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 :)