Think twice about Plastics?

Our civilization has surged exponentially in the past one hundred years, finding new, innovative ways to live more comfortably and effectively. It has always made me wonder however, is being introduced to these lifestyle-changing inventions have a down side? (Since we are all taking this class we can agree that the obvious answer is yes). One thing specifically that I have always been perhaps superstitious about (simply because I knew very little about its make-up and possible effects) are plastics. Truthfully, this precaution goes back to my childhood when my mother would warn me not to warm up my food in the microwave in plastic containers because plastic, being more malleable, tends to leach into the food you eat.  

After reading Wiley and Allen’s chapter, two specific parts stuck out to me: precocious puberty among younger and younger females and environmental toxins. Though, Wiley and Allen did not mention plastic as an environmental danger to one’s health, it reminded me of an article I read at some point last year, describing a specific type of plastic, bisphenol A (BPA), that is considered an endocrine disrupting chemical (EDC) which can mimic, block or disrupt hormones. In an article written by Food Insight, conclusions are drawn from scientific studies showing that for adults, the low levels that come into contact with food are not harmful. The article goes on to state that in past and present studies, the chemical is found to be readily absorbed, detoxified and released from the body. However, the article continues to explain, according to recent FDA statements, pregnant women, infants and children are most at risk in coming in contact with BPA since their bodies are developing and their hepatic systems, that detoxify the blood and would eliminate this substance, are immature. (Article: Questions and Answers about Bisphenol-A (BPA))

There is no direct scientific link between BPA and early onset of puberty since many other factors surely contribute to this. However, it is scientifically certain that BPA is an endocrine disrupting chemical acting as Xenoestrogen, binding with estrogen receptors (Molecular Cancer Therapeutics). BPA was released on the scene over forty years ago. Curious how early onset puberty ages have dropped since then.

Searcher response to blog post

In Maddy Thomas's post, she makes an excellent point about the use of the Body Mass Index as a poor indicator of health in children- or anyone for that matter. As a future teacher, I know that the health of my students is important to their role in the classroom. The rising rates of obesity in children is an important societal issue that is shedding light on either weight issues in kids. I can remember in high school being obsessed with my BMI and questioning my doctor as whether or not I was healthy. This web link addresses many of the same points my doctor addressed when she talked to me. While this scale may serve as an okay "rough estimate" of weight to height ratio it isn't specific enough to indicate total health. With the term "health" evolving quickly in an ever changing society and far different than what our ancestors would consider healthy the common use of this scale definitely speaks volumes about our lack of perception on the matter.

The Madness in Milk

Reading Wiley and Allen reminded me that I don’t like milk. I have never found the taste to be appealing to my palate. Even as an infant, I refused to drink breast milk despite my mother’s infinite attempts. Finally succumbing to a degree of thirst and hunger, I would reluctantly have some, but in small amounts, my mother recalls. Growing up, I steered clear of plain milk at school lunches, family dinners, and dining halls (though I was perfectly content with chocolate milk) and received puzzled reactions from children and adults alike. “You don’t like milk?” “You know it’s good for you right? All that calcium!” “It’s so tasty and builds strong bones.” Yes, I ate my cereal plain.

The face of milk has certainly changed since I was a child. Milk used to be widely advertised as nutritious and good for your bones. As Wiley and Allen recalled, the “Got Milk?” commercials encouraged the consumption of milk in great amounts without the mention of any negative side effects. Though milk’s main pitching point was growth in height, Wiley and Allen concluded no profound growth in children consuming it (Wiley and Allen 125). Today, there is much suspicion surrounding milk and the potential effects that the overconsumption of dairy products in general has on human health. In an article written by PCRM (Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine), the potential side effects of milk are analyzed, ranging from well-circulated links such as breast cancer to less commonly studied effects of milk such as acne: Health Concerns about Dairy Products. I was surprised to read that in multiple studies, the calcium in milk did not increase bone density or decrease one’s risk of osteoporosis. If milk can’t help it, what can? Certainly not my genetics as osteoporosis is common in women of the Asian population. What was noted was that “your risk of osteoporosis can be decreased by reducing sodium, increasing calcium intake from plants, exercising, and using calcium-fortified products such as breakfast cereals and beverages” (Health Concerns about Dairy Products). I find that statement very hard to believe as “fortified” should be considered an addition to commercialized products rather than a substitute for naturally-derived minerals and nutrients. However, the article did mention the often targeted aspect of milk: hormones. Milk’s link to breast and prostate cancer is accounted for by its increased estrogen and insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) concentration. Hormone level alterations also a play an effect in sexual maturity; thus, parents today may be concerned about their kids drinking too much milk.

What about the alternatives of milk for the worried individuals and those not fond of the taste? MSNBC has compiled a list of the pros and cons of milk and its substitutes: The skinny on milk nutrition: Cow, goat, rice or soy? As a fan of soy and almond milk, I soon too realized the potential risks associated with each. Soy milk contains high levels of estrogen as well whereas almond milk lacks adequate protein.  It looks like I am never going to escape the doom of dairy products so like my mom always says, “everything in moderation.”

Assignment 1

Hello,

My name is Stacie Roberts and my major is Sociology, and I am taking this course because I need a Natural Science course in order to graduate. The 3 blog posts are as follows: www.livescience.com/6021-ongoing-evolution-explain-mysterious-rise-diseases.html

www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/cancer/cancer_evolution.html

www.livescience.com/26313-menopause-and-memory-problems.html

I found the article on cancer www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/cancer/cancer_evolution.html to be informative and interesting because I am a two year breast cancer survivor. I chose this article because I wanted to get a better understanding of how good cells turn into bad cells, and how or what can we do to prevent this from happening?

In order for a normal cell to become cancerous, it must first go through a series of mutations, in which it will continue to divide and multiply until a bigger and stronger cell comes for a visit. At this point, the unwelcome cell is more muscular and aggressive and will decide to claim their territory.

The cells near the growing tumor will lose their strength and energy, and the cells that avoided the tumor must now find a new home in another organ of the body. At this point the cells meet a Good Samaritan (a cell that has mutated), and become best friends (both cells). The mutated cells and the non-mutated cells decide to become best friends forever (bff), and they continue to divide and multiply.

According to this article, this process takes years, and you’re likely to die from some other illness before developing cancer. In addition, the mutated cells can only mutate in certain genes, and in the correct place in these genes. If this is true, there has to be something that we all have in common, and that we are all doing, all of the time. Once we find what this “something is,” only then will we find a permanent cure for cancer.

Week One Assignment - Chapter Five

Andrea Wiley and John Allen present many interesting topics in Chapter Five. The one that I found most relatable to my life was the discussion of size and weight, especially in terms of overweight and obese children.

In our society, talk of weight loss and weight gain are prevalent almost everywhere. There are diet ads on the radio, TV, and computer; there are entire shows that focus on weight loss (i.e. “The Biggest Loser”). Talk of weight loss or dieting will happen in almost any conversation with an adult. But children are a different story. The authors of this article discuss how childhood obesity is much more of a problem in rural areas, due to the lack of adequate and nutritious food, as well as activities to keep children active—all arguments that are commonplace. This struck a chord with me personally. In this case alone, the adults investigating this so-called epidemic are basing their measurement of children’s general health on weight and the BMI scale alone. The problem with this is that BMI only measures the relationship between weight and height. It doesn’t take into account muscle mass, bone density and structure, or even differences between men and women. I have watched so many people struggle with their weight and base it off this scale alone, not taking into account any other measurements of health; a perfectly healthy individual could be overweight or even obese on this scale and vice versa. So, while reading this, I personally did not agree with what the researchers were doing.

Beyond that, however, the article mentions something that I was pretty confused about. It states that rapid growth is associated with rapid rate of cell turnover, which can lead to rapid reproduction of malignant (i.e. cancer) cells. The article says that this may be associated with a specific protein that assists in growth. What I don’t understand is that the article then draws the conclusion that height is positively associated with a risk of cancer. They cited a study that proves this, but when you hear about cancer prevention, it is never mentioned that taller people are at a higher risk. I am skeptical of this and can’t help but wonder if there’s a confounder in that correlation somewhere.

First Blogging Assignment

Hello everyone!

My name is Maddy Thomas. I am a sophomore in Speech and Hearing Science. When I was browsing through the course catalog for a class this semester, I stumbled on this class and was instantly interested. I enjoy biology more than any other science, and have always found diseases and the human body fascinating. I have also never taken an anthropology class, despite the fact that I've always thought it was an intriguing area of study. I'm glad I will be getting the chance to explore the combination of these two studies.

After doing some research, I found a couple of blogs that I think are relevant to this class.

The Skeptical Adaptationist
How is Darwinian medicine useful?
"Darwinian Medicine"



The one I found the most interesting was the third blog. In particular, there is a section on some of the classic symptoms we experience when we’re sick that I found really relevant. These symptoms, such as coughing, vomiting, fevers, and even pain in general, are typically seen as nuisances, and we tend to simply take a pill to relieve these symptoms. However, sometimes it doesn’t occur to us that these are actually evolutionary defenses. Some of them would be obvious; vomiting can rid the body of toxins, and pain serves as a warning to stay away from things or activities that can harm the body. But some are not so obvious, like fevers. According to the blog, the body’s rising temperature could actually help to kill the infections within the body. Furthermore, it’s been shown that people who suffer a fever during a bout of the flu tend to recover more quickly than people who take fever-reducing medicine in order to be more comfortable. I find this fascinating because this is actually my approach when I am sick: to let my body take care of itself, as it was meant to do. Others tell me that I should take medicines, but I argue against it for the reasons this article explains. The rest of the article is a wealth of information on other topics that may be influenced by evolution and Darwinian medicine, such as psychological disorders and the concept of “coping with novelty”.


In conclusion, I am looking forward to taking this class, especially now that I have done some background research on it.

Public Support vs Entertainment

      Before I read Wiley and Allen's Chapter 5, I quickly looked over the reading and noticed that many topics were going to be discussed. But after I finished a couple of pages, I quickly realized that there are many connections between each of the sections. One that I would like to address comes from a combination of this week's reading and my recent knowledge of a movie called The Pregnancy Pact about a girl who purposely becomes pregnant as a way to "keep the man she desperately loves." How does one react to movies like this and reality shows such as High School Moms, I'm Pregnant and…., My Teen is Pregnant and So Am I, 16 and Pregnant, Pregnant in Heels, and Teen Mom? TLC and MTV have been hard at work at showcasing the challenges of teen pregnancies! 

      Obviously the topic of pregnancy has been thoroughly exploited at this point but what worries me is when I start weighing out the influence of these shows on their viewers (mainly young adult females) and the research data that this week's reading points out. On one hand, these shows can teach young people how tough teen parenthood really is, but on the other, teenagers can glorify it by seeing the publicity and fame that comes with being on a pregnancy reality show. A similar issue comes into play when one analyzes research information that has been derived from our society. We live in a world where reproductive development is rapidly increasing among the younger generation which is linked to earlier menarche among girls.  But the long-term consequences of early menarche include both cardiovascular disease and cancer. (Wiley and Allen, 129) This can also explain Table 5.4 where it shows that if the child was born when the mother was around age 15, the probability of the mom being alive at the child's 20th birthday was much greater than if she waited until age 30. (Wiley and Allen, 130) More data is also available showing that birth weights were higher for the firstborn children of younger mothers than older mothers. (Wiley and Allen, 130) 

      At a biological standpoint, the younger you become pregnant, the better! On a social and economical perspective, however, there are too many girls these days who have unrealistic ideas about the life of a teen mother and the hardships that follow. It's a battle between public support and entertainment. But who will win?

Week 1 - Chapter 5

     Andrea Wiley and John Allen present many fascinating points about growth and development throughout Chapter 5. A section I found particularly intriguing was that about environmental toxins and growth in adolescents.

     For many of us, we can think of pollution levels dating as far back as the Industrial Revolution, and possibly even sooner. What has not been as prevalent are the affects these pollutant have on the human body. Adolescents are especially vulnerable to toxins and unborn children in the womb are even more at risk. Lead poisoning is an example of such a substance. If a pregnant woman exposes herself to these dangerous substances, in particular early on in the pregnancy, the child is expected to be born with a lower weight at birth than one that is healthy and unexposed. Increasing levels of exposure result in decreasing birth weights of children. These affects on an infant have been compared to those of tobacco smoking in pregnant women, with similar consequences (Wiley and Allen).

    In today’s post industrial society, where pollutants surround us, why are individuals not taking extra careful precaution so as to not expose their unborn child to any more toxins than necessary? In the United States, at least, most people have access to some form of education on the matter. Unfortunately, this is not the case for less fortunate countries, living in poorer neighborhoods. How can these people be made more aware of the danger of exposure, the effects of which can last long after birth, even being retained in breast milk that is ingested by the infant?

Week One

When I was going through the readings from this week, I kept on drawing parallels between my own life and what the authors were focused on. So, for this blog post, I decided to focus or relating the reading to myself and my own experiences.

In the Scientific American blog post, Maria Konnikova talks about the difference between today’s youth and youth in the past.  “When I was your age…” is a phrase that I have heard from my mum many times. Following this phrase is usually some comment about having to walk miles to school, studying with candles when the electricity went out, or learning how to cook a full course meal when she was only ten years old. Konnikova brings up the great point that maybe, just maybe, there is not this profound difference between generations.

Differences between generations do exist, but there are many similarities as well. For one, my mum always brings up the fact that she had to work hard to get what she wanted and that nothing ever comes easily. However, isn’t that the same with the youth now? Many of us in college hold jobs so that we don’t have to ask our parents for money. Yes, we do 'play,' but we also do our homework and study for our tests.

Another point from this blog post is that information passed down between generations is highly selective and usually events that we recall are ones that have been marked by a huge change. From all the things my mum has told me about, if you asked me to name one, the first I would name is her coming to America. This was the biggest change in my mum’s life; after all, she had grown up in India. Because these major events are the things we remember, our mothers look at our lives and shake their heads because they are ‘stagnant.’

The latter is one of the points Konnikova makes that I would actually like to challenge using my own experiences. Because my mom moved to America, everything here is such a new culture. I know that my mum does not think my life is stagnant or that my life is not transitioning. In fact, we have all just made a huge transition: coming to college. The clubs we join and activities we do are things that make our lives different from our parents. While I agree that adults may look upon our generations and pity the way we do things, I believe they also look upon us with awe because of the new technology and such made available to us. 

Chapter 5

Chapter 5: In reading this chapter of Growth and Development I learned about two fundamental constraints: time and energy.

Hill and Kaplan state that these two constraints have two major task; growth/maturation and reproduction. According to the book time and energy may not be used simultaneously for reproduction. I took this to mean that it takes energy to conceive and time as the birth process takes place.

The authors describe time as how much time we have left on this earth. Therefore, for most people time is impossible to measure out. I found it interesting that if an organism knew that their time on earth was low that the recommended way to manage the time left correctly is to reproduce. This view as opposed to the view of enjoy life while you can, is very unfamiliar to me. If my time on earth was limited and I knew it the last thing on my mind would be reproduction, especially if whatever is limiting my time on earth can be passed on to my off-springs.

Probability of being alive for child’s 20^th birthday

Age at Birth		Whites	Blacks	Harlem	Detroit	Chicago	Watts
Mothers
15		0.99	0.98	0.95	0.97	0.95	0.96
20		0.99	0.97	0.91	0.95	0.93	0.95
25		0.98	0.96	0.88	0.93	0.9	0.92
30		0.97	0.94	0.85	0.9	0.87	0.9
Fathers
15		0.97	0.94	0.89	0.9	0.86	0.87
20		0.96	0.92	0.82	0.88	0.82	0.85
25		0.96	0.9	0.74	0.85	0.78	0.83
30		0.94	0.88	0.68	0.8	71	0.8

By being from the Westside of Chicago and from what I hear about Harlem I think that this chart is pretty accurate being that those two cities have the lowest percentages as far as parents probability of being alive for child’s 20^th birthday, mainly because those are dangerous areas. I know that in Chicago, depending on which part, a lot of dad’s are poor and uneducated and have, unfortunately, become involved in selling drugs to make ends meet. With that being said, as we all know that is a dangerous job to do and can often lead to an early death.

As far as race goes I am not sure what to make of that. Maybe you guys can better help me understand why it seems blacks have a lower percentage in this chart.

Peace!!

Week One

The reading for this week by Wiley and Allen was extremely interesting, but covered a lot of ground. As such, I think I will focus on the parts that stuck out the most to me, and pose some questions for you all to consider.

One of the first things that the reading went into was life history theory. It just so happens that this theory was one of the topics covered in Personality Psych, a course I took last semester. One of the main features of this theory is the two main constraints that all living beings are faced with, namely those of time and energy. As reproductive beings, the two most important things we can spend our time and energy on are reproduction and growth/maturation. Unfortunately, we can’t invest in both at the same time, and as a result, which of these that we choose to focus on is determined by the environment in which we are raised. If we are raised in an environment which has abundant resources, we can spend more time maturing and growing before beginning reproduction, since there is a lower mortality rate. On the other hand, if we are raised in an environment which has very scarce resources, the focus on reproduction becomes more prominent, since there is a higher mortality rate.

However, what Wiley and Allen did not discuss is r/K selection theory, which is another important facet of life history theory. In essence, an r-selection strategy would be one which tries to produce as many offspring as possible, and dedicates the least amount of time to parenting these children. This strategy is common within an environment which is unsafe and unstable, meaning that mortality rates are higher. A K-selection strategy involves having fewer children, but spending a lot more time raising them. K-strategy is most often seen in environments which are safe and have stable supplies of resources.

While I am somewhat confused as to why Wiley and Allen did not mention these strategies, I do not feel that their absence detracted from the article in any significant way. As far as questions go, I would like to ask this:

These two strategies can be present within a single species of organism, meaning that even today these strategies may manifest themselves within humankind. Do you feel that these theories hold any value in our current society? Is one strategy inherently preferred over another (culturally, socially, environmentally, etc.)? If so, why is this? I’m interested to hear what people have to say about this, and have included a relatively simplified explanation of r/L selection if anyone wants to check it out.

Maybe we should stick to the Middle

Reading  “Chapter 5: Growth and Development,” from Medical Anthropology: A Biocultural by Andrea S. Wiley and John S. Allen, I was initially nervous what I would write this blog about. NOT because it wasn’t interesting, but because I didn’t know where to dedicate me focus. For about thirty pages, we got the pleasure of reading about human development from Gestation to the end of Childhood.  It is quite a wide topic and that chapter contains several interesting insights that I was not aware of. In the end I decided to write about the thing, which I found to be the oddest, and that was the fact that extremes are, in a medical sense, not optimal.

I first notice this during the discussion about birth weights, and then again when the chapter discussed height and weight. It was this second instance that I found so interesting and I hope to explore in this post.

SMALL BUT HEALTHY? ... IS BIGGER BETTER?

These are two of the titles that the chapter uses to introduce this idea about growth and development in reference to body size. The first one talks about how slight figures are an adaptation, which can result from mild malnutrition. It is a reaction to the fact there is not enough nutrients available to help sustain a larger body, and so the body remains health despite being small. However Wiley and Allen make the distinction that just because the body adapts that does not make the adaptation “good” or “optimal.” By looking at a child’s growth, Wiley and Allen Believe that they can better understand the socio-economic conditions from which they come.

The next title discusses child obesity/overweightness and although though children are not lacking supplements, there calorie intake is higher than it should be so instead of converting the remain energy into height it converts it into weight. Thus obesity/overweightness have increased in resent years, leading to various health defects.

            SO WHAT?

I’m sure some people are wondering why I find this to be so interesting. In my mind it is simple. In our health crazed society we tend to use body weight and height to judge people. Sure bigger isn’t always better. Obesity can lead to certain health concerns such as Type II diabetes. However being stick thin is not always the positive indicator that we always think it is. How can we find the balance between them?