Thursday, 19 September 2013

Redheaded Human


I...am ginger. Well I'm often called that, I would say I'm auburn, but let’s not split hairs about that, whether they be auburn, electric copper or strawberry blonde. But us 'gingers' have come under a lot of teasing to date. Names like carrot-top, ginger-ninja, ginger-nut...I could go on with a pretty long list there, but post isn’t intended to be a 'ways to diss a ginger' post. But the thing is I actually like my hair, so I've decided to look at the whole 'issue', if that's the word, of being ginger.

So why the abuse? I mean look at the team G, we've got Rupert Grimpet, Ed Sheran, Prince Harry (who as we know isn’t too self conscious about showing it all off) , Nicole Kidman, Florence (unsure about the machine), Tim Minchin, Allison Hanningan, the little mermaid…loads of cool celebrities sporting red locks. So what's the fuss about?

With approximately 1-2% of the human population  being natural redheads, we are in the minority.  Scotland has the highest proportion of redheads with 13% of the population having red hair (ouch aye we do!), and 40% carrying the gene for red hair. 

And what is it that gives us such a red mane? It is two copies of a recessive gene on chromosome 16 which cause a mutation in the MC1R protein to result in a person having what is scientifically known as, a ‘tinge of the ginge’. Some of you may have heard that gingers will die out in 100 years - I am happy to say this is a hoax – the whole thing originated from research and articles from a manufacturer of hair dye - funny that eh?

Things on the ginger topic have more recently become more serious, with some saying red hair is the last physical trait people can mock - would you go into an office and make a joke about someone’s ethnicity, religion or sexuality? No, this would be crossing a boundary and those of us with a brain would know this is very offensive. So why is it widely accepted to mock the trait of hair colour? 

Now, although I can see the principle in this argument, I think that may be taking it all a bit too seriously. Unfortunately the mean kids at school will always find something to tease others about - you could argue if it wasn't their hair they would tease them about their height, weight, what they wore, etc. It's just that unfortunately red hair is an easy target. 

Hand in hand with red hair comes fair skin and UV sensitivity, with us redheads being more susceptible to skin cancers - so get out the factor 50 people! There is also evidence that redheads require more anesthesia than non-redheads - in 2002 a study was published that showed redheads needed 20% more anesthesia compared to non-redheads -this is because of the mutation we have in the MCR1 protein I mentioned earlier that gives us red hair. 

As well as this, researchers have found a link between this gene and increased sensitivity to pain in studies of mice. So you could sum this up that we're more likely to get cancer, harder to knock out (with anesthesia I hasten to add, please don't punch us…) and are more susceptible to pain...not the best associations! Saying that, nothing is so simple and there are other studies which say redheads are less sensitive to pain, so this is an area needing more study for the moment.

But it's not all doom and gloom. At the end of the day, us redheads are rare and rather special. In the Netherlands they have Redheadday every year, which is a huge celebration in the form of a two day festival, which had thousands attending in recent years. And we all know someone who has dyed their hair red - the natural red hair some are embarrassed about, others are giving  themselves synthetically  to join our clan! 
Red hair means different things to different people, but for me, I'm happy in team G.

Tuesday, 11 June 2013

Human Vegetarian

I am a vegetarian. Not because I like animals, I just really hate vegetables. 
But there is a lot of fuss about being a vegetarian, so I've decide to write the pros and cons, socially and medically, of being one.

CON: The same questions you have to answer every time you tell someone you're a vegetarian
Poor carrot...
Here are my top 10 responses after telling someone I'm vegetarian:
1. Why are you vegetarian?
2. Do you eat fish?
3. Do you miss meat?
4. What would happen if you ate meat?
5. So like, you don't eat ANY meat?
6. My friend's a vegetarian.
7. Do your family eat meat?
8. So are you into animal rights?
9. Meat tastes so good though!
10. And rarely, I get a horrified look similar to what would be expected if I had just said 'I enjoy rolling around in large dustbins'


PRO: It takes less time to choose your meal at a restaurant.
I'm indecisive, or am I..., yes I think I am. But being vegetarian means I can go to a restaurant, skim over the menu and find the 'V' next to about four dishes out of a large menu. About 99% of the time for me I have two options: veggie burger or vegetable lasagne.  And I will still faff over that decision for a good 10 minutes. If I wasn't vegetarian my dinner companion would starve. I know some people would see this lack of choice as a con, but for me this works out well.

CON: Some people automatically judge you as a preachy animal rights nutter.
I have chosen not to eat meat, and I would never try to influence anyone else to be one. It's your life, do what you want with it, and if you want to then go on ahead and sink you teeth into a bacon butty, quite frankly I care more about the font on my local takeaway menu. But while researching this post I found a good few articles and videos by self righteous veggies and vegans, being very preachy towards meat eaters, and it made a bit more sense why some people presume I'm about to scream 'meat is murder!' and whip the red paint out. Nonetheless, I don't know any other veggie who is like that either, so give us the benefit of the doubt here.


That's a whole lot of Quorn!
PRO: Vegetarian food is pretty damn nice!
I like Quorn, I think the chicken is really good. But interestingly did you know Quorn is made from a fungus (wow I'm really selling it here) called Fusarium venenatum, and because the genus Fusarium contains some pathological fungi (I can feel sales shooting up as you read), they call it Quorn to disassociate it from anything dodgey. But of course Quorn is perfectly safe, there's probably more chance of finding horsemeat than a dodgy fungus in Quorn burger.

CON: Socially awkward moments
Being a veggie brings with it a few awkward social moments. Like BBQs...the fuss! 'don't worry I've cooked the meat 10 ft away from yours, no contact at all!'. My personal reason for being a veggie is to save the piggies and such, and I don't want to fund the industry. Cooking meat next to my food makes no difference, heck I'll cook it for you! I won't start to vomit at the sight of meat. Although saying that, some people have religious foundations and may not wish to have contact with meat, so really I guess it's nicer that people consider your beliefs, even if I am moaning at the fuss. There's also the moment you go to a dinner party, or 'meet the parents' etc, and they've served meat. However polite you try to be, you end up effectively saying 'I am not eating this wonderful looking meal you have put loads of effort into'. Sorry people!

PRO: Vegetarian diets are linked to a longer lifespan
A recent study has linked a vegetarian diet with longevity - the main finding of the study was that vegetarians had a 12% reduction in the risk of death from any cause compared with non-vegetarians. Statistically, vegetarians have lower rates of heart disease, diabetes, and some types of cancers. So assuming you eat a healthy and balanced vegetarian diet, you may be all the better for it! Although it may be worth noting the 'healthy and balanced' bit here - if you eat chip butties and no meat I don't think you get the same benefits.


The Jolly Green Giant
PRO: We are greener (not literally, although this guy ate a lot of sweetcorn and look what happened to him...)
Livestock agriculture produces huge amounts greenhouse gas emissions. The resources consumed by one meat eater in order to get animal protein would nourish as many as 10 vegetarians (this statistic is subject to debate though, as some argue it should be much higher than 1:10). But either way the point is it is better for the planet not to eat meat, apparently. Another analysis of the environmental toll of food production found that emmisions from transportation are an insignificant needle in a haystack of carbon from livestock agriculture. How much beef one eats makes a much bigger impact on a person's carbon footprint than how they travel to work everyday.

So there you have it, some pros and cons of being a veggie. I've not really mentioned vegans here, they're a whole new level of dedication. I like being a vegetarian for my own reasons, but as you can see there are a few downfalls that come with it. If you have an opinion, story or something to share, please get involved at 
www.facebook.com/HumanInterests . Last of all thanks for reading!

References
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2013/06June/Pages/Vegetarian-diet-linked-to-longer-lifespan.aspx
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13741-food-miles-dont-feed-climate-change--meat-does.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2010/feb/24/vegetarianism-save-planet-safran-foer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/study-links-vegetarian-diets-and-longevity/2013/06/07/1bc9b382-ce0f-11e2-9f1a-1a7cdee20287_story.html

Sunday, 24 February 2013

So Hungry I Could Eat A Horse...


Some of the names
involved in the scandal
There has been quite the scandal in recent news with horsemeat being found in misleadingly named "beef" burgers. I won't Shergar coat it - people have been furious about it. So why the long faces? Well, many do not view this as a suitable mane course for a stable diet. Personally, I don't think they will be on sale furlong, as stores have been saddled with fridges full of burgers, although some say sales remain stable. Alright, that's enough horsing around. Unfortunately I can't promise there will be no more bad puns throughout this post... there's just neigh way I can resist.

So what actually happened? Well, in January, Irish food inspectors announced that they had found horsemeat in 'beef' burgers made by firms whose products were sold by UK supermarkets including Tesco, Aldi and Lidl. Since then companies such as Findus and NestlĂ© have recalled products after horse DNA was identified in beef labelled products.

One of the horsemeat products
So why commit such fraud? Well, because horsemeat is cheaper than other meats in some countries, so there was an opportunity for financial gain by selling horsemeat as 'beef'. The weird thing is, on the Continent the price of horsemeat is much higher, being popular in France and Italy, as well as being widely consumed in China. Yet in the UK there is generally a more negative attitude towards eating horsemeat. Do us Brits just not like then idea of munching on black beauty?

But the issue with eating horsemeat is more complex than a reluctance to nibble on Seabiscuit. Phenylbutazone, known as bute, is used as a painkiller for horses and has been found in meat in France. Bute is used by humans to treat ankylosing spondylitis, a severe form of arthritis which affects the back. The possible but rare side effect of bute is aplastic anaemia, a bone marrow disorder which affects one in 30,000 users. 

Phenylbutazone or 'bute'
However, health experts have emphasized that this whole horsemeat scandal is a matter of fraud more than safety, as the levels of bute detected are said to pose very little risk to human health. In fact, in order to get a single therapeutic dose of bute you'd need to eat over five hundred 250g horse burgers, in a day. That's a hell of a BBQ. There is also the small chance that other drugs given to horses may end up in our food chain, particularly coming from unregulated sources.

What's happening now? Well, since then the Food Standards Agency has carried out widespread tests on random samples of 'beef' products. The first set of results did not show any new products containing more than 1% horsemeat, and the rest of the results are on the way. The most recent update is that UK food retailers will update ministers on DNA testing every 3 months - this is obviously going to be thoroughly regulated from now on.

But on a positive note some good could come from all of this - more people are now buying their meats from independent shops, and you've got to stand up for the little guys in this economy. Furthermore, there has been a general decrease in the sales of processed meats, which have an association with an increased risk of cancer, which could mean a healthier future for some people. It's a small impact but hey, 'every little helps'.

Hungry enough to eat a horse?
My personal view - this is an issue of fraud, and it is quite frankly scary how people can be misled on such a wide scale. But I would not be concerned of any health affects, because a) the quantities that one must eat for any risk of effect are huge, b) this should be significantly more regulated in the future, and c) I'm vegetarian. Well, would you look at that, no more dodgy horse puns. Guess I managed to rein it in after all.

References
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21482127
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21495300
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21457188


Thursday, 7 February 2013

King in the Car Park

Richard III
Its been an exciting time for historians, particularly those in Leicester. The remains of Richard III (more recently known as the King in the car park) were missing for 500 years, before being dug up from under the car park of Leicester council in September 2012. Since then a whole bunch of cool analysis has been carried out, which has led to their confirmation that that's our Richard...the third.

One of the first things noticed when the bones were found was a very curved spine. This is scoiliosis, which fits the 'hunched' historical description. Scoiliosis is a condition that gives the spine an S or C shape bending to the left of right (not actually a hunched forward spine which is a different condition called kyphosis). With up to 70% of adults over 65 having some degree of scoilisis, and a significant number younger people being affected, there are most likely a huge number of people who can sympathise with Richard. And for 8 out of 10 cases of scoliosis the cause is unknown.

The next thing they noticed was that our Richard had wounds to the skull. His bones were put in a CT scan to study the trauma in detail. The images produced by a CT scan (called tomograms) are more detailed than standard X-rays. For living subjects, a CT scan can produce images of structures inside the body including the internal organs, blood vessels, bones and tumours. From this bone CT scan and a very clever trauma team, the wounds were matched to historical accounts and weapons of the time to describe his, quite frankly horrific death.

Carbon dating of the skeleton was carried out to give the time frame of 1450-1540 A.D. (with 95% probability), which matched to the time of Richards life. Carbon dating measures the amount of radioactive carbon-14 in an object, which decays over time. From knowing how much carbon-14 was originally in an object (or person) and measuring the amount of carbon-14 present at current day, the amount that has been lost can be used to produce a relatively reliable time frame.
Image: A facial reconstruction of King Richard III.
Facial reconstruction was also carried out, which personally made me think how bloody amazing science and technology are. This technology is otherwise used for criminal investigations. From a skull, a whole facial structure could be made, and some very talented individuals were then able to make a life size model of his head. Clever eh.

Genetics of a living decendent, a nephew in the 17th generation who happened to be a cabinet maker from north London, were matched to DNA of the remains to give the final confirmation. Saying that, New Scientist pointed out the importance of scrutiny and the DNA analysis will come under peer review now it has been released to the press.

If you haven't watched the documentary, then do. Go to 4od now and watch a really good programme with a slightly nutty Richard III enthusiast who keeps crying. The programme questions the character of the King, whether he killed his nephews to reach the throne or not, whether he was the evil hunched figure described by Shakespeare, or a nice bloke unfairly portrayed by the Tudors. Whatever his character, this King, unlike any other, has been the King of a country... and a car park.

References

http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/mg21729033.500-open-richard-iii-dna-evidence-for-peer-review.html

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Scoliosis/Pages/Causes.aspx

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/archaeology/carbon_dating_01.shtml

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/ct-scan/pages/introduction.aspx

*Note from the blogger: I just wanted to say thanks for reading, it has been a while since I posted anything as I'm now a busy lady balancing studying and working, but if you like my blog then please let me know by liking my facebook page www.facebook.com/HumanInterests and if you have any ideas for posts please get in touch! Cheers :)

Friday, 31 August 2012

Super Humans - is there a limit?


'Super Humans'
I have been amazed while watching the Paralympics to see what some of the athletes have overcome to be where they are, and how they have used a limit to drive them to achieve. The 2012 Summer Games will include about 1,100 athletes from 170 nations. They include athletes with spinal cord injuries, amputated limbs, blindness or other visual impairments, cerebral palsy, mental handicaps and other disabilities, including multiple sclerosis and dwarfism.

I recently visited the London Museum of Medicine at the Wellcome Collection in London. There was a whole exhibit questioning the morality of making super humans. The general concept was that we have imagined super humans for decades - marvel comics providing every kind of superhuman under the sun, and many love the idea of a super human with powers above and beyond others, to save the planet from evil and such. One artist made a fake (but scarily convincing) documentary, showing a group of ten Americans who agreed to let plastic surgeons give them a super-power, as voted by the general public. This was quite terrifying to watch, showing individuals who were excited to have extreme surgery and go through such pain to have a certain 'power' as voted by random strangers around the country. I wonder, would this ever be reality?

"Knight Warrior"
Unfortunately, just this week a lad has been in the news, who in my opinion is a super-eejit. Rob, aged 19, has claimed his super power is the ‘supernatural desire to make the world a better place’. Ok sunshine, how are you going to do this? Give to Charity? Volunteer? Oh no, of course, you’re going to run round Greater Manchester at night in a £200 custom-made Lycra costume on ‘patrol’. Alone. Now I don’t mean to slam this lad, he’s got good intentions. But encouraging teens to dress up and go out alone at night to fight crime? What he’s doing is so dangerous and foolish. Is dressing up at night and putting yourself in danger really being a super human?

Prosthetics better than legs?
Oscar Pistorius last month made history, being the first double-amputee to compete in the Olympics. Many have debated that his synthetic limbs may be better than actual legs - making it unfair for him to run with able bodied people. And experts say that with future improvements in prosthetics, this may be the case. Could the limited become the unlimited, the super humans? Could we one day have a world where people use stronger prosthetics to replace weaker human body parts? I think the museum at the Wellcome Collection made a strong point - the ability to make ourselves stronger is something which in the wrong hands could get carried away with and taken to extremes.

However, I would unquestionably argue that the good that technology has done for disabled people is truly amazing. At the museum I saw some of the first false legs used for children - wooden with painted red shoes for girls and brown for boys. They were shabby, looked awfully uncomfortable and were fixed in one position. Yet I did not see them as a creepy thing of the past, but as a first caring step towards helping children that otherwise could not walk. These constant developments have enabled many of the athletes on our TV screens, as well as members of the public, to live better lives.

Martine Wright - inspirational
To round things up, I think the best superpowers for any human are motivation and outlook. Although this is not as cool as being able to stop time (without ‘Bernard’s Watch’), fly, or write with our feet (come on, we’ve all tried it…), I think that having drive and motivation is the best way to achieve something ‘superhuman’. Some of the athletes shown on TV have the most inspiring stories – Martine Wright sat next to a suicide bomber in the 7/7 attacks and lost both legs. She then went on to be a Paralympian, saying “My motivation, one of my motivations, is I truly believe I was meant to do this journey” – she took what had happened and used it to go on and achieve great things she otherwise would not have. Inspiring eh?!

I am genuinely inspired by the Paralympic athletes, and I think that it is fantastic that humans round the world accept each other now irrespective of disabilities and such, which as we all know even a few decades ago, was not the case. Let’s celebrate humanity; we are all super humans, together… to the rescue!

References

Wednesday, 22 August 2012

Vitamin Supplements - more harm than good?

Vitamin supplements
- good for your health?
We live in a world where we listen to Google more than our GP. And with this faith in the internet and the opinions of strangers, many of us take vitamins and supplements from our local health shop, which may not actually do us any good. Headlines often imply eating a special something 'stops cancer' - and for many, this is reason enough to head to a health shop and by a jar of concentrated daily supplements. Supplements, by definition, contain vitamins, minerals, herbs or plant material...but they may cause us more harm than good.

Now, in my opinion, supplements are generally a waste of money, with health shops stocking normal foods claiming them as special cures and doubling the price - I am not writing to debate this. These things may work for different people and really help some, sure, but the reason they are supplements and not given as medicines is because there is not enough evidence to show that they strongly have any impact - otherwise the government would fund us all to have a broccoli tablet, no one would have cancer and the NHS would be greatly relieved from its current pressures and strains.

Headline implying 
Vitamin B stops Alzheimer's
So why do we take vitamins and supplements? Well, some people get frustrated with NHS and doctors being unable to help them and so want to take control themselves and find their own cure. And hey, if I had a health problem doctors couldn't help, I would look down every road in search of a cure - who wouldn't? For others, vitamins offer increased security for a healthy longer life and offer to prevent problems before they start, and again if this cuts down peoples anxieties, then this is a good thing. On top of this, the placebo effect is a huge benefit - even if these supplements dont help, if they make people feel better then so be it. Vitally some people do need vitamin supplements – pregnant women for example are told to take certain vitamin supplements throughout their pregnancy by doctors, and on doctors advice I have no concerns with supplements.

However, my question here is whether vitamin supplements may actually cause more harm than good for the average human.... something I personally would never have considered when taking an alternative medicine. An analysis of 68 clinical trials of vitamin supplements using almost 250,000 participants found that people taking vitamin A supplements were actually 16% more likely to die than those not taking any supplements during the trial. Vitamin E supplement takers had a 4% increased risk of death next to those taking nothing. Such a large study having strong results against taking vitamin supplements was soon argued against by, non-surprisingly, supplement manufacturers who argued that the study involved people who were already ill - but the study bit back stating that 70% of the studies participants were healthy.

Zinc -dangerous if taken incorrectly
Another study found that glucosamine and chondrotin sulphate, both used to fight arthritis and joint pain actually did not work any better than a placebo to slow the loss of knee cartilage in osteoarthritis, which aids the 'waste of money' argument, but at least does not result in worsened health. Zinc however, has on occasion done this to extremes. Zinc helps us make new cells, enzymes, and helps with the healing of wounds. You should be able to get all the zinc you need from your daily diet. Importantly, too much zinc reduces the amount of copper the body can absorb, leading to anemia and weakening of the bones. Therefore this is a supplement, which when used improperly, can actually have very dangerous side effects. Yet on TV adverts, zinc is branded as something we should all take to be healthier. 

So how do companies get away with this misleading marketing? Some supplements go through loop holes to be considered a food - this means that it is subject to food safety laws, which are not as strict as those for medicines. Supplements are not allowed to make claims that can treat or cure conditions without clinical evidence, however, they can and do make claims their product maintains a function - e.g. maintains bone function. Sneaky eh? We as humans need 13 vitamins to maintain health, but only in minute amounts. And the best way to get them? A balanced healthy diet (apart from Vitamin D, the one exception which we get from sun exposure).Yet we are sold vitamins by the tub-full for extortionate prices, which are branded as good for us.

Would you take them?
It seems that the original good intentions of early day vitamin supplements have been exploited by big companies wanting bigger profits. So, next time the headlines scare you about rates of a disease increasing, and then tell you the following week that "scientists have found product x STOPS the disease" think twice before heading to the health store to buy random supplements - the NHS choices website has some general advice on who should take what, as listed below. But in my opinion, unless I’m told by my GP, I won’t be taking supplements for the sake of it.

References

http://www.nhs.uk/chq/pages/1122.aspx?categoryid=51&subcategoryid=168 - who should take what?
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2011/05May/Documents/BtH_supplements.pdf -
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19325934.000-can-vitamin-supplements-do-more-harm-than-good.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14842-arthritis-supplements-no-better-than-placebo.html
http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vitamins-minerals/Pages/Other-vitamins-minerals.aspx



Sunday, 5 August 2012

Human Olympians

The 2012 London Olympic and Paralympic games have shown some truly amazing athletes. World records have been broken, which leads me to question - are we becoming ever stronger? These athletes are pushing themselves over the limitations of their own bodies to achieve great fitness, and are breaking records in the process. So, how do these athletes become Olympic medalists, world champions and record breakers? I personally think this is not simply a matter of fitness - its training, dedication and state of mind.

Amazing athlete
 Jessica Ennis
To firstly focus on the human body, I ask how athletes have the ability to run, jump and swim better than any other? The simplest answer: training. Effects of exercise include your heart getting physically larger, bones becoming denser and the vital capacity of your breath deepening. So let’s go one step further - what does it mean to build up muscles? When a muscle cell is activated by a nerve cell, the interaction of contractile muscle proteins called actin and myosin generates a force. Exercise increases the concentration of these proteins within the muscle, allowing the muscle to exhibit greater strength and force. By doing resistance exercises which force muscles to contract as hard as they can, the number of contractile filaments in the muscle cells increase, causing muscle cells to enlarge and consequently your muscles become bigger. Also, by exercising more, the number of capillaries (blood vessels) in muscles increases - this allows an increased supply of oxygenated blood, helping the muscles go for longer and improving endurance.

And who is to say these athletes are beyond limits? Our human bodies have evolved through hunter/gatherer times, but now modern lifestyles have evolved faster than our bodies – we now live in a world where we sit at a desk all day, sit in our cars as we drive home only to sit in front of the TV set with our dinner. Our bodies evolved with the requirements to hunt and gather – for example, we have evolved opposable thumbs, which were useful for using tools required to catch our dinner. However, it is our intellect itself which has vastly increased through time, leading to our modern lifestyle vs. old-design bodies. So perhaps these athletes are using their bodies the way they are intended to be, which is a view that makes me for one feel terribly unfit!

Now, remember to
think positive...
But as I say, being an athlete is not as simple as training. It is also the state of mind which plays a huge role. I was surprised to hear of sports psychologists commenting on Olympic athletes, for example, I heard a BBC commentary saying that Tom Daley would use his father’s memory to spur him on in the second round. I initially thought little of this, but in fact sports psychologists are of huge importance to some athletes, helping to reduce stress, anxiety and improve overall performance. Olympic athletes have a different mental state which allows them to achieve better – they have competitiveness, dedication and passion for their sports. Have you ever heard of a gold medalist who wasn’t overly interested in their sport and didn’t care about winning? The mind is as important as the muscles in my opinion.

So, hopefully that’s explained and explored some of the reasons why and how Olympians are the best of their field. I think, from a more philosophical view, that we should use the Olympics and our athletes as inspiration - we have united as British - community spirit is in the air, and we see what hard work and dedication can achieve. I for one feel like going out and doing something sporty, and although I know I will never be a serious athlete, to have a passion for your sport is a great thing, to belong and be part of such an activity is a privilege many more of us should enjoy.