HOLY CRAP!.......before I write my blog........THIS IS THE LAST ONE!!!!
Maybe Memphis in May should have been moved to this weekend. This year's Memphis in May was a real disappointment. I know that it is tradition for the festival to see more rain than sunshine, but tornado warnings are not part of the annual forecast. The weather men proved some of credibility with this past weekend's weather prediction. Nobody had no clue how bad the weather was going to be. After Friday night, the rain, wind, and tornado warnings made believers out of many people that wanted to attend this year's music festival. Every year people reserve hotels and purchase tickets for this all weather three-day event. Unfortunately, the year was a little too water-logged. The weather was even discouraging for some of the bands. Several dropped out after Friday. Saturday was even worse. The park's events were postponed until three o'clock. The weather had settled down some with random downpours. My friend Bailey and I decided to go around nine o'clock. Her aunt had two tickets that she gave us because she decided not to use them. We got all the way downtown when we heard the sirens go crazy. Then, we got a ton of text messages that flooded our phones (no pun intended!). Everyone was telling us to turn around. We left the area quickly. The tickets were a waste of money, and I felt sorry for Bailey's aunt because she had wasted about sixty dollars. The website clearly states that there is no refunds and that the events are subject to change, but there should be some way to ensure satisfaction of the customer when the weather gets this bad. Sunday, a lot more bands dropped out because they could not make it due to the flooding, or because they did not want to participate in the music festival anymore. The weekend was a total disappointment for me and others that were anticipating an exciting weekend.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Blog 14
Maybe we have a slightly bigger problem than what was originally thought. The recent gulf coast oil spill is going to have a huge impact on our lives. Our gas prices will go up; also the spill poses a big health risk to the people on the coast. However the biggest cause for concern is the wildlife and the seafood industry .many animals could be in danger because of this spill. If the spill reaches the shoreline, the seafood industry could be shut down for years. The gulf coast is the nation’s biggest seafood provider. If the seafood is not available, many restaurants will have to resort to using imported seafood from out of the country. The spill will have a huge impact on the fishermen of the gulf coast. Fishing is their livelihood, which for most of them dates back to generations. This oil spill could cost hundreds of fishermen their jobs. Most of them probably have never done anything else but fish for a living. One of the main issues right now is that there is not enough oil containment booms to be put out into the gulf to protect the coast line and the wildlife and seafood. BP has stated that there were three leaks. One of them has been capped off; however, two of them remain producing about 200,000 gallons of oil a day into the gulf. The current plan is to have an oil containment dome, which will be used to pump out most of the oil. The 100 ton, 40 feet high steel, concrete box should arrive to the coast by the weekend. The gas company says that this will be an experiment in hopes to contain this crude oil. The odds of this plan working are about 50/50. There is not a real solution to this problem. There is already a lot of damage that has been done. The news has already stated that this oil spill will influence The Gulf and its marine life for many years to come.
Blog 13
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/may/02/woolly-mammoth-antifreeze-blood
What if we can prove another piece in the science of evolution? In a recent study by a group of scientists led by Kevin Campbell, a paleobiologist, evidence of a blood adaptation was found in wooly mammoths. The study was conducted on a wooly mammoth that was 43,000 years old. The team extracted DNA from the animal's remains. These great, big animals existed in the harshest weather. They lived in sub-zero climates. They lived during the Ice Age when climate changes were spread globally. How could they have survived in sub-zero climates? The team set out to answer this question when they began the study. The DNA remains were processed, and the answer was found in the wooly mammoth's blood. The animal's haemoglobin had adapted genetically to the harsh climates and resist heat loss. The wooly mammoth had already undergone evolutionary transformations in the size of their small ears and small tails; but their haemoglobin allowed their bodies to function. The team also conducted another study in which they compared the DNA of modern elephants to that of their ancestor. The study shows that the modern day elephant and the wooly mammoth's genetics are not too different. The protein of the wooly mammoth was slightly different. The research proved that the wooly mammoth's haemoglobin burned less energy than the modern elephant. The oxygen could be carried throughout the body with very little energy. The less energy it used the less heat the animal lost. This was an efficient evolutionary adaptation. The study proves that without this genetic change, the wooly mammoth probably would not have survived at all. The research that has been done has also led to other studies in other animals. Scientists are looking for more "antifreeze systems" in animals that have adapted genetically. These studies will greatly impact science and evolutionary research.
What if we can prove another piece in the science of evolution? In a recent study by a group of scientists led by Kevin Campbell, a paleobiologist, evidence of a blood adaptation was found in wooly mammoths. The study was conducted on a wooly mammoth that was 43,000 years old. The team extracted DNA from the animal's remains. These great, big animals existed in the harshest weather. They lived in sub-zero climates. They lived during the Ice Age when climate changes were spread globally. How could they have survived in sub-zero climates? The team set out to answer this question when they began the study. The DNA remains were processed, and the answer was found in the wooly mammoth's blood. The animal's haemoglobin had adapted genetically to the harsh climates and resist heat loss. The wooly mammoth had already undergone evolutionary transformations in the size of their small ears and small tails; but their haemoglobin allowed their bodies to function. The team also conducted another study in which they compared the DNA of modern elephants to that of their ancestor. The study shows that the modern day elephant and the wooly mammoth's genetics are not too different. The protein of the wooly mammoth was slightly different. The research proved that the wooly mammoth's haemoglobin burned less energy than the modern elephant. The oxygen could be carried throughout the body with very little energy. The less energy it used the less heat the animal lost. This was an efficient evolutionary adaptation. The study proves that without this genetic change, the wooly mammoth probably would not have survived at all. The research that has been done has also led to other studies in other animals. Scientists are looking for more "antifreeze systems" in animals that have adapted genetically. These studies will greatly impact science and evolutionary research.
Blog 12
Maybe we should get more than a couple hours of sleep each night. As a full time college student and worker, I find it hard to get a decent amount of sleep every night. It is recommended that we get at least 8 hours of sleep each night. Most people do not get this much each night. I hardly ever get more than 5 or 6 hours each night. I consider myself lucky to get 6 or 7 hours of sleep in one night. According to an article that I read in The Guardian's science section, getting less than 6 hours of sleep may lead to early death. It is a scary thought for a college student that has many stresses and work to do every day. Outside assignments make up the majority of college work, and allowing time for those assignments after work is very tiring. However, I have to do them in order to pass and succeed. The scientists that conducted this work also concluded that getting too much sleep can lead to early death due to illness. The likelihood of someone dying from too much sleep is not as threatening as lack of sleep. Lack of sleep can really harm a person's health. The article suggests that the economical status is placing pressure on a society that works long hours to make enough money to pay bills and "get by." The study that they conducted revealed that lack of sleep was also linked to heart disease, high blood pressure, obesity, and diabetes. These studies make sense if we step back and look at how the majority of people function in today's world. We are people that are constantly on-the-go. Maybe one day we can all find a resting period, and I do not mean early death!
Blog #11
http://www.aolhealth.com/2010/04/23/store-makeup-testers-often-contaminated-with-herpes-e-coli/
What if you got E. coli from a cosmetic sample? A recent study that was conducted by Elizabeth Brooks, a M.D. and biological sciences professor at Jefferson Medical College, shows how just how contaminated free testers are at different stores. The test results were positive for E. coli bacteria, conjunctivitis, herpes, staph, and strep. "Wherever you see E. coli, you should just think 'E. coli equals feces,' " Brooks told the newspaper. How gross! The results were shown 100 percent of the time. The tests were conducted on busy days like Friday and Saturdays. How are these viruses and bacteria spread? Some people apply these testers and samples directly to the skin. For example, somebody sticking their finger in an eye shadow tester and applying the makeup directly to the eyelid. The article uses the example of lipstick being applied directly to the lips. If a consumer comes to test some lipstick and uses a cotton swab to apply the lipstick, she can still contaminate herself because she is unaware of whether or not the person before her applied the lipstick directly to their lips. I have had a personal experience at a makeup counter where a salesperson has put her finger directly into a tester and applied the product to my face with her finger. I thought that was nasty and unsanitary on her part. The article discusses other options for women at the makeup counter. One option is to wipe off the top of a sample with a cloth dipped in alcohol, but it also states that the alcohol will only get rid of some of the bacteria. It encourages people to avoid uses brushes that people use to apply the sample product. Another suggestion was to avoid things like lotion that come in a jar or container that one would typically apply to the body with the hand. Instead, the article advises people to use tube sample that can be squeezed out.
What if you got E. coli from a cosmetic sample? A recent study that was conducted by Elizabeth Brooks, a M.D. and biological sciences professor at Jefferson Medical College, shows how just how contaminated free testers are at different stores. The test results were positive for E. coli bacteria, conjunctivitis, herpes, staph, and strep. "Wherever you see E. coli, you should just think 'E. coli equals feces,' " Brooks told the newspaper. How gross! The results were shown 100 percent of the time. The tests were conducted on busy days like Friday and Saturdays. How are these viruses and bacteria spread? Some people apply these testers and samples directly to the skin. For example, somebody sticking their finger in an eye shadow tester and applying the makeup directly to the eyelid. The article uses the example of lipstick being applied directly to the lips. If a consumer comes to test some lipstick and uses a cotton swab to apply the lipstick, she can still contaminate herself because she is unaware of whether or not the person before her applied the lipstick directly to their lips. I have had a personal experience at a makeup counter where a salesperson has put her finger directly into a tester and applied the product to my face with her finger. I thought that was nasty and unsanitary on her part. The article discusses other options for women at the makeup counter. One option is to wipe off the top of a sample with a cloth dipped in alcohol, but it also states that the alcohol will only get rid of some of the bacteria. It encourages people to avoid uses brushes that people use to apply the sample product. Another suggestion was to avoid things like lotion that come in a jar or container that one would typically apply to the body with the hand. Instead, the article advises people to use tube sample that can be squeezed out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
