Dangerous Food Additives

    In the United States, many of our food and drink products contain additives that are banned in multiple other countries.  Everything from certain food colorings to growth hormones is known to many states to cause cancer, birth defects, or other illnesses.  To get straight to the point, if they are banned in many European countries, then why do we still use them here?  Most of those additives and preservatives are not necessary and can either be substituted out for something safer or just left out completely with no major difference to food and drinks.  If we already know how dangerous all of these things can be, then why do we continue to use them in our foods? There may not be an extremely worrying amount of these unnecessary ingredients in individual items, but with the majority of our groceries containing some sort of additives, it all begins to quickly add up.

How the Industrial Revolution Changed 20th Century Russia

While reading my book “The Romanov Sisters” there were many causes behind the assassination of the royal Russian family, one being the Industrial Revolution. The industrial Revolution made way for new ideas to emerge about the way government should run a country. Russia in the 20th century was an agricultural society. The Tsar and his family, during this time, were very wealthy while their subjects were living in extreme poverty. In addition, it was very difficult for peasants to climb out of poverty. For years there was cultural unrest and tension between the classes. The Bolsheviks were pressuring the Tsar to provide rights and freedom to the Russian people. At first, Tsar Nicholas the II adhered to the people’s requests and began to give them more freedom. However, In the end, the Tsar was forced to abdicate from the throne to keep his family safe because the people were beginning to get violent. The Industrial Revolution was influencing the whole world and it made way for people to see things differently and to stop following the old government blindly. Do you think the Tsar could have avoided his downfall as Britain did or do you believe the Tsar’s downfall was inevitable?

Covid-19 Transmission

    Recently we've learned that Covid can be spread not only through respiratory droplets, but also possibly through aerosols and just by touching your eyes. It seems like there's not much we can do to ensure our safety other than living in a bubble at this point. With so many people split on whether we should be able to return to our regular lives or if we should stay in quarantine, I'm personally concerned with how exactly we can catch the virus. I have a member of my extended family who might have gotten Covid back in October 2019. She works as a nurse at a Kaiser hospital in LA, and she recently told me that she had gotten sick in October with most of the symptoms that we already know are linked to Covid. She took an antibody test a few weeks ago, but it came out negative (probably because we already know antibodies don't stay in the body for more than a few months). She's completely recovered now, but she has always been extra cautious at her job for fear that she could spread anything from there to her family back home. She had already been doing things that nurses are doing now, like wearing N95 masks and washing her old clothes as soon as she got home.

    As we learn new things about this virus, I'm wondering if there are any other ways that Covid can be spread. Are we ready to go back to normal life while transmission rates are still climbing? Will we ever be able to live as we did before? Or will this be something that continues to develop new strains like the flu, and stick with us for much longer than we'd hope?

Food Waste

One of the debate discussions I chose for my document was about the amount of food that is thrown away in landfills and ways we can help reduce that amount. One debater shared her thoughts on how the consumers can do their part which involved buying more responsibly and cooking with the foods we already have. I'm sure that I'm not the only one who has to empty milk gallons when it has gone past its "use- by" date. Some times I'm not able to eat all the bread and mold starts growing so then I have to throw away bread that could have been used. We need to buy amounts that we know we are going to be able to finish so that none of the foods get thrown into the trash. Another thing she shared was that if a food is past its "use-by" date, it doesn't mean that the food is expired. Some foods could go months past that date and still be fresh and safe to eat. Another debater thought that the government should do their part by removing laws that create more waste. One law she thought that should be removed was the law that bans past-date foods from being sold. As I said before, past-date foods aren't spoiled and can still be eaten, so this ban only creates more piles of food in landfills. All of this wasted food could be given to families that really do need them. The amount of wasted food could be enough for everyone to be able to eat until they are full and hunger wouldn't be such a big problem. Reading this discussion made me more motivated to do my part in reducing the amount of wasted food and made me think of giant piles of food just rotting away in dumps. What other ways do think we can reduce wasted food? What can you do to reduce the food you waste?

Cancer Treatments

There are many different types of cancers with some types being more common than others.  Many different organizations and foundations do research to find cures and develop more effective treatments, and they have been trying for centuries to make a major breakthrough. Most research foundations accept donations from the public to help further their progress in their studies. While we already have popular treatments such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy, we still cannot guarantee that any of those will be 100% effective, and some may argue that it's impossible to make any treatment that reliable.

    Sometimes I wonder where exactly all of that money goes, some foundations receive hundreds of millions of dollars every year and yet we still seem to not have made very much progress.  I know that studying something as complex as cancer isn't cheap, but we already know some of the key characteristics and behaviors of some of these cancers. So why haven't we created more potential treatments and cures to be tested by now? 

The Residue of Postman's Words

    After finally finishing Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death I developed a question about our media and discourse and entertainment all together. With the way we are televising more and more serious discourse topics, will there be a day where everything is wrapped in a pretty bow and presented to the masses as entertainment and not the actual content that it says it is spreading. Such as education, religion, and politics that all have been given an "Age of Show Business" make over, that in reality just dissipates any authenticity of the serious topic. 

    In the final chapter Postman states that the next generations only hope of understanding and having control of our shallow inconsistent media and discourse is the United States Education System, which honestly is not the best. However, we are reading this book now, in our american english class to learn about our media and discourse, which we most likely had no prior knowledge of it's dangers or control. So at least in this aspect we now, hopefully, have a better understanding of how our present media and discourse shapes and defines information, which was Postman's goal at least partially achieved. 

    Nonetheless I revert to my previous inquiries of where is the media of television, and social media taking the serious discourse of our society? Will it all eventually be fluff and giggles or will we become aware and learn about the difference it truly makes in our lives, and put in the effort to truly understand it?

The book that we read for summer homework was not very fun to read in my opinion. It had a lot of references that I  couldn't understand, mostly having to do with history influencers. To be honest I think that this new wave of technology is helping us but I'm not as wise as Postman. The tech we have today is helping kids in the classroom study, do their homework, and easily learn more about any subject imaginable. This new tech is helping businesses grow and providing consumers with quality service. In the future though, it might get a little hectic. People will start to lose jobs because of this new tech and it might cause some heat between tech producers and job losers. Hopefully, it does not get to that point though because I think that the tech we have today is perfect but soon we will get overwhelmed with the newest products of technology.

When I was a kid I always hated getting participation trophies because it adds on to the guilt that you lost the big game or made an error that cost a game. I think participation trophies should be completely taken out of kid's awards for sports. Some arguments are that it will give them high self-esteem but that is just simply wrong. A participation trophy always reminds you of a loss and they would not be given out to kids over the age of 10. Now, when kids are below 10, then it might be ok for that trophy. If they constantly get a participation trophy, they learn that it is ok to lose and they won't have any drive for their sports. Hopefully, these sports will recognize this soon and will get rid of them. One last thing, even if kids are excited to get a participation trophy, later in their life they will remember that game they lost and will never want to get one ever again.

AI has been growing over the past few years and its starting to get overabundant. There is a lot of new artificial intelligence in the world now and its starting to get a little overwhelming. With all the new robots coming up, there is next to no room for real people to have jobs. If people don't stop making robots for jobs then soon, probably within the next two decades there will be no jobs left for people and the economy will plummet. With people not working, then no money is given out to us and that means there will be two separate social called, the really poor, and the really rich from robot income. Of course, it doesn't affect me directly now, but when we are all older it will be the prime time for robots to take people's jobs, and it's going to be hard to make money. One solution to this is either make robots or discover new jobs that a robot can't do.

Medications with Dangerous Side Effects

    A few days ago I saw an ad for antidepressant medication, and I noticed some of the possible side effects could do more harm than good to the person who takes them.  Some of the side effects included an increase in suicidal thoughts, aggression, birth defects, and depression.  A few ingredients in the medication are also known to be highly addictive.

    I know there are more medications out there that also have contradicting side effects, so why are they all so normalized?  If the point of the medication is to target depression in people, then why does it seem like it could make it worse for some of them?  Why would a company that is well aware of this still decide to send the product out for widespread use?  Shouldn't they instead take a step back to see if they can eliminate the major risks, especially if one of the side effects is the original condition they are trying to combat?

Traveling During the Pandemic

As everyone knows, COVID-19 has stopped countless things from happening.  Concerts, schools, jobs, events and more have all been put on pause due to the virus.  With the slope and number of cases slowly declining in most states (except California, which seem to only be getting worse) travel has now been allowed.  Airports are open for the public to travel wherever they want to go.  Do you think it is too soon?  If people were traveling to a state that had less cases, would it be better?  Personally, I think that precautions should be taken by those who work in places that people travel in.  In airports, for example, I think that seats in airplanes should be spread out and everyone should be required to wear a facial covering.  Things like skipping rows and seats in the middle to help with social distancing guidelines should also be done.  Temperatures should be taken as well as background checks to see if that person has been around anyone who may have been ill.  Some may think that this sounds a little overboard, but what do you think?  What other precautions should be taken?  These precautions will only help prevent the spread of the deadly virus, which is what we should all try to be doing in these times.  

What happens when you overthink?

    Over quarantine I find myself with a lot of free time and sometimes all I can do to pass the time is thinking to myself. However, sometimes just thinking about a topic can lead you down a rabbit holes and all of a sudden you have to make 15 different phone calls to family and friends because they all might die tomorrow. I wondered if there was any psychology to this so I started looking. It turns out that the average human brain tends to over think, but it becomes a problem when it's consistent.

    Sometimes when I overthink it can ruin my whole day. According to medium.com, "Overthinking can lead to serious emotional distress and increase your risk of mental health problems". What happens is that your brain can get caught in a loop of constant jumping from one topic to the next. It can take up your entire day and spill over to the next few. It can be mentally draining and also deteriorating to your health and personality.

    Does this happen to you? If so, how do you control it or cope with it?

Should kids go back to school?

    In many California counties, kids are encouraged not to go back to school to contain the spread of covid-19. We understand this as Mayfair isn't going back to physical school for the fall 2020 semester. However, I do have several family members that are deciding if they should send their kids to school because their kids are young and they feel like they can't teach as well as professional teachers. I have one family member that is going into kindergarten without having gone though preschool and her parents are concerned with how their computer is going to teach their daughter how to read and write. 

    I had read an article that was recommended to me on Google and one statement stood out to me. Younger kids are less likely to contract coronavirus and definitely less likely to die from it. Also, younger kids are the ones that need in-person learning more than the average high schooler. Although they should be taking precautions, certain groups such as preschoolers may suffer more from online learning.

Is digital trend good or bad for people?

    In the article “Is Digital Connectedness Good or Bad for People?”, two debaters argue if the internet improves our lives or hurts it. Noa Gafni Slaney, one of the debaters,  argues that the internet helps people explore new things and build new relationships. Meanwhile, Emerson Csorba argues that sharing or posting things on the internet can lead to competition and depression. Csorba mentioned that studies show that increased  Facebook usage “contributes to anxiety and even depression”. I’ve seen many people including people I know competing against one another to see who is the best. Some have led people to depression but I still believe that digital connectedness is good for the people. For me the internet has helped me make new friends and strengthen the bonds I already had with my old friends. I know people who are very insecure but they still post anyways and get so much love which gives them a boost of confidence. Which leads me to ask: Do you think the internet harms people rather than help them?

Do Anti-Smoking Commercials Benefit the Youth?

During the past several years, there have been many embellished anti-smoking and anti-vaping commercials aimed at teens, but is this the best way to discourage them? For example, in the South Park episode, “My Future Self ‘n’ Me,” the kids' parents hire adults from a company titled Motivation Corp. to act as future versions of the children and explain to them how drugs, alcohol, and smoking ruined their lives. Commercials in the episode are tremendously exaggerated, such as portraying that marijuana causes terrorism. The kids are upset with their parents for lying to them as one the characters, Stan, claims he would rather have been told the truth, as I’m sure many adolescents would agree. The intention of this episode was to exemplify that embellished commercials and lies aren’t as effective as honesty--which is often preferred.

I recall watching Nickelodeon and one of the commercials was burned into my brain. It consisted of a teenage girl purchasing a box of cigarettes from a liquor store and not having enough money so she tore a piece of her skin from her face to pay. This is not an accurate depiction of the effects of smoking, and, as a kid, was scary and uncomfortable. For a teen, this commercial was likely considered dumb and unrealistic, and breezed right past them. 

As Postman points out in Amusing Ourselves To Death, television shapes many aspects of our lives; thus, I do not think frightening children will have very beneficial effects. Fear is not the way to discourage teens from smoking and such disturbing commercials should not be streamed on a kids channel--or streamed at all. If anti-smoking and -vaping commercials continue (and I’m sure they will), they should advertise accurate information and be more “kid-friendly,” like the commercials that illustrate the positive effects of being smoke free.