a cyclist passes by).  In the current prototype, the car has no pedals nor steering wheel – the only way humans can control the driving is a red button for emergencies. Google’s prototypes have been released in California and are expected to be released to the public by 2020.

YouTube Preview Image

Other examples of  self-driving vehicles include Tesla models, which have been on the roads of Canada.  Compared to Google’s project, Tesla’s models are not entirely automatic, as they still require a driver to command lane changes and they require a driver to be present and touching the steering wheel periodically.  Nonetheless,  it still contains functions such as cruise control, automatic parking,

2013_Tesla_Model_S_(11322176214)_cropped

Image: Wikimedia (by Niels de Wit);  Tesla Model S, first Tesla to have autopilot software.

hand-free lane changes, and top speed limit.

Apart from not needing a driver, what else does a self-driving car offer?  Google’s prototype is environmentally friendly because it is completely battery powered. The computer of the vehicle is also programmed to drive safely, although Google has the ability to set the aggressiveness of the drive.  Consultancy firm KPMC predicts self-driving cars can reduce accidents by 80% and an estimated 2500 fewer deaths due to car accidents between 2014 to 2040.

The self-driving car still has it’s limitations though.   The software in all models are still to be perfected and we are still seeing accidents in prototypes. Questions have also been raised about common driving circumstances,  such us backing up a few feet for convenience, or deciding if someone should be let into your lane. If every car on the road was programmed, perhaps we could little to no car accidents.  However both the hardware and software is fairly expensive, such as Tesla’s software requiring a $3000 add on.  In addition there are various legal issues. Ontario still requires a driver  to be in the driver’s seat at all times. Responsibility of accidents are still to be decided between the user and manufacture.

With many factors still unknown, the popularity of the self-driving car in the future is still debatable. However, we can continue to expect steps in development and new self-driving models to appear.

Daryl

 

Howdy, Dr. Robot?!

Human health…. People spend tons of money to maintain

image from pixabay.com

Image from pixabay.com

their health in a good condition and even more when something goes wrong. Therefore, one would expect the accurate diagnosis and adequate treatment from the cohort of specialists available on the market nowadays, especially when it comes to the early stages of the most hardly detectable, but lethal diseases, like cancer. Till the latest time, there was no other alternative for the patients than to throw themselves into the hands of the most skillful, knowledgable, and experienced medical specialists in the field. But is it all shine and no rain?

According to a recent research, medical errors are on the third place among the all fatality causes in medical community. Among the main reasons are miscommunication, inability to keep track on the patients’s extensive medical history and history of drug consumption, and misreading the data patterns received from the tests. The latest peak of notorious cases occurred in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, and related to the doctors who continuously misdiagnosed their patients with breast cancer and prescribed the unnecessary treatment or no treatment at all, when it was needed. The biggest issue there was lack of “quality control”, so, no one questioned or reviewed the diagnostic processes!

At the same time, the progress in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning brought to life several brilliant projects, which have a better accuracy in diagnosing patients than the doctors have. For instance, the IBM Watson Health system gathers different types of information, including the recognition of the medical images, into one immense database. From that, the “self-learning” analytical technology recognizes the patterns and makes more accurate predictions. In general, the machines are better in interpreting the patients’ symptoms and medical history. And it costs less money!

More on how the machines may “outsmart” people in the video below (Herbert Chase, MD, MA on TEDMED Day CUMC, Youtube).

Among the benefits of having machines, if not as “doctors”, but at least as the doctor’s “assistants”, are the better interpretation of the clinical tests, control over the prescribed treatment, ability to fast-track the possible negative reactions or, so-called, adverse effects, and creating a continuous medical history, which is easy to review. And that’s what the scientists at MIT Artificial Intelligence lab work at.

The only possible draw back is creating a sufficient “learning pool” for the

Bodymedia device collects data about the person’s activity and burnt calories. Image from flickr.com.

Artificial Intellect, as an enormous amount of data is required to predict the most possible outcomes. However, as the technological progress moves on, the problem of data collecting becomes less and less significant, as the personal wearable devices  open the new opportunities in this case.

As seen from above, new technologies are rapidly moving into the health industry. I hope, soon we all can step into the era where doctors and machines will work together for the benefit of society and where it will be no place for the medical errors.

~ Alex Budkina

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