The Real Deal On The Five Second Rule

Who hasn't done this: You drop a piece of food on the floor, pick it up within five seconds and pop it in your mouth. It's still okay to eat, right? Not exactly. According to a recent survey, women are more likely to invoke the "Five Second Rule" than men. Not surprisingly, everyone's more inclined to eat a dropped cookie than a dropped piece of broccoli. But is it really okay to eat something you dropped on the floor? Well, there are a few schools of thoughts on this.

First, at the University of Illinois, floor tiles were purposely contaminated with E.coli. Then researchers placed cookies and gummi bears on the tiles for anywhere between one and ten seconds. The upshot was: Almost-instant food-poisoning.

But a new study was done at the University Chicago and University of Iowa. Researchers tossed gum, cookies, chicken legs and hot dogs on different types of floors. They found the safest surface is the kitchen floor. Only the hotdog was contaminated enough in five seconds to make you sick. The living room carpet isn't quite as clean. Both the hot dog and the chicken leg were contaminated within five seconds. And basically, anything you drop on the bathroom floor or the lawn is a germ-freak's nightmare. Every item that fell on those surfaces was contaminated enough to make you really sick.

Want to know who the first person was to invoke the Five Second Rule? Experts say it was Genghis Khan, but he used a "20 Hour Rule." And anything that had been lying in the dirt for less than 20 hours was still safe to eat. So if you drop a cookie on the kitchen floor, go ahead and eat it within five seconds. Chances are good you won't get sick. But if you're at a picnic and drop any food on the grass, toss it out!

5 Tips To Burglar-Proof Your House

 

Too many break-ins are preventable. So here’s what you need to know about protecting your home from thieves:  

• First, know that summer is prime time for burglaries. They spike in July, August, and Labor Day Weekend when people are more likely to be on vacation. But that doesn’t mean we can let our guard down other times of the year. December and January are also big months for burglaries. That’s when thieves pick through your recycling bin to see if there are any boxes for new electronics in there. So don’t put the packaging for new electronics in the bin until right before curbside pickup on trash day.  

• Another tip to avoid break-ins: Don’t leave lights on 24/7 or leave the radio playing constantly. That actually alerts thieves that you’re away. Instead, use a timer that turns things on at certain times.  

• A good way to burglar-proof your house is to add shrubs in front of windows, but only about three or four feet high. That’s high enough to make getting close to a window difficult, but short enough so a thief can’t hide behind them.  

• A burglar alarm is a great deterrent, even if it’s not connected to the police department. A loud alarm is enough to scare thieves away. And home improvement stores typically carry cheap alarms, like around $10, you can affix to a window or door.  

• Lastly, your dead-bolt on the front door is a safe option. Just make sure the plates that attach the lock to the door have three-inch screws. Typically, they’re installed with one-inch screws, which makes the door easy to kick in.

Think Before You Jump In The Water

Before you jump in a lake, pool, or the ocean to cool off – there’s something you need to know. As refreshing as it looks – it may be dangerous in more ways than one.

Let’s start with the pool. If the water isn’t sparkling and clear, don’t get in. A woman in Boston drowned this summer in a public pool and her body wasn’t found for two days, while the pool was used as usual by swimmers and lifeguards! Why? Because the water was so murky no one could see her at the bottom! If the water had been clear, she may have been spotted immediately and saved.

Also, regarding the pool, stay away if babies are in the water. Find the adult pool. Even trace amounts of waste matter from a dirty diaper can harbor parasites and contaminate the entire pool. And the more the merrier does not apply when it comes to public pools. More bodies equal more germs, bacteria and viruses in the water.


What about a lake? Beautiful, peaceful, and filled with algae. Blue-green algae can grow like crazy in a lake and produce toxic bacteria. If there’s a slimy, green film on the surface, that’s a warning sign. Don’t jump in. If there’s a weird smell, don’t jump in either – that’s another sign of algae. And don’t let your dog jump in. Dogs have died after exposure.

Lastly, the ocean. Debris usually washes up on a beach. If things are floating away from shore, like seaweed, that means there’s a riptide. And even strong swimmers can be no match for a strong current.    A little observation before jumping in will make for a safe and enjoyable swim.

Energy Drinks

What are Energy Drinks?

Energy drinks are canned or bottled beverages sold in convenience stores, grocery stores, and bars and nightclubs (in mixed drinks). Most energy drinks are carbonated drinks that contain large amounts of caffeine and sugar with additional ingredients, such as B vitamins, amino acids (e.g. taurine), and herbal stimulants such as guarana.

Energy drinks are marketed primarily to people between the ages of 18 and 30 as a stimulant, which is why energy drinks have names that convey strength, power, and speed, and sexuality, such as:

• Red Bull Energy Drink
  
• Monster Energy Drink
  
• Full Throttle Energy Drink
  
• Amp Energy Drink
  
• XS Energy Drink
  
• Redline Energy Drink
  
• Rock Star Energy Drink
  
• Spark Energy Drink

History of Energy Drinks

Although sales of energy drinks in the United States were $3.5 billion in 2005, according to Beverage Digest, the category was only recently created with the launch of the Red Bull Energy Drink.

Red Bull was created by Dietrich Mateschitz, an Austrian who adapted the energy drink from a Thai beverage called Krating Daeng, a popular drink with rickshaw drivers in Thailand. The key ingredient in the Thai energy drink was taurine, an amino acid that was first discovered in bulls (this association is responsible for the Red Bull urban legend that the drink's active ingredient is bull urine or semen). Red Bull was introduced to Europe in 1987 and to the United States in 1997.

Energy Drinks Contain Caffeine

Red Bull, one of the most popular energy drinks, contains nearly 80 mg of caffeine per can, about the same amount of caffeine as a cup of brewed coffee and twice the caffeine as a cup of tea. Other energy drinks contain several times this amount. The amount of caffeine in an energy drink isn't always indicated on the label, so it is difficult to gauge how much one is consuming.

Another problem with energy drinks is that unlike hot coffee or tea, which is sipped slowly, it's common for typical energy drink consumers to drink large amounts quickly.

Some people are sensitive to caffeine and experience anxiety, palpitations, irritability, difficulty sleeping, and indigestion with relatively small amounts. People with heart conditions should avoid large amounts of caffeine, because it is a stimulant.

The Combination of Ingredients in Energy Drinks Has Not Been Studied

One of the biggest concerns is that we just don't know enough about the effect of the combination of ingredients in energy drinks. Many ingredients are believed to work synergistically with caffeine to boost its stimulant power.

For instance, one can of Red Bull contains 1000 mg of taurine. A German double-blind study compared a taurine and caffeine drink, a caffeine-only drink, and a placebo drink. Stroke volume--the volume of blood ejected with each beat of the heart--was increased only in the group taking the taurine-and-caffeine drink. Taurine appears to play an important role in muscle contraction (especially in the heart) and the nervous system.

Red Bull also contains 600 mg of glucuronolactone, a substance that is naturally found in the body. There is a lack of published information on the health effects of glucuronolactone supplementation in humans or on the safety of this combination.

Energy drinks contain sugar (although sugar-free energy drinks are now available), because it is a quick source of energy.

B vitamins are sometimes added to energy drinks in small amounts. It makes energy drinks appear healthy, although they probably contribute little. B vitamins are needed to convert food into energy.

Some energy drinks contain guarana, a South American herb that is an additional source of caffeine.

Energy Drinks Should Not Be Mixed With Alcohol

Red Bull and vodka has become a popular mixed drink at bars because it has a reputation for reducing the depressant effects of alcohol (e.g. fatigue) while enhancing the "feel good" buzz. But while people may not feel impaired, their blood alcohol concentration is still high. People may consume larger amounts of alcohol as a result.

A study compared the effects of alcohol alone to an alcohol plus energy drink combination. Researchers found that the alcohol plus energy drink significantly reduced subjective alcohol-related symptoms such as headache, weakness, dry mouth, and impairment of motor coordination, even though breath alcohol concentration and objective tests of motor coordination and reaction time didn't reflect this.

The caffeine in energy drinks is also dehydrating, which may slow the body's ability to metabolize alcohol.

Energy Drinks Should Not Be Consumed During Exercise

Energy drinks should not be confused with sports drinks such as Gatorade, which are consumed to help people stay hydrated during exercise. Sports drinks also provide carbohydrates in the form of sugar and electrolytes that may be lost through perspiration.

The caffeine in energy drinks acts as a diuretic and promotes dehydration.

A California high school was the first to ban energy drinks after two students experienced dizziness and disorientation after drinking an energy drink before football practice.

Did Depression Offer an Evolutionary Advantage?

A provocative new theory explores the possibility that depression is an evolutionary condition that protected our ancestors — from infection.

Such a theory could explain the ubiquity of depression which affects one in 10 adults in the United States. As such, experts believe the hypothesis that depression is “hard-wired” into our brains must be considered.

This has led biologists to propose several theories to account for how depression, or behaviors linked to it, can somehow offer an evolutionary advantage. Some proposals have focused on how depression influences behavior in a social context.

In a new article, a pair of psychiatrists addresses this puzzle in a different way, tying together depression and resistance to infection.

In this theory, researchers propose that genetic variations that promote depression also helped our ancestors fight infection. An outline of their proposal appears online in the journal Molecular Psychiatry.

Co-authors Andrew Miller, M.D., and Charles Raison, M.D., recognized that depression is often linked to inflammation or an overactivated immune system. People with depression tend to have higher levels of inflammation, even if they’re not fighting an infection.

“Most of the genetic variations that have been linked to depression turn out to affect the function of the immune system,” Miller said. “This led us to rethink why depression seems to stay embedded in the genome.”

“The basic idea is that depression and the genes that promote it were very adaptive for helping people — especially young children — not die of infection in the ancestral environment, even if those same behaviors are not helpful in our relationships with other people,” Raison said.

Until development of sulfa drugs and antibiotics in the early part of the 20th century, infection was a major cause of death. Surviving infection was a key determinant in whether someone was able to pass on his or her genes.

The authors propose that evolution and genetics have bound together depressive symptoms and physiological responses that were selected on the basis of reducing mortality from infection. Fever, fatigue/inactivity, social avoidance and anorexia can all be seen as adaptive behaviors in light of the need to contain infection, they write.

The theory provides a new explanation for why stress is a risk factor for depression. In theory, the stress-depression link is a side-product of a process that pre-activates the immune system in anticipation of injury.

Similarly, a disruption of sleep patterns can be seen in both mood disorders and when the immune system is activated. This may come from our ancestors’ need to stay on alert to fend off predators after injury, Miller said.

Experts believe the new theory could also guide future research on depression. A particular area of focus could be the use of inflammation biomarkers to help predict whether someone will respond to various treatments for depression.

Miller and Raison are involved in ongoing research on whether certain medications, which are normally used to treat autoimmune diseases, can be effective with treatment-resistant depression.

Roger Ebert's "J. Edgar" Movie Review

From Roger Ebert:

J. Edgar Hoover was the head of the Bureau of Investigation from 1924 until he died in 1972; he added the word "Federal" to its title in 1935. Under the administrations of Coolidge, Hoover, Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon, he was, many believed, the second most powerful man in government. Now he has been dead for 39 years, and what most people probably think they know about him is that he liked to dress up like a woman. This snippet of gossip, which has never been verified, is joined by the details that he never married, lived with his mother until she died, and had a close, lifelong friendship with Clyde Tolson, the tall and handsome bachelor who inherited his estate.

It is therefore flatly stated that Hoover was gay, which would have been ironic since he gathered secret files on the sex lives of everyone prominent in public life and used that leverage to hold onto his job for 47 years and increase the FBI's power during every one of them. He was outspoken against homosexuality, and refused to allow gays (or many blacks, or any women) to become FBI agents. He was sure enough of his power that he sometimes held hands with Tolson in restaurants and shared rooms with him on vacations. There wasn't a president who could touch him.

Given these matters, and the additional fact that the screenplay for Clint Eastwood's "J. Edgar" was written by Dustin Lance Black, who wrote "Milk," you would assume the film was the portrait of a gay man. It is not. That makes it more fascinating. It is the portrait of the public image that J. Edgar Hoover maintained all his life, even in private. The chilling possibility is that with Hoover, what you saw was what you got. He was an unbending moralist who surrounded himself with FBI straight arrows. Those assigned closest to him tended to be good looking. Agents wore suits and ties at all times. He inspected their shoeshines. He liked to look but not touch.

In such famous cases as the capture of John Dillinger and the manhunt for the kidnapper of the Lindbergh baby, Hoover's publicity machine depicted him as acting virtually alone. He was not present when Dillinger was shot down outside the Biograph theater, but America got the impression that he was, and he never forgave the star agent, Melvin Purvis, for actually cornering the Most Wanted poster boy. Doubt persisted that Bruno Hauptmann was guilty in the Lindbergh case — but not in Hoover's mind. The fight against domestic communism in the years after World War II provided an ideal occasion for him to fan the Red Scare and work with the unsavory Joe McCarthy. Two of the reasons Hoover hated beatniks and hippies were their haircuts and shoeshines.

This man was closed down, his face a slab of petulance. He was so uncharismatic that it's possible to miss the brilliance of Leonardo DiCaprio's performance in "J. Edgar." It is a fully realized, subtle, persuasive performance, not least in his scenes with Armie Hammer as Tolson. In my reading of the film, they were both repressed homosexuals, Hoover more than Tolson, but after love at first sight and a short but heady early courtship, they veered away from sex and began their lives as Longtime Companions. The rewards for arguably not being gay were too tempting for both men, who were wined and dined by Hollywood, Broadway, Washington and Wall Street. It was Hoover's militant anti-gay position that served as their beard.

Two women figured importantly in Hoover's life. One was his domineering mother, Annie Hoover (Judi Dench), who makes clear her scorn for men who are "daffodils." The other was a young woman named Helen Gandy (Naomi Watts). In an extraordinary moment of self-image control, Hoover concludes that it would be beneficial for him to have a wife. He asks Helen, an FBI secretary, out on one of the more unusual first dates in movie history; he demonstrates the workings of a card file system with great pride. It must have been clear to her that nothing was stirring in his netherlands. Their budding relationship segued smoothly into her becoming his confidential secretary for the rest of his life — the woman entrusted with the secret files.

Eastwood's film is firm in its refusal to cheapen and tarnish by inventing salacious scenes. I don't get the impression from "J. Edgar" that Eastwood particularly respected Hoover, but I do believe he respected his unyielding public facade. It is possibly Hoover's lifelong performance that fascinated him. There's a theme running through most of his films since "Bird" (1988): the man unshakably committed to his own idea of himself.

As a period biopic, "J. Edgar" is masterful. Few films span seven decades this comfortably. The sets, the props, the clothes, and details, look effortlessly right, and note how Eastwood handles the many supporting roles (some of them depicting famous people). These minor characters are all to some degree relating to Hoover's formidable public image. As a person or as a character, he was a star of stage, screen, radio and print; he was said to have the goods on everyone. People tip-toed around him as they might have with Stalin. It's a nice touch, the way Eastwood and DiCaprio create a character who seems to be a dead zone and make him electrifying in other actors' reaction shots.

Eating Eggs and Life Expectancy

Are Eggs Good or Bad?

Eggs have to be one of the most confusing foods out there. Eggs were first healthy, a good source of protein. Then we discovered that eggs had cholesterol and every one thought eggs would give you a heart attack. Then it was discovered that the cholesterol in eggs was “neutral” and we could eat a few eggs a day. Eggs were good for you again. Well, now it seems that having 7 or more eggs a week increases your risk of death. What is the story here?

Eggs are Bad (Again)

A Harvard study of over 21,000 male physicians found that men who ate up to 6 eggs a week had no increase in their rate of death. But once they ate a seventh egg, their risk of death went up 23%. The men were studied over a 20-year period and routinely surveyed about their health status and eating habits. During that period, 1,550 had heart attacks, 1,342 had strokes and 5,000 died.
To make matters more confusing, if the men had diabetes and ate any eggs, then their risk of death over the 20-year period was doubled.

Why Are Eggs Bad?
The cholesterol in eggs is the most obvious culprit. This cholesterol can clog arteries and contribute to heart attacks and strokes. Interestingly, in the study, the eating of eggs was only linked to the men who died, not to the men who had heart attacks or strokes. Clearly we don’t have the whole picture here.

So If I Don’t Eat Eggs, I’ll Be Better Off?
Not really. This study (and most nutritional studies) was not able to really sort out the full differences between men who ate no eggs, 6 or fewer eggs or eggs every day. The researchers did say that the lots-of-egg eating men were also more likely to be smokers, eat more vegetables, drink more and exercise less.

Play Armchair Epidemiologist
When you think about it, what is different about men who eat eggs every day compared to men who don’t? We could make up a lot of theories here. They are not eating oatmeal as much (because they are having eggs for breakfast); they are more likely to eat toast with lots of butter? How about bacon -– that goes with eggs a lot. The study didn’t address these kinds of links. You can come up with your own reason that men who eat lots of eggs would be less healthy -– a lot is left out of this picture.