Health Benefits of Kissing

I happened to catch a Twitter post from "@MindblowingFact" that said "A kiss can be ten times more effective than morphine in reducing pain, as it's thought that it activates the body's natural pain-killers". Then I thought to myself; "is this why little kids always want someone to kiss their injuries to make them feel better? could this actually be effective?"

I found this article with some other health benefits:
1: Kissing helps prevent tooth decay
2: Kissing relieves stress
3: Exercising the muscles of the face can help keep you looking younger
4: Kissing burns calories
5: Kissing boosts your immunity
6: During a kiss natural antibiotics, and allergy antibodies are secreted in the saliva

It seems to be true, a report on the subject seems to confirm the 'mind blowing fact'. When someone is kissed endorphins are released which trigger parts of the brain that perceive pain. Much like an orgasm, a kiss can stimulate the release of these endorphins and create a sense of euphoria and pleasure, even when a person is in extreme pain.

All of these benefits are quite interesting to me and when reading, kissing is a bonding behaviour for most humans and even some animals. It was quite interesting to find that some populations find kissing actually revolting. The perception around exchanging saliva is considered grotesque. These populations found in South America, and the Himalayas are not convinced that there are many benefits to locking lips with their loved ones.

Do you consider any of these benefits when kissing? Or is kissing simple a natural expression of intimacy between yourself and someone you love? I admit that I had never thought of the benefits besides the sense of connection created.  

Sir David Attenborough

How many times have you flipped on the TV and before you even see what's on you hear the voice of Sir David Attenborough's and know that you have just turned on a witty naturalist program worth watching?  Attenborough's voice is unmistakable and is known to viewers worldwide.

If you have never heard of Sir David Attenborough, watch a few of his videos clips here, you will be amazed.

Sir David Attenborough is a naturalist from Britain who started his career in broadcasting over 50 years ago. Attenborough "studied natural sciences at Cambridge" but grew to dislike lab work so after finishing his studies he joined the Royal Navy. Attenborough disliked the Navy life so he left and pursued a career in broadcasting.

Initially, Attenborough's application for a broadcasting job at BBC was declined but later he was offered the job at BBC. This opportunity opened a world of possibilities for Attenborough as he began to climb the corporate ladder. At this time Attenborough was in charge of "all non-fiction broadcasts" including several "natural history programs such as The Pattern of Animals and Zoo Quest."

In 1965, Attenborough became the controller of BBC2 which in later years lead to him taking the position of "Director of Programmes for  BBC1 and BBC2." But, with natural history being his passion, Attenborough returned to his documentary making naturalist roots in 1973.

Some of Attenborough's most famous documentaries are:

"Life on Earth (1979), The Living Planet (1984), The Trials of Life (1990), The Private Life of Plants (1995), The Life of Birds (1998), The Life of Mammals (2002) and Life in the Undergrowth (2005)."

 I have seen several of these videos and in my opinion no one can produce a nature documentary as well as Sir David Attenborough. Not only does Attenborough narrate the documentaries, he also writes the script and produces many of them.

Sir David Attenborough's ability to teach about nature in a way that is witty yet informative is unique and unmistakable. He is an inspiration to naturalists everywhere.

"The Life Series" has been ongoing for many years but has come to a close with the final documentary being "Life in Cold Blood."

I have a feeling that Sir David Attenborough will not retire yet and I can't wait to see what he does next!

What Happened to Bill?

Do you remember Bill Nye the Science Guy from those cheesy videos we all seemed to watch in grade school? At that time I wasn't very interested in Nye's scientific background. Recently however, I was thinking about the Science in Seconds' approach to informing people about science through intriguing online videos, and it made me wonder what we had before Science in Seconds. I came to the conclusion that we had Bill Nye the Science Guy on VHS tape or television as our intriguing guide to the world of science.

 This got me questioning who is Bill Nye and what is his scientific background. I did a bit of research and found that Bill Nye is a very distinguished scientist with several honorary degrees. Nye has a "Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering" from Cornell University, as well as honorary degrees from Johns Hopkins University, Goucher College, and Rensselaer Polytechnic.

Also, I discovered that Bill Nye the Science Guy was one of Nye's earliest works of media in which he was not only the host but also the writer and producer of the series which ran from 1992-1998. From the years of 1986 to 2009 Bill Nye has been host, and/or writer, and/or producer for 8 different television series with a focus on children's channel science series.

Before the television series, Nye worked as a licensed Mechanical Engineer at Boeing in Seattle, Washington.

I can't forget to mention that in his spare time, Nye wrote 5 children's books all about science.

It's funny to think that when I watched Bill Nye the Science Guy all I saw was a goofy, comical man who loved science. I have to admit that this research is very enlightening for me because I can now see that Bill Nye was being goofy so that children would remember the science lesson at hand and so that they could find science just as fascinating as he does.

Just in case you have forgotten Bill Nye the Science Guy, have a look at these videos as a refresher of his humor and love of science in these "Consider the Following Videos."

A Reason to Delay Becoming a Father

http://frank.itlab.us/photo_essays/wrapper.php?nephila_2002_dna.html

Since today is father's day, Sunday June 17, 2012,  I found this article to be interesting. The study that was done indicated that how old a man is when he has kids may affect the lifespans of his grandchildren. It was concluded that men who were older when they kids, resulted in longer telomeres in their kids and grandkids. It has been found that in comparison to people with shorter telomeres, people with longer telomeres have a lower risk of dying over a given time period.

The results of the research showed that the length of the telomeres of the children increased with each year that a man delayed having children. This result was still true when the researchers took into account factors that could affect telomere length, such as children's birth order, body mass index, household income and age at which the blood samples were taken. The effect of longer telomeres was found to be additive over generations.

Some studies have showed that those with shorter telomere length have a higher risk of dying of infectious diseases and cardiovascular disease. However, more research is needed to show whether those with longer telomeres suffer from fewer health problems.

Radiation From Mocrowaves

http://www.elfwood.com/~timvangorp2/Radiation-Sign.3289399.html

Radiation is defined as "the complete process in which energy is emitted by one body, transmitted through an intervening medium or space, and absorebed by another body." Many of us come in contact with radiation everyday. In a household, many radiation sources can be found. For example, the TV, the smoke detector, and a microwave.

  http://www.google.com/imgres?q=household+microwave&hl=en&as_st=y&biw=907&bih=668&tbs=sur:f&tbm=isch&tbnid=P7isHkhWVpOMYM:&imgrefurl=http://sayonara.komakino.ch/&docid=YLQ2iaHq1fAjJM&imgurl=http://sayonara.komakino.ch/images/microwave.JPG&w=900&h=557&ei=Lq_eT4-dNIPM2gX8qujhAQ&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=458&sig=113013620842434162201&page=1&tbnh=124&tbnw=185&start=0&ndsp=14&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0,i:84&tx=97&ty=40

A microwave is found in a typical household. As I placed my food into the microwave a few days ago, a relative, whose older in age, began saying how unhealthy microwaves are and how much we use them. At that time, it came to mind how often we are exposed to hazardous materials from day to day activities. Yet, all these sources are considered to be safe.

The Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety explains that in general, a high level of exposure to microwave radiation, of which most is absorbed by the body, where it is transformed into heat. Body parts which are sensitive, such as the eyes and the brain, are not able of getting rid of the extra heat which would cause it to build up. However, it also mentions that the amount of radiation that microwaves emit is not enough to cause this bodily harm.

In the past, microwave radiation caused problems to people with pacemakers. Interaction with oyhrt electoral sources, caused the pacemaker to malfunction and send incorrect information to the heart muscles. Now, properly maintained and operated microwaves should not cause this problem. As an additional precaution, electromagnetic shields have been put into the new pacemakers.

Caffeine Effects

http://capl.washjeff.edu/browseresults.php?langID=14&photoID=1043&size=m

I know how easy it is to grab a coffee or a chocolate bar while drowned in studying, or while running around from one thing to the other throughout the day. I'm sure i'm not the only one, and I acknowledge how unhealthy that could be. Although the presence of caffeine in my system does some good sometimes, such as keeping me alert, I know that it's side effects are great if consumed in large quantities.

Health Canada reports that because caffeine tolerance differs between each person, and thus causes various health effects to arise, it is difficult to link the precise level of caffeine to health effects.
The recommended daily intake of caffeine is,                                                  
children aged 4-6: 45 mg
children aged 7-9: 62.5 mg
children aged 10-12: 85 mg
Determining how much caffeine a person 13 and older should consume has not been developed as because of the lack of insufficient data, but Health Canada recommends that no more than a daily intake of 2.5 mg/kg body weight should be taken.

The presence of caffeine can increase heart rate, dilate pupils, tighten up muscles, and cause the release of glucose into the blood stream, which is used for extra energy. These symptoms can be considered beneficial, especially when one is looking for a jump in their energy. Another effect of caffeine that could be considered as good, is that caffeine causes a raise in dopamine levels which stimulate the pleasure parts of the brain. The downside to this is that this may also be the answer to why caffeine is addictive.

Caffeine has many side effects, such as stimulating the central nervous system and can produce restlessness, headaches, irritability, and also increases heart rate and blood pressure. Caffeine is also diuretic and causes a loss of fluid, leading to a dehydrating effect. Another long-term problem is the effect of caffeine on sleep. Caffeine has a half-life in the body of six hours. If caffeine is ingested a few hours before sleeping, that person may bot obtain the restful benefits of deep sleep. 

The Definition of Pseudoscience

Pseudoscience is defined by Wikipedia as:

"a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status."

Merriam Webster's Online Dictionary defines pseudoscience as:

"a system of theories, assumptions, and methods erroneously regarded as scientific"

I choose to give two different definitions because pseudoscience is a very debated topic with a lot of controversy and bias. I am making the assumption that with Wikipedia, conflicting opinions of editors will create a definition that allows the editors to meet in the middle. Merriam-Webster is a very reliable dictionary so I am assuming that their definition is unbiased as well.

A few examples of different types of pseudoscience or partial pseudoscience include: astrology, creation science, crop circles, paranormal activity studies, Ufology, aromatherapy, colonic hydrotherapy, homeopathy, magnetic therapy, and chiropractic manipulation to name a few.

Personally, of these listed I have experienced chiropractic manipulation and it helped with back pain caused by an injury. I am aware there are believed to be dangerous side effects associated with chiropractic manipulation even though I have not experienced them myself. Before you try chiropractic manipulation it is important to discuss it with your doctor to become informed of the potential risks and rewards of a chiropractic treatment.

Many of the other types of pseudoscience or partial pseudoscience I have no personal experience with so I cannot give a fair personal opinion. I do however, believe that there are some things that science has not explored and that the scientific method cannot explain. More research should be conducted on the different types of pseudosciences or partial pseudosciences in order to provide a fair assessment.

Pseudoscience is a very debatable topic that tends to get quite heated as people often have strong opinions.

I would like to open up the comment area to debate about pseudoscience. Do you have an experience relating to pseudoscience?