Is blogging an effective learning tool?

Is blogging an effective learning tool?

Studies show that blogging has proven to be a very effective learning tool. “One of the benefits of blogging is that it is public, and we are more attentive to the quality of our work when it is public than if it is just viewed by one other person.” Blogs create an environment where students are more aware of their work, and more dedicated to competing assignments properly. The publicity of blogs subconsciously guides students to exert more effort in their assignments.

Also, “Discussions in weblogs promote higher levels of thinking, because people can think before answering back.” The weblog format is different from the classroom, because time for reflection is able to be incorporated into the student’s thought process. When questions are asked in class students are expected to raise their hands and have an answer immediately. When questions are asked in a weblog students are able to digest the information and consider all of his or her options before being forced to cough up a response. The latter has more potential to generate more informed and appropriate answers.

Finally, “Because of its format similar to that of a personal diary, weblogs encourage informal communication, creativity and self-expression.” A student can take creative liberties while writing in a blog. Students have to find their own voice and mold an opinion into a response that is unique. Blogs create a more laid back atmosphere and that is why self-expression may come easier for the majority of students when compared to immediate verbal responses in a classroom. This is especially notable when comparing more extroverted students to introverted students. A blog allows both to shine without creating a stigma of embarrassment or inability to formulate an opinion right away. In summary, blogging seems to be an effective learning tool by improving quality of work, encouraging deeper thinking, and promoting greater levels of originality.

http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/effective-teaching-strategies/blogging-to-improve-student-learning-tips-and-tools-for-getting-started/

http://desarrolloweb.dlsi.ua.es/blogs/use-of-weblogs-in-higher-education-benefits-and-barriers

Castoreum what is it, where it comes from, and what it is used for?

Castoreum what is it, where it comes from, and what it is used for?

Castoreum is a “food flavoring that is extracted from the castor sac scent glands of the male or female beaver, which are located, near the anus.  The substance is fairly expensive and is more common in perfume than in actual foods.”  Castoreum is a product of the trapping industry. When beavers are skinned for their fur, these glands are taken out, and are sold after being smoked or sun-dried to prevent decay. As a result of the trapping industry the European beaver and American beaver populations have decreased immensely for not only the castoreum but also their fur.  

Castoreum is used in some incense, and is also used to contribute to the flavor and odor of cigarettes. In food, castoreum is used to flavor candies, drinks, and desserts. “Acute toxicity studies in animals indicate that castoreum extract is nontoxic by both oral and dermal routes of administration and is not irritating or phototoxic to skin. Castoreum extract possesses weak antibacterial activity. A long historical use of castoreum extract as a flavoring and fragrance ingredient has resulted in no reports of human adverse reactions.  Low-level, long-term exposure to castoreum extract does not pose a health risk. The objective of this review is to evaluate the safety-in-use of castoreum extract as a food ingredient”

The exact definition given from the Code of Federal Regulations for natural flavors is: “The term natural flavor or natural flavoring means the essential oil, oleoresin, essence or extractive, protein hydrolysate, distillate, or any product of roasting, heating or enzymolysis, which contains the flavoring constituents derived from a spice, fruit or fruit juice, vegetable or vegetable juice, edible yeast, herb, bark, bud, root, leaf or similar plant material, meat, seafood, poultry, eggs, dairy products, or fermentation products thereof, whose significant function in food is flavoring rather than nutritional.”

http://www.health.com/health/gallery/0,,20588763_11,00.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17365147

http://gentleworld.org/the-gross-truth-about-natural-flavors/

How are GMO researchers treated?

How are GMO researchers treated?

GMO stands for genetically modified organisms. This is a very controversial topic when it comes to conflicting research with the agricultural businesses, in which GMO researchers are treated extremely unfair.  Profound Biologist Arpad Pusztai was the world’s top expert in his field, “accidentally discovered that genetically modified (GM) foods are dangerous, he became the biotech industry's bad-boy poster child, setting an example for other scientists thinking about blowing the whistle.” Pusztai was given a three million dollar grant for his research in the early 1990s. Dr. Pusztai fed rats genetically modified potatoes and within days the rats “developed potentially pre-cancerous cell growth, smaller brains, livers and testicles, partially atrophied livers, and damaged immune systems.”

Within days of this research coming together and Dr. Pusztai was given permission to do a television interview. Dr. Pusztai “was receiving calls from the pro-GMO prime minister's office to the institute's director, within the next 24 hours Pusztai was fired. He was silenced with threats of a lawsuit, his team was dismantled, and the protocols never implemented. His institute, the biotech industry, and the UK government, together launched a smear campaign to destroy Pusztai's reputation.” As other researchers were witnessing this very reputable man’s career being destroyed by the government and a large agriculture business fear was brought about, and researchers were not as willing to release the data collected during their research. “According to University of California at Berkeley professor Ignacio Chapela, there is a de facto ban on scientists asking certain questions and finding certain results. He says, it’s very hard for us to publish in this field. People are scared.”

“Dr. Charles Benbrook, former Executive Director of the Board on Agriculture of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, said he has personally spoken with dozens of scientists who had to contend with this backlash and these counter attacks that the industry unleashes on scientists that they view as a threat. The majority of them get out of the field.” These scientists’ careers are being taken down by the scientists who work for the large agricultural businesses, simply because the information that is being given out does not match what the business is saying about their products.

http://www.sott.net/article/237064-GMO-Researchers-Attacked-Evidence-Denied-and-a-Population-at-Risk

Fukushima three years later

Fukushima three years later

On March 11, 2011, The Great East Japan Earthquake struck, having a magnitude of 9.0. Not only did this extreme earthquake do a considerable amount of damage it caused “a 15 meter tsunami that disabled the power supply and cooling of three Fukushima Daiichi reactors, causing a nuclear accident. All three cores largely melted in the first three days.” The reactors were allegedly supposed to withstand the worst earthquake conditions.

Three years later, “a dark threat of further tragedy yet hangs over Fukushima. On the fourth floor of Reactor Number  4—the reactor that exploded on the first day of the earthquake—1,331 spent fuel rods remain stored in cooling water in a large steel tank. The tank, jolted by the quake, tilts to about 30 degrees. The six reactors at Fukushima have produced 14,225 spent fuel rods, all of which are stored in the same way at the reactor sites. To underscore the lethal potential of this situation, a single exposed spent fuel rod, 4 meters-long and 1 centimeter in diameter, will kill a man in four seconds.” Although it has been three years since the Fukushima meltdown Japan is still dealing with the effects of contamination on everything that comes in contact with it. The people who resided near Fukushima had to leave their lives behind, making the area surrounding Fukushima somewhat of a no-man’s-land.

“Neither the Japanese government nor Tokyo Electric knows how to dispose of the radioactive water, which presently amounts to about 500,000 tons, 400 tons per day, every day. This water was used to cool the meltdowns. Worse, underground water veins that originate from the nearby mountain range, amounting to about 1,000 tons a day, run beneath the meltdown reactors and must be pumped and stored before the water runs amok in rivers and the Pacific.” The issue of the toxic water disposal is very concerning and still very prevalent today. Tanks have begun leaking due to the extreme temperature of the water itself. The Nuclear Regulation Authority came up with a solution “Not every drop of the contaminated water is imminently dangerous to our health, so the less radioactive water should and must be dumped offshore, into the Pacific Ocean.” 

http://mashable.com/2014/03/11/three-years-after-fukushima/

http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/170736