Conditional Racism.

Apparently this is a real product?
Image Credit:http://images.fileferrets.org/vv2008/

t's not okay to be racist conditionally. It's not okay to use a racial slur to refer to a person whom you don't like or respect. It's not okay to make a satire ad for Obama Waffles, even if you think he is failing at his job. It's not okay to superimpose Condoleeza Rice's face on Aunt Jemima's face just because you think her participation in The Bush Administration sets both women and blacks back. It's not okay to refer to an entire grassroots organization as "white crackers", even if you believe this organization to be the very same people who were against the civil rights movement (ignoring the fact that the Tea Party platform never mentions race, anywhere. And ignoring the fact that this organization is made up of people who represent a multitude of races and ethnicities and a wide range of ages ie too young to be part of protests against the civil rights movement) 

It's also not okay to throw around the labels -ist, bigot, or anti- just because someone doesn't agree with you. There are very valid reasons to dislike world leaders, regardless of race. Being pro-Pakistan

A racist caricature of Condoleeza Rice
Image Credit: ZenComix.Com

does not necessarily make you anti-Semitic, being pro-Isreal does not necessarily make you anti-Muslim. 

Lastly, it's not okay to excuse the autonomous actions of a particular group that segregates themselves along racial or religious lines, while berating another group for doing the exact same thing. Eg supporting whites who disallow marriage to anyone other than another white, while shaming blacks who disallow marriage between a black person and anyone who is any other color. 

Stop running from the debates that have the power to advance society. Stop using the name calling shield. Most controversial views have valid supporting ideals. Effective compromise will make the world a better place, but this compromise cannot happen if we continue to act like kindergarteners. Use logic, not emotion.

With Regard to Agressive Atheists.

Side note: I am not okay with the claim that always science endorses
atheism. The scientific method cannot apply to spirituality because
there is no observable data on the topic.
Logically, science would endorse agnosticism. The openness to all
ideas about who we are, where we came from, and what might be out there.
 Scientific evidence counters things in the bible ie. the literal
translation of creation and the idea that heaven is in the sky. But, this
limited data has little impact on the expanse of spirituality.
Photo Credit: PSNT.net

I'd like to rant for a minute, if that's okay.
To the atheists of the Internet: I've noticed that you feel that you are victimized quite often. I've noticed that a few of you are quite defensive about your choice. So much so that you attack anyone you perceive to not agree with you.

Maybe this emotional reaction stems from how people close to you view your choice. But, to millions of strangers, your choice is insignificant. Much like the choice to be religious by other interneters is insignificant. Perhaps, you are defensive because your religious parents are upset with your choice. Or maybe you are defensive because you feel that the religion you grew up with has been a controlling sham that you resent for dictating so much of your life.

I applaud your ability to think for yourself. Your ability to use critical thinking to reach an important life decision. It's okay to be atheist. It really is. It's not okay to insult and attack those who are not atheist. If they are insulting or attacking you for your decision, by all means, tell them that it is your choice, and they have no right to tell you how to live your life.

But there cannot be a double standard. If you expect people to respect your decision and show it by not attempting to belittle you or convert you, you cannot belittle or attempt to convert others.

An example of the kind of rude behavior this post is about.
Photo Credit: Un-Learning.Org

If a discussion about faith arises, politely explain how you reached your decision. This may mean pointing out the flaws you perceive religion and spirituality to have. If, once you have made your case in a rational and reasonable fashion, the dissenting party continues to tell you that you are a sinner who is going to Hell just give up. This debate is not worth your time.

It is okay to discuss your perceived downsides of religion, but it must be done in a polite, logical, and civil debate.

I have reached the conclusion, entirely on my own, that religion is not right for me. But, since we cannot be certain that there is no higher power, I have chosen to remain spiritual. I find great comfort in the idea of an afterlife. I cannot imagine grieving for a lost love one with out the idea of an afterlife. I like using prayer to guide my life. But, I pray to whomever is listening, not necessarily an all powerful, all knowing man in the sky.

This is my decision. I, much like you, have reached it using critical thinking. I respect your decision, and I expect you to respect mine.

The world is changing. Not being religious is more widely accepted than many of you understand. So please be more confident in your choice to deny religion.

A billboard created by a Christian minister.
The rude, childish, overly emotional,
hate occurs in theists as well.
Photo Credit: GodDiscussion.Com

** Of course, there are many overly defensive, hypercritical religious people out there. Merely changing the word atheist to the name of any religion would hold the same meaning. Because every group has some members who are guilty of these actions. I just chose atheism because that is what I am most exposed to via the internet. I often see atheists attacking religious people when unprovoked. Or attacking an imaginary person when no one has said anything despairing or dissenting towards atheism. If you are atheist, and you feel that I am wrong in generating this post, I hope you will approach me in a civilized manner. Though, all of my atheist friends are mature, reasonable, pleasant people. So, I doubt this will be an issue. This was directed at the few, hateful, aggressive atheists that make their presence so well known on the internet.

*** Last note: An agnostic is a person who chooses to not accept or deny the existance of a higher power because sufficient evidence is lacking. Agnostic is the label I most identify with. To be clear, I am not an offended Christian, Muslim, or Jew ranting about the wrongs of atheism. I am just a person who fully believes in tolerance and acceptance of all reasonable thought processes.

A comic about agnosticism. I just love these guys.
Photo Credit: Cyanide and Happiness

Thank you for reading this. Any discourse that may result regarding this that is not mature and civilized will be removed. So, if you would like to comment, please act your age

Scientific Research and the General Population

My father, mother, and I were discussing the Aaron Swartz case, and we reached some interesting conclusions. I know he comes up a lot, but what he was doing was very important to me. I have been in the academic science field for around 8 years now. I had to take two research methods classes as an undergrad, and I'm set to take one at the graduate level in the coming year. An important part of science is the ability to analyze original research. You are presented with a document that ideally tells you how to recreate the experiment on your own. The authors draw their own conclusions about what the data indicates, but they must present the data uninterpreted in their journal articles.

My parents both hold masters degrees, one in chemistry, and the other in education. My dad attended college in the late 60s and early 70s, my mother attended in the 70s. Obviously, the ability to access scholarly sources has changed quite a bit in the past decades. My parents went to college during a time when any schmuck could walk in to a university library and pull a journal off of the stacks. My dad and his peers used xerox machines to copy the articles that they needed. I believe this violates copyright laws, or at least the signs posted on all university copiers lead me to believe this. My dad stated, "I don't know how the students in the 50s survived without the ability to xerox these papers." Indeed, I must frequently reread and annotate technical writing in order to fully understand the content. Not sure if everyone is like this, though I score high on reading comprehension tests.

My mother said that she continued to access the latest research, via academic journals, throughout her career. She used her own interpretation of original data to offer parents advice on how to deal with atypical learners. But, this was the 80s and 90s, just prior to widespread electronic databases. We tell doctors and dietitians to review original research when consulting patients. Entire units are focused on giving med and dietetics students the skills to effectively analyze research.

We use original research to generate laws that affect the public, yet the public does not have reasonable access to original research. If you are not affiliated with academia, it's very expensive to access these journals. Something like $30 per article. It could be argued that it is expensive to access these journals if you are affiliated with academia, because the cost is reflected in tuition, and the ability to pay university employees.

In the US, and other places I'm sure, tax dollars are used to fund scientific studies. So, we are all paying to fund these studies. Why doesn't every single citizen have reasonable access to this research?

Aaron understood this. He took action, and in the end he raised awareness for the open science movement. I whole heartedly wish things had gone differently. I would trade the gains that he afforded the movement for him to still be alive. But, since that isn't going to happen, let's use his work to further the movement.

My father loves to play devil's advocate, and in doing so we reached a nice compromise. Publishers don't have to offer everything at a loss. But, they could accept a decrease in profit margins, by lowering the cost of access. What if access to an article cost $1.50? Would that be reasonable? With the advent of electronic databases and PDF, publishers don't have to foot the costs of ink, paper, and press production. The user has the right to print the article, but they pay for ink, paper, and printer access. In my experience, this tacks on around $0.75 to the cost. It wouldn't hurt to limit the amount of unneeded paper use to print physical journals. Trees probaby aren't an unlimited resource.

If you are a researcher, consider making your articles open access. Use a platform that allows for this. Figshare is great! http://figshare.com/. You worked hard on your research, you spent hours in LaTeX writing, so share it with the world.

As scientists, we are asked to reference original data. Yet, in the current system, we ask the public to rely on journalist's intereptation of the origninal research. I'm sure, during your undergrad career, you were asked to do an assignment comparing a scientific popular culture article to the original research. I'm sure you know that this system can be misleading. Let's fix this.

I would be quite pleased to see intelligent, civilized discourse on the matter. Please comment with your views. You may alter the views of your peers. If you have a good argument in defense of the current system, this blog would love to hear it.

Disclaimer: The views presented in this blog do not necessarily represent the views of the individuals or organizations mentioned in this blog. If any individual, deceased individual's family or friends, or organization would like their reference removed from this post, please contact me.  

In Light of the NSA Scandal... here are some thoughts, focusing mainly on piracy and internet censorship. Maybe it's the roots of a call to action?

 Let's change the entire US government. Let's stop allowing corporations and special interests groups to have more power over the government than citizens have over their government. Let's fight internet censorship

Aaron Swartz, one of my idols (I know, it's weird to
have an idol who is only a year older than you.), a
man who clearly operated using level 6 ethics,
a believer in freedom, a warrior against corruption,
an amazing coder, and a handsome Jewish boy : )
Photo Credit: FreeCulture.Org 

and government spying. Let's create a government where prosecutors are not allowed to bully defendants (RIP Aaron Swartz). Let's create a government where shit actually gets done! 
I dislike the party system (particularly the two party system). I dislike people who label theirselves as a republican, democrat, tea partier, green partier, libertarian, etc, and blindly follow a party.I don't hate this country, but it could be better. Let's overhaul the system! Who is with me?

Elton John's magnificent Old Windsor Estate
Photo Credit:BornRich.Com

Want to help out? Do a little research on the pressing issues, I'd start with anything pertaining to the war against internet use. Formulate an opinion. Perhaps, you agree with the proposed anti-piracy bills (CISPA, PIPA, SOPA, and what ever SOPA was originally called). The Recording Artists of America makes the valid argument that piracy hurts everyone in the recording industry, from the producers all the way to the janitors. Of course, Elton John has 8 upscale domiciles, and a net worth of 280 Million US dollars[1]. I wonder if Sir Elton could take a pay cut in order to provide raises, pension funds, health insurance to the lower paid supporting employees? It should be noted that SEJ recently auctioned off 5 (the 6th one didn't sell, I guess) of his 6 incredibly luxurious automobiles to benefit his HIV/AIDS foundation. He is in no way evil, and that's not the point I am trying to make here. I am only using Sir Elton as an example, because he has come out in support of these anti-piracy bills[2].

Photo Credit: ORBooks.Co
Perhaps it is theft when you torrent a film, an album, or software. I don't torrent, I can see how it hurts people. But those who helped organize the fights against these bills found that the issue was far greater than copyright infringement, or theft[3]. The issue was government censorship of the internet. The government was seeking to block access to entire websites. The book Hacking Politics (available here http://goo.gl/lhfjv) details the fight for freedom on the internet. I think you should read it, and I haven't finished it, so I'm going to go in to detail here. It's only $10 for the electronic version ($25 for the print version, I went with the print version because I wanted to further support Demand Progress), and you will not be let down. 

Anywho, I am currently battling strep throat (with the aid of hydrocodone), so I am sorry if this isn't a great post. I will expand on it when I am feeling better. As always, please don't just take my word for it. Get out there. Do your own research. Enjoy my views and interpretations, but formulate your own! Oh getting back to the "if you want to help out" claim, here is a list of non-partisan organizations that are working to protect internet rights, alter the way our government works, or just change the way we do things.

• Demand Progress is currently run by a former US representative(David Segal), and a Washington policy attorney (David Moon). I believe they started in 2012, but I could be wrong. This organization generates online campaigns, petitions, and letters to your congressman or woman with a special interest in internet and electronic protection. You can become a member, or you can just participate in campaigns  (for free!). Find them here:http://www.demandprogress.org/

• The Electronic Frontier Foundation started in 1990, before people really cared about the internet. The EFF operates in a similar fashion to Demand Progress, but has a broader scope. This organization also offers more information on topics and issues than Demand Progress, thanks to a larger team. You can find them here:https://www.eff.org/

Photo Credit: Demand Progress

Photo Credit: Electronic Frontier Foundation

I'll add more as they come to me. Thank you for reading! Stay tuned for a post regarding the NSA scandal, as I have a chance to research it more. Stay skeptical!





References:
1.http://www.bornrich.com/sir-elton-john.html
2.http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/story?id=112766&page=1#.UbMTkvZ8LPQ
3. Moon, D; Ruffini, P; Segal, D [2013]. Hacking Politics: How Geeks, Progressives, the Tea Party, Gamers, Anarchists, and Suits Teamed up to Defeat SOPA and Save the Internet. Print copy from OR Books.

Disclaimer: the views expressed in this blog do not necessarily represent the views of the individuals or organizations mentioned in this blog. These individuals/organizations are in no way affiliated with the Skeptical Cati blog. Think of this as my interpretation of the information these individuals/organizations have made available in print or online. Please direct any complaints to my Gmail account: Caitlin.Swartz88@Gmail. I will gladly remove any information or photos the individuals (or individual's friends and family, in the heartbreaking case of Aaron Swartz) or organizations mentioned are not comfortable with being presented in this blog. 

My take on what happened to the Neanderthals.

I suppose I will start my blog off with a series of works I have written for school. This is a final paper   that I did for ecological anthropology. I earned a 95%, because I made the claim that human's are the dominant niche. I still believe that we are, though I recognize that every species is of equal importance. we are just at the top of the food chain, according to my research  we attained this rank using cunning intelligence, rather than the traditional use of brute force.

I am left with a wonder about the implications of human dominance. We have dramatically altered the ecosystem. Luckily, mother earth is resilient. I assume that if the world were to "end" because of our actions, the earth would adapt to our changes. The world would end in the sense that humans would no longer exist. But, do we have the power to end all life? Or would it be like the dinosaur extinction? If we cease to be, would this event allow another species to fill the top niche?  In any case, if human life were to end, the giant spherical rock we call earth would probably still exist. Provided that we don't accidentally create and detonate an explosive capable of  annihilating the planet.

        Super Humans: Homo sapien Domination of the Hominid Niche through Innovation

       

A comparison of AMH and neanderthal
bone structure.
Photo credit:http://tinyurl.com/d6ojrzk

Homo neanderthalensis (Neanderthals) occupied Eurasia for roughly a half a million years. These hominids were well adapted to the colder climates of Eurasia. This is demonstrated in their robust bone structure, short limbs, and large nasal passages (Mellars,1998). These stocky traits limited heat loss by keeping the limbs close to the blood supply. The large nasal passages helped warm and humidify air before allowing it to enter the lungs (Gilligan, 2007). This is in contrast to the gracile, heat adapted anatomically modern humans (AMH) who began developing in Africa around 200 kya. AMHs had long limbs, which were ideal for heat loss (Gilligan, 2007). Neanderthals had a larger brain case with an average cranial capacity of 1450 ccs. AMH demonstrate a cranial capacity of 1345 cc. The relatively small difference in cranial capacity does not necessarily indicate that Neanderthals were more intelligent than AMH (Gilligan, 2007). It should be noted that the range of height and width in Neanderthals falls with in the shorter, wider range of AMHs. Neanderthals used the Mousterian techno complex and eventually developed the Châtelperronian techno complex (Gilligan, 2007). AMH used the Aurignacian and Gravettian techno complexes. Neanderthals were top carnivorous predators who likely hunted large game. This is demonstrated through analysis of stable isotope dating, faunal remains, and the comparison of bone injuries to bone injuries that occur in rodeo performers (Hockett & Haws, 2005). AMH were omnivores who exploited a wide range of plant and animal sources (Hocket et al., 2005).  Neanderthals were undoubtedly more fit in the environment in Eurasia than AMH.

         The Neanderthals went extinct about 30 kya. This event allowed AMH to fill the hominid niche. Currently, there are three main theories as to why the Neanderthals became extinct: climate change, competition for resources with migrating AMH, and DNA admixture of Neanderthals in to AMH. Regardless of what ecological factors caused the demise of the Neanderthals, all three theories suggest that greater innovation by AMH in clothing, diet, and social networks allowed for humans to survive and take over the hominid niche.

         Marine isotope stage 3, which occurred from 60kya to 24 kya, was characterized by rapid fluctuations in temperature and wind velocity (Gilligan, 2007).  This situation limited the amount of genetic adaptation that could occur. The cold spikes were particularly detrimental to the Neanderthals. These cold spikes included wind velocity spikes and the combination increased the wind chill factor and thus cold stress. If cold stress is allowed to continue for too long hypothermia and eventually death will occur. Hypothermia as a cause of death is undetectable after the victim returns to a normal temperature. It is also undetectable in the skeletal structure of fossilized remains. Clothing can protect against cold stress and can be broken down in to two categories: simple and complex. Simple clothing includes lose clothing that is draped over the wearer while complex clothing is layered and form fitting. Protection from cold stress through the use of clothing is rated in units known as clos. Simple clothing provides 1-2 clos while complex clothing provides 3-5 clos.       

         It is assumed that the Neanderthals used simple clothing in the form of animal pelts loosely draped over the wearer (Gilligan, 2007). This is inferred through the observation that Neanderthals were cold adapted.  If they were using clothing that provided adequate protection from cold stress there would be no evolutionary force selecting for cold adaptation because a less fit wearer would not die from cold stress. It is assumed that AMH used complex clothing because they remained heat adapted after they migrated in to Eurasia. Other factors such as, the discovery of needles and buttons at AMH sites provide evidence that AHM were using complex clothing.

         Infants and young children are far more susceptible to hypothermia. If the Neanderthals could not adequately protect their offspring from cold stress the rate of infant mortality would increase. This in turn would cause the population to decrease as fewer individuals make it to reproductive age. In contrast, if AMH were using clothing to protect their infants from cold stress their fertility rates would increase or at least stay constant (Gilligan, 2007). The use of complex clothing is a clear example of an AMH innovation that protected them from mortality. 

         The MIS 3 rapid climate fluctuations inevitably altered the amount of flora and fauna in any given period. Early humans would need to adjust their hunting and gathering practices to account for changes in available energy sources. It is documented that the Neanderthals were top predators who mainly consumed large game. While AMH consumed a wide range of plant and animal sources (Hockett et al., 2005).

         It is well documented in current nutritional science that meat sources provide a large amount of macronutrients while plant sources provide a large amount of micronutrients. Micronutrients are often involved in the extraction of kilocalories (Kcals) from macronutrients. Without micronutrients the dense amount of calories in, for example, bone marrow, would be wasted when a lack of niacin rendered the TCA cycle ineffective (Hockett et al., 2005).  Furthermore, it is known that consuming a wide variety of foods increases life span and helps women have safer pregnancies and healthier babies. That is, combining adequate Kcal consumption with adequate vitamin and mineral consumption decreases mortality along the lifespan. This increases the fertility rate by allowing more individuals to survive to reproductive age (Hockett et al., 2005).

         The ability to exploit a wider range of sustenance protects the individual from starving in time when large game is scarce (Hockett et al., 2005). Research shows that Neanderthals often endured famine and routinely underwent times of small-scale extinction in specific sites. However, that isn’t to say their highly specialized diet was completely ineffective. The Neanderthals survived in for 500,000 years, which is a very long time. Furthermore, big game yields a high Kcal return for a relatively small amount of work. This strategy was probably quite effective while the Neanderthals had little competition. It seems that their sustenance strategy became less effective once AMH began migrating in to Eurasia. This event created a kind of competition that the Neanderthals had probably never experienced and the pressure coupled with the fact that AMH’s wide diet breadth probably allowed their population size to increase caused a famine the Neanderthals could not recover from.

         A wide diet breadth filled with micronutrients from plant sources is a AMH innovation that not only kept them fed in times when big game was scarce but also allowed for increasing fertility rates and decreasing mortality rates. It should be noted that a population of Neanderthals in southern Spain survived until 28 kya or about 5-10 thousand years after the rest of the Neanderthals disappeared. These Neanderthals consumed a wider diet, which included shellfish and plant sources. They also lived north of the Ebro boundary, which kept them isolated from AMH for much longer than other Neanderthals (Hockett et al., 2005).

         Neanderthals lived in small groups with large land areas between them. They probably did not engage in trade with other Neanderthal groups nor did they transport valuable resources over long distances. This isolated way of life for Neanderthals contributed to periods of localized extinction (Horan, Bulte, and Shogren, 2004). AMH groups were large with small land areas in between. Groups were part of a larger social and trade network. This social network engaged in the trade of information and ideas as well as raw goods. With in AMH groups members participated in different activities and the settlements had different areas for different functions. AMH created innovations in food procurement, particularly in hunting, and these hunting innovations became a problem for the Neanderthals and their specialized diets. AMH innovations in group organization, culture, trade, and food procurement allowed for direct competitive exclusivity.

         DNA admixture is the theory that the Neanderthals went extinct through interbreeding with AMH (Wall and Hammer, 2006). It can be loosely tied to the overarching theme of AMH innovation with the assumption that Neanderthals chose to mate with AMH to attain the benefits of AMH innovation. Research is in the process of creating a Neanderthal genome from the mitochondrial DNA extracted from Neanderthal fossils. However, current data is limited. So far, research indicates that Europeans have .01-25% Neanderthal DNA. This is not highly suggestive of DNA admixture (Green, Krause, Ptak, Briggs, Ronan, Simons, Du, Egholm, Rothberg, Paunovic, and Paabo, 2006). This number may increase as we gather more Neanderthal loci or it may stay the same. More research is needed on this theory.

In summary, the Neanderthals were the closest members of the Homo genus to Homo sapiens who inhabited Eurasia exclusively. The species survived around 500,000 years but became extinct about 30-40 kya. This was around the time AMH entered Eurasia. The Neanderthals were more fit for the Eurasian environment than AMH. However, AMH managed to survive when the Neanderthals perished. There are three theories estimating why the Neanderthals became extinct: climate change, competitive exclusivity with AMH, and DNA admixture. AMH survival was probably due to innovations in clothing, social networks, and energy procurement. The exact cause of Neanderthal extinction may never be known but it was probably a combination of all three theories. Or perhaps it was from an extraneous factor that is yet to be discovered. Whatever the reason is it remains clear that humans used innovation in order to survive. In fact, we are still using innovation to dominate the top niche despite not necessarily being the most fit organism for the environment.

        

References

Green, R., Krause, J., Ptak, S., Briggs, A., Ronan, M., Simmons, J., Du, L., Egholm, M., Rotheberg, J.,

Paunovic, M., Paabo, S. (2006). Analysis of one million base pairs of Neanderthal DNA. Nature

444, 330-336

Gilligan, I. (2007). Neanderthal extinction and modern human behavior: the role of climate change and

clothing. World Archeology 39, 499-514

Hocket, B., Haws, J. (2005). Nutritional ecology and the human demography of Neanderthal extinction.

Quarternary International 137, 21-34

Horan, R., Bulte, E., Shogren, J. (2005) How trade saved humanity from biological exculsion: an

economic theory of Neanderthal extinction. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 58,

1-29

Mellars, P. (1998). The fate of the Neanderthals. Nature 395, 539-540.

Wall, J., Hammer, M. (2006). Archaic admixture in the human genome. Current Opinion in Genetics and

Development 16, 606-610

    

 

A Little Dietary Information (repost from my food blog)

A few semesters ago, I took a public health/nutrition class. As a project, I was asked to make a nutrition blog. This is the first post and I really liked it. I need to dig up the sources I used, they are somewhere on my hard drive. So, I will add them when I find them.

Nibbler, my three year old pug. Nibbler loves fruits and
vegetables and you can too! He also loves the baby swing

Ease in to your new healthy lifestyle
If you are a dog lover (like I am!), you know that changing your dog's diet is a gradual process. If you change your pup's food too quickly, they will suffer a range of gastrointestinal upset (1). It's the same for humans. If you suddenly switch from a processed diet to a whole foods diet, you will get diarrhea, bloating, and gas (2). No one ever told me this. Slowly, replace junk food with whole foods to give your gut fauna time to adjust. Also, a gradual change will make it easier for you to keep the change.

Don't give up if you don't like the new foods in the beginning. 
Over time, your palate will adapt to the flavors of foods that aren't designed to get your mesolimbic (reward pathway in your brain) all excited. High sugar, sodium, and fatty foods cause your brain to release the feel good neurotransmitters dopamine and serotonin. Scientists theorize that this is an evolutionary tactic to get you to select the foods that are optimal for survival (3). This tactic is maladaptive in our current ecosystem (at least in the western world). Food is readily available, so it is easy for you to ingest the high energy foods that were once so imperative and scarce. You are the result of humans who survived long enough to reproduce. The genetic factors that made your ancestors the most fit in times of scarcity are working against you now (4). So, fruits and vegetables don't provide the immense pleasure  you get from a doughnut. Your brain will adapt and this will actually lower your junk food cravings. It will be much easier to not graze eat (5). And, you will find yourself enjoying a big plate of vegetables.

Don't be afraid to add vegetables to a meal
When I eat on campus, I add vegetables from the salad bar to everything. I put spinach and mushrooms in tortilla soup. I add tomatoes and peas to my grilled cheese. My friends often remind me that I am adding calories to my food. But I am also adding filling fiber and water (6). Fiber can keep your blood sugar stable which keeps you from feeling ravishingly hungry in a few hours. And don't forget that I am adding precious micronutrients (vitamins and minerals that humans need for biochemistry to work properly).

Ditch potato chips for vegetables as a snack
Sometimes, we just feel compelled to eat. We might find ourselves eating an entire bag of potato chips while watching a few episodes of 30 Rock. Ideally, you should avoid mindless snacking. Too bad we don't do that. I like to employ, what public health professionals refer to as, harm reduction strategy. You're going to mindlessly snack but you can reduce your harm by swapping a bag of lays for a bag of snap peas. The entire bag of snap peas has far less calories and far more fiber and nutrients.

Don't buy in to marketing gimmicks and fad diets
Food corporations have taken note of the healthy food trend. Nutritional and health science is rapidly evolving. As a result, scientists are better able to tell consumers how they should be eating. Highly trained advertising executives are using this to sell more food. Cereals with similar nutritional value to cake are being marketed as healthy foods because they are fortified with vitamins. They have been fortified with vitamins for decades. They have also been fortified with sugar for decades. (Watch for a post on the history of cereal in the coming weeks.) Similarly, foods that have eliminated trans-fats are marketed as health foods. These foods are better for you now, but they are usually still junk.

This brings me to fad diets: juice fasts, paleo diet, atkin's diet, gluten free foods, and to some degree veganism and vegetarianism. Paleo and low carb diets work by shifting the kinds of foods you eat to healthier alternatives. A lower carb diet would have you swap refined grains for whole grains and that's great. But you don't have to follow a strict diet. If you switch to a whole foods, plant based diet you will lose weight. Extremely low carb diets are actually quite dangerous because glucose is the brain's preferred fuel. (again, watch for a post). Juice fasts are silly to me because they cut out all of that wonderful fiber. They are downright stupid if you use a juice cocktail. You should juice on your own. Or better yet, just puree fruits and vegetables. Gluten free diets are designed for people who suffer from celiac's disease. They are not necessarily better for you and Lady Gaga probably won't lose that extra 25 pounds on a GF diet. Gluten isn't evil, unless you have an intolerance to it. Finally, veganism can be a great whole foods diet. However, it isn't automatically whole foods. Plain lays potato chips are vegan.

Meet with a registered dietitian at least once in your life
RD's use evidence based practice to provide you with the most accurate information. He or she will provide you with plans for a healthier you. You don't need to go in looking to fix a specific problem.

An Abridged Autobiography

I'm Cati; I have a lot of thoughts. Too many for the social media platforms I currently use. So, at the recommendation of several friends and family members, I have decided to take up blogging. I don't exactly know what I am doing, I do not have and editor, and I am not a professional writer. Therefore, you should expect typos. Please don't berate me for them. Of course, this only matters if I can even get anyone to read this blog.

I'm 25 years old and I am about to move from sunny Southern Arizona to chilly Upstate New York. I am working towards a master's degree in clinical dietetics, but I have a passion for research. I did undergraduate work in Public Health and Nutrition, at The University of Arizona.

High school Caitlin. Note the sweet foil hat.

Growing up, I was always extremely passionate about science. I hit a lazy spot in high school, which really held me back. In high school, I abandoned my dreams of being an astronaut, or a meteorologist, or a biomedical researcher. I decided that I wanted to be a housewife who had no kids. I found a boyfriend with dreams of becoming a mechanical engineer. I figured that I could just marry him and let him support me in exchange for a clean house and a full stomach. He wound up graduating 7th in our class, he was quite smart, and would no doubt make something of himself. As a result, I gave up in school. I tried just hard enough to keep my parents happy; this basically meant not dropping out of school. I was bright enough (and went to a crappy enough school) that not trying still made me an honor roll student. I earned As without studying. I half-assed my homework, I spent lectures daydreaming, doodling, and writing fictional stories. But, learning comes naturally to me. I didn't read a single assigned book for English class, I could barely tell you what happens in the book Things Fall Apart, something about a yam hut and polygamy.  I flat out refused to do math homework, yet I earned Bs and Cs on all of my exams. I didn't ever give up in my science classes, though. I was fascinated by everything that science has to offer, and studying science didn't feel like a chore, it was just fun. I graduated 205th out of 800, earned a 27 on the ACT without studying, and I was accepted to every college I applied to. I was admitted to the University of Arizona without provisions, despite having earned Ds in all of my math classes. I suppose my 25 on the math portion of the ACT made up for my math GPA.

I decided to go to college, mainly to have fun. My boyfriend was going to the same school, so I just had to hold him down until he graduated. I figured I would drop out in 2010, and marry my boyfriend. While in college, I realized that I had

19 year old Caitlin. She even looked like a bitch.

grown tired of my boyfriend. I met a lot of cute boys, and I was quite attractive (5'5, 120 pounds, 34C cup bra, shiny blond hair, flawless skin). I got a lot of attention from potential mates. Plus, my boyfriend was doing poorly in his freshman engineering classes, despite being amazing at math. He couldn't pass chemistry in the fall, and he still couldn't pass it in the spring. He was kicked out of school for having a D average. I broke up with him (I know, 19 year old Caitlin wasn’t a great girl. But don’t worry karma punished me). He went to community college to be an auto mechanic. He later went back to school, earned a bachelors degree in economics, and is now employed for a major home loans corporation. But, I digress.

I earned a 2.5 GPA freshman year, the result of 3 Bs and a D in sociology 101 (I didn't like the idea of categorizing people and using stereotypes, even if they were statistically validated).

Jamba Juice days. 

I started working at Jamba Juice in the spring semester of freshman year; I quickly made my way to assistant manager. I loved all of the money I made from working full time. I also made a lot of trashy friends. Sophomore year, I couldn't have cared less about school. I started dating a mall employee who was not very bright. He came from a white trash family and was chauvinistic, rude, immature, and a little abusive. He wanted to be a firefighter; I figured he would have enough money to support me, so I rode it out. Too bad, the fire academy exam was too hard for him. He became enraged when I tried to help him with the chemistry and first aide portions of the exam. He didn't understand simple physics. "How can a pound of feathers and a pound of lead possibly weigh the same amount?!" He would become frustrated, yell at me, and eventually hit me.

I put up with him for all of sophomore year. Fall of sophomore year, I was placed on academic probation for having a 1.87 overall GPA. I had stopped going to class, only showing up for exams. I still feel guilty about all of the money I wasted that semester. Fall of sophomore year, I had to earn a 2.0 semester GPA to stay enrolled in college. I was enrolled in 3 classes: History of Western Civilization. Economics, and Introduction to Communication Disorders (a class I had mistakenly taken, thinking it was a communications class. I wanted an "easy" major). I chose to attempt to stay in college because both of my parents hold masters degrees and I couldn't imagine telling them I had been booted from college.

I fell in to old habits. I missed almost every day of History of Western Civilization because it was at 9 am, and I was consistently out partying with my mall friends. But, I wrote strong papers that earned me 100% every time. The night before the midterm, Valentines Day, my boyfriend began withdrawing from some drug, I think it was cocaine, but it may have been oxycontin. He was very sick. He kept me up all night with his whining and vomiting. I slept through my midterm. The course was graded on 4 papers, a midterm, and a final. I emailed my TA, I told him I didn't have a great excuse, just that I had just overslept. He told my professor I was a great student, which was sort of a lie, as I had missed almost every day of discussion section. He didn't even know me, aside from the As I had earned on the first two papers. He told me I would be allowed to take the final and have it weighted to account for the missing midterm. The only condition was that I didn't miss any more discussion sections. This was a lot of pressure; I could not screw up on the final. But, I hadn't studied for the midterm, so it was actually a blessing. I attended maybe 4 of the lectures following the midterm. I went to discussion, but didn't participate. Finals week rolled around, we were given 5 essay prompts and were told that 3 would be on the final. We could select one of the three on the exam. I did not study for the final (stupid, I know). But, by some miracle, the prompt regarding the bubonic plague was on the final. I was fascinated by disease and had studied read all about the plague in my free time, all throughout high school and college. I also, happened to participate on the discussion section regarding the plague, so I learned all I needed to know about the social and economic impacts. 70% of the exam grade came from the essay, and 30% came from defining terms. I got 100% on the essay and 18% on the terms (I only knew the terms that pertained to the plague, like flagellants.) Possibly by divine intervention, I earned an 80% in the class.

I struggled in economics, despite doing all of the homework and never missing class. I earned Ds or Fs on all of the exams. At the end of the term I was earning 55% in the class. My professor gave the class the option to take a final and have the grade from the final be our final grade. As they say in economics, there is no free lunch. The score from the final would be your course grade, even if it was lower than the grade you had earned during the semester. At the end of the final, I told my professor that I feared I had earned a much lower grade than 55% on the final. He said that he would curve the grades such that 55% was a D. Then he said I could throw my exam away. I walked away feeling uncertain about my future. I didn’t know my history of Western Civ grade yet and I had earned a C in Communication Disorders. My fate was very uncertain and I hated myself for it. I managed to pull off a 2.0 semester. So, I got to stay in school.

I worked 50-60 hour weeks for the summer between sophomore and junior year. I now had two jobs. One was a dull customer service job. I realized that I need intellectual nourishment. I needed a career in science and I needed to start applying myself in college. I was lucky enough to be given the chance to redeem myself. 

I went back to school in the fall uncertain of what major I wanted to choose. I took courses in astronomy, planetary science, biology, atmospheric science, physics, and acoustics. I discovered a love of biology and health science. I decided to pursue a career in health. I loved research, but I felt limited by my perceived lack of creativity. I couldn’t imagine coming up with useful studies. I had an urge to practice medicine, but I knew no med school would take me. So, I declared public health, with the intent of working as an industrial hygienist. I also began making the dean’s list every semester. I had turned my poor academic performance around.

I began volunteering at a hospital and was exposed to all sorts of career options. At the time, I had an excellent chance of getting in to physician assistant school. I was also taking a clinical nutrition course that I loved. By the time I was ready to apply to grad schools, the PA school requirements had changed to match med school requirements. Admissions counselors consistently told me not to waste my time applying, even though, I had pulled my GPA up to a 3.0 in 2 years. Feeling discouraged, I applied to a nutrition graduate school. To my surprise, I got in. 

I guess I'll have to get used to grant writing.
and yes, I do know that is a
erlenmeyer flask, not a beaker.
Photo credit: Cyanide and Happiness
http://bit.ly/11ShDm4

I start fall of 2013. I have been considering thesis options, and I have discovered that I am much more creative than I give myself credit for. My current ideas are: the possible link between autism and food, why women binge eat during the luteal phase of menstrual cycle, GMO foods and disorders of the GI tract, food-drug interactions, and possible links between nutrients/malnourishment and disease. I would like to take part in all of the emerging research in nutrition and it's relationship with disease. Perhaps, there is a food answer to a lot of aliments.

As I get deeper in to my grad school career, I will post articles on my findings. In the meantime, I will focus on social and political issues (with emphasis on healthcare and internet rights), corruption and fraud in academia and the government, health science/public health stuff, and technology. I have been referred to as insightful and hopefully that wasn’t just flattery. I am also quite skeptical, the information on this blog will include legitimate sources and will make note of shortcomings in data, much like the discussion section of a peer-reviewed paper. I will also strive to provide both side of the argument. I am not here to convince you to think just like me, I want to open your minds to a world of possibilities and hopefully teach you to question everything.  Please read; please offer comments and constructive criticism. I am open to all idea, provided differing opinions are presented in a mature and constructive fashion.

Thank you for visiting!

Just so you know who you are dealing with!
I'm the blond one...obviously.
Note the skull and cross bones shirt. The skull has lab goggles
and the bones are test tubes.
Also, the darker Jewish boy is my current boyfriend (Jordan)
The lighter one is fat Roey (he's now called buff Roey : ))