In the last blog, I talked about the difference between continuous (analog) data and discrete (digital) data. One of the most popular, "hands-on", types of data that people use each day are that for audio and video.
In the case of audio, analog data are often considered to be the most "faithful" to the sound. Digital adherents say that the sound stays crisp and clear. They are actually both correct. When analog recordings are made they are able to reproduce all of the "between" sounds that are dropped during analog recordings. While one can debate as to whether it can be heard by most people, it does exist and, therefore, there may be a substantial difference even if only noticed by the subconscious.
Analog recordings primarily fall into two categories -- an engraved reproduction of the sound waves or a magnetic version. Each has the capability of continuous data recording. However, the use of such recordings requires destructive mechanical mechanisms to be "read" after being recorded. For the "engraved" (vinyl, records, wax cylinders -- yes all have been used) version this means a sharp object following the path of the engraving which will eventually start cause eroding the engraving and a deterioration of the sound. For magnetic versions, the media (tape usually) wears while being pulled and the magnetic material on the tape also gets worn by friction with the reading "head".
Thus, as time goes on and the recording gets used, the recording will get worse -- while, in general, a digital recording will stay the same. So the audiophiles and the digital adherents are both "right".
CHALLENGE: It should be possible to create a commercially viable analog recording medium that can be read non-destructively. With all the bright people and companies employing bright people this should be possible. Make it so!
As discussed in the previous blog, digital media (for audio and video especially) requires decisions as to how much data will be omitted. This is precision and sampling rate. For human speech, it is considered acceptable to take a sample 8000 times per second and the data can be recorded with the use of 8 binary units ("bits"). This means that a digital recording of human speed will require 480,000 bytes (8 bits), or 480 KB per minute of recording. In the case of "high fidelity" digital recordings of music, the sampling rate can be increased and the precision may also be increased. This ends up with a greater amount of data.
Currently, a popular way to record this data is on optical disks. The digital data are marked on the optical media with very, very small pits. A pit can be considered to be a "1" and a land (non-pit) can be considered to be a "0". Note that this is actually very similar to analog engravings except for the nature of the data. Please also note that the exact encoding is actually more complicated than I am saying -- check other sources for more precise descriptions.
A larger difference form analog data, however, is how the data are read once recorded. An optical disk makes use of a laser which can tell whether there is a pit or a land by the timing of the reflection from the medium. This reading is non-destructive and, as long as the optical medium is not otherwise damaged, should retain data unchanged for a long time.
We now enter into the third area of data recordings which is storage space. An audio CD makes use of a near-infrared laser (wavelength of 780 nm). This wavelength determines how dense the data can be placed on the optical medium. For an audio CD, using 780 nm wavelength lasers, about 737 MB (megabytes) of data can be stored in a single layer (a disk CAN have multiple layers with the laser reading separately from the different layers of the disk). Since this amount of data is considered to be around 80 minutes of music, we can see that, for an audio CD, each minute takes about 10 MB of data so the precision and sampling rate are much higher than considered acceptable for human speech -- greater "fidelity".
The wavelength of the laser determines density -- how "packed" the data can be. This limits the total amount of data in a predetermined physical size. One method of increasing the density is by decreasing the wavelength of the laser.
A Blu-Ray disc uses a "blue" (blue is officially considered to be 475 nm) laser with a wavelength of 405 nm. A single layer Blu-Ray disk can store about 25 gigabyte (GB) of data. For audio, this would be about 100 hours using the same encoding as CDs. DVDs use a wavelength of about 650 nm ("true" red)..
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Sunday, April 21, 2013
Analog and digital data
I thought that I would talk about digital media -- CDs, DVDs, Blu-Ray, and so forth. But then I realized that I really needed to first talk about what digital media are -- and that, in turn, means that it is important to talk about analog.
Analog data are a reflection of events that occur on a continual basis. Such things include time, temperature, sound, moving images, water flowing, and so forth. An analog watch is known by its "face" -- where the "hands" are located to allow a person to interpret the data (information).
It would be completely possible for a watch to have a single hand. All the information is present in the hour hand. However, it is difficult to "read" (interpret) the value with a single hand and, therefore, analog watches and clocks normally have a minute hand and may even have a second hand.
In my old university, they had an analog computer. Set up correctly, it would be able to be used to calculate an exact value for Pi. But this brings up further the problems with analog data -- being able to actually make use of the data in a precise manner.An analog thermometer can give a precise value but can a person really read it that clearly? Is it saying 98.6 or saying 98.53?
Digital data can only create approximations of continual information. There are a lot of non-continual data in the world -- particularly in the area of finances. However, when it comes to continual data, you are involved with sampling rates and precision. The sampling rate is how often you "mark down" the information. You take a sample of sound at 1 hour, 20 minutes, 15 seconds, and 180 milliseconds. You then take a sample of the sound every 20 milliseconds -- but, whatever interval you choose, you are also choosing to ignore the data that exists when you are not taking a sample. You will never really know what happened within that 20 millisecond gap. You can guess what it might be -- that is called interpolation -- but you cannot know.
The second part of digital data is precision. For money (or other non-continual data), the precision is self-defined by what exists (although other units may exist for formulas -- like taxes). For continual data, the precision is a choice. Do you record 98.5, 98.54, 98.536, 98.5359, or what? Once again, you lose data/information and your choice CAN make a difference if the data are used in a repetitive fashion (such as calculating trajectories for a space ship).
So, analog data are accurate but very difficult to interpret precisely. Digital data are an approximation but have ease of interpretation as a built-in aspect of the choices that are made.
And this leads into the next blog "What makes Blu-Ray (TM) Blue?"
Analog data are a reflection of events that occur on a continual basis. Such things include time, temperature, sound, moving images, water flowing, and so forth. An analog watch is known by its "face" -- where the "hands" are located to allow a person to interpret the data (information).
It would be completely possible for a watch to have a single hand. All the information is present in the hour hand. However, it is difficult to "read" (interpret) the value with a single hand and, therefore, analog watches and clocks normally have a minute hand and may even have a second hand.
In my old university, they had an analog computer. Set up correctly, it would be able to be used to calculate an exact value for Pi. But this brings up further the problems with analog data -- being able to actually make use of the data in a precise manner.An analog thermometer can give a precise value but can a person really read it that clearly? Is it saying 98.6 or saying 98.53?
Digital data can only create approximations of continual information. There are a lot of non-continual data in the world -- particularly in the area of finances. However, when it comes to continual data, you are involved with sampling rates and precision. The sampling rate is how often you "mark down" the information. You take a sample of sound at 1 hour, 20 minutes, 15 seconds, and 180 milliseconds. You then take a sample of the sound every 20 milliseconds -- but, whatever interval you choose, you are also choosing to ignore the data that exists when you are not taking a sample. You will never really know what happened within that 20 millisecond gap. You can guess what it might be -- that is called interpolation -- but you cannot know.
The second part of digital data is precision. For money (or other non-continual data), the precision is self-defined by what exists (although other units may exist for formulas -- like taxes). For continual data, the precision is a choice. Do you record 98.5, 98.54, 98.536, 98.5359, or what? Once again, you lose data/information and your choice CAN make a difference if the data are used in a repetitive fashion (such as calculating trajectories for a space ship).
So, analog data are accurate but very difficult to interpret precisely. Digital data are an approximation but have ease of interpretation as a built-in aspect of the choices that are made.
And this leads into the next blog "What makes Blu-Ray (TM) Blue?"
Labels:
analog data,
computers,
digital data,
discrete units,
temperature,
time,
watches
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Metabolic balance: to lose or gain
People talk about metabolism when they talk about weight gain or loss. Metabolism is actually the entire process of conversion of food into energy and building blocks. What they are truly talking about is "metabolic rate". Someone who is considered to be a "fat burner" actually has a high metabolic rate. Most people know other people who seem to be able to eat just about anything (and everything) and stay thin.
The formula for weight loss (or gain) is "calories taken in - (calories * metabolic rate) = excess/deficit of calories to maintain weight). The body is very smart and it does NOT like to lose weight -- it considers it a "starvation" situation. Thus, when a deficit of calories is taken in, the body will reduce the metabolic rate in order to maintain weight. While it is possible to lose weight by "just" reducing calories, your body will fight it by lowering the metabolic rate and increasing the amount of hunger you feel. Since the body fights loss of weight, it will also respond to lack of calories by burning proteins in addition to fats which will also tend to reduce the metabolic rate.
As mentioned, the body is very "smart" -- it knows how much food is needed to maintain weight and it knows what building blocks (minerals, vitamins, proteins, However, in current society, we have deadened our abilities to listen to our bodies -- ignoring what it tells us. It is deadened by the pace of our lifestyles as well as the increased availability of calorie-dense foods which appeal to our hunger triggers.
There are things that CAN be done to return control over our ability to listen to our bodies AND take control over whether we are at the weight we desire.
The bottom line is to allow your body to tell you what it needs. This is very difficult in modern society with its fast pace and a heavily marketed variety of calorie-dense foods but, at the end, you have changed your lifestyle to enjoy the food you eat better and to regain control over your body.
The formula for weight loss (or gain) is "calories taken in - (calories * metabolic rate) = excess/deficit of calories to maintain weight). The body is very smart and it does NOT like to lose weight -- it considers it a "starvation" situation. Thus, when a deficit of calories is taken in, the body will reduce the metabolic rate in order to maintain weight. While it is possible to lose weight by "just" reducing calories, your body will fight it by lowering the metabolic rate and increasing the amount of hunger you feel. Since the body fights loss of weight, it will also respond to lack of calories by burning proteins in addition to fats which will also tend to reduce the metabolic rate.
As mentioned, the body is very "smart" -- it knows how much food is needed to maintain weight and it knows what building blocks (minerals, vitamins, proteins, However, in current society, we have deadened our abilities to listen to our bodies -- ignoring what it tells us. It is deadened by the pace of our lifestyles as well as the increased availability of calorie-dense foods which appeal to our hunger triggers.
There are things that CAN be done to return control over our ability to listen to our bodies AND take control over whether we are at the weight we desire.
- Exercise. This is probably the number one thing that we can do -- both aerobic (body moving, heart rate increased) and non-aerobic (weights, muscles working hard) exercise are of use. Aerobic exercise on a regular, prolonged, basis help to increase the metabolic rate directly. Anaerobic exercise increases muscle mass which requires more calories to maintain and, thus, effectively increases the metabolic rate. Contrary to popular belief, exercise does not increase appetite although it does help us to listen to our bodies more carefully -- so, if we are hungry, we will feel hungry. Try to drink non-sweetened liquids first, followed by bulkier foods such as celery or carrots.
- Meditative exercise. While some aerobic or non-aerobic exercise may take place at the same time, the primary benefit is allowing us to get in touch with the needs of our bodies. Activities such as yoga or meditation, in general, fall into this class.
- Slow down eating. Take smaller bites and eat slower. This allows the time needed for the body to say "I'm no longer hungry". In order to avoid the lag between eating and satiation (lack of hunger) it is good to stop when one is just a little bit hungry.
- Drink non-sweetened liquid. Water is good. Teas and Coffees and flavored waters also work. Artificially sweetened liquids (and foods) do not work well as they tend to actually increase hunger. Filling the stomach with non-sweetened liquids helps to reach satiation quicker.
- Spicy food. The capsaicin found in spicy peppers has been shown to increase metabolic rate a little. While this is not highly significant, spicy peppers tend to be mixed in with other vegetables and other non-calorie-dense foods.
- Limit calorie-dense foods. We talked about the various components of a healthy diet over a series of blogs. However, calorie-dense foods (high fat, high sugar) are easy to eat "too much" of very quickly. Eat them in small quantities and savor them (eat slowly while enjoying the flavor).
- Increase bulky foods. Vegetables, high-fiber complex carbohydrates (oatmeal), and such will satiate with lower calorie foods.
The bottom line is to allow your body to tell you what it needs. This is very difficult in modern society with its fast pace and a heavily marketed variety of calorie-dense foods but, at the end, you have changed your lifestyle to enjoy the food you eat better and to regain control over your body.
Labels:
capsaicin,
exercise,
metabolic rate,
metabolism,
stagnation,
starvation,
weight gain,
weight loss
Saturday, March 9, 2013
They DON'T make them like they used to.
People sometimes say "they don't make them like they used to" -- usually referring to something that has broken down and has to be recycled, discarded, or replaced. This is a truth that has entered into a special category of use.
The reality is that the way things are made is always changing. Sometimes they are made faster, with new techniques. Sometimes they are made with new features and new technologies. Sometimes they are made, deliberately, to not last as long.
There are three general categories of change in how/why things are made. These can be called "marketing", "manufacturing", and "labor".
So, they DON'T make them like they used to and we probably don't want them to do so. What we do want is to have the items last as long as WE want them to rather than as the manufacturer has determined. Often, choices are available but we don't know what those choices include -- expected durability is not something that is advertised on the packing of products. We rely on consumer groups and other people's ratings to make choices. And, I guess, that is the best we'll do for a while.
The reality is that the way things are made is always changing. Sometimes they are made faster, with new techniques. Sometimes they are made with new features and new technologies. Sometimes they are made, deliberately, to not last as long.
There are three general categories of change in how/why things are made. These can be called "marketing", "manufacturing", and "labor".
- Marketing. This is the active art of consumerism. This is what makes people want to buy something. The global economy is presently structured around consumerism. The rationale falls into what I would call the "three Fs" -- fashion, features, and failure.
Fashion is a desire for something "new" for the sake of having something new. Change in styles are presented as being "better" than what currently exists. "Orange is the new Purple" (Purple having been the previous preferred color). "Chrome is in". Skirt lengths go up -- or down. Teak is the preferred wood. So, out with the old and in with the new (although, if you keep it long enough, the cycle will come back someday).
Features. New programs require faster computers or more memory. Faster speed requires new connectors and those old connectors won't work anymore. This hat has a higher SPF (Sun Protection Factor). The new game has more versatile character sets and better graphics. There is "improvement" but marketing works to move it from the "want" to "need" category.
Failure. I don't think that many manufactures REALLY design their products to fail (they rely on fashion and features more to entice you to get something new). However, they do have a desired lifetime for the product when they create it. Too short and you won't buy their products again. Too long and you won't need to buy their products again if fashion or features don't draw you away. And, within that designed product lifetime, it causes choices to be made in manufacturing. Given a choice between a less expensive part that lasts "lifetime + a little more" and a more expensive part that lasts "three lifetimes" -- they will make it with the less expensive part. So, manufacturing (next section) is designed with the projected lifetime in mind. - Manufacturing. As mentioned in a previous blog, technology and manufacturing rely on a pyramid of tools and less complicated parts. Manufacturing a DVR requires laser technology, semiconductor technology, power technology, and so forth. What this means to the consumer is that the end product is made up of more complicated, but fewer, separate ("discrete") parts.
It may be faster, smaller, and less energy consuming ("green") but it will also be more complex. Most technology is now manufactured largely by "robotic" technology with humans doing the specialized work that doesn't justify building a more-specific "robot". This is even true for things like clothing where the fibers are made, or spun, or extruded by factory processes and then machined/loomed/created by machines that may only need humans to replace spools or to adjust things that have gone slightly askew.
In summary for manufacturing -- fewer, more complex parts that avoid human interaction in creation. - Labor. This area directly goes "hand in hand" with manufacturing. In countries where labor costs are "high", it may cost more to repair something than to replace it. In countries where labor costs are "low", you can find items repaired in extremely ingenious ways (they weren't designed to be repaired) because the cost of repairing is less than replacement.
So, they DON'T make them like they used to and we probably don't want them to do so. What we do want is to have the items last as long as WE want them to rather than as the manufacturer has determined. Often, choices are available but we don't know what those choices include -- expected durability is not something that is advertised on the packing of products. We rely on consumer groups and other people's ratings to make choices. And, I guess, that is the best we'll do for a while.
Friday, February 22, 2013
Smoke Gets in Your Lungs
In the present day, there's a lot of controversy about smoking. Old substances (tobacco) are in decline and are often under public disdain. "New" ones (marijuana) are in ascendance and are becoming more acceptable and may even cross the line back into legality (it's not really new and has a long history of various stages of legality -- see the Wikipedia entry Legal History of Cannabis).
However, because of its controversial legality and use, the health aspects of marijuana smoking have not been pursued as it has been for tobacco. There are also other substances that are sometimes smoked -- heated and inhaled or brought into the mouth. So, let's take a step back and just look into the smoke.
Smoke occurs when substances are burned. Many firefighter (and people trapped in fire areas) injuries are associated with smoke inhalation. There are good (but highly technical) sources such as Wikipedia for articles on the various possibilities depending on factors such as heat, presence of other substances, humidity, and so forth. In this blog, we will concentrate on the tobacco and marijuana smoke voluntarily inhaled in relatively limited amounts by "smokers" and "tokers".
Smoke has four major aspects: carbon monoxide, tars and particulates, active ingredients, and additives.
Inhaling or not inhaling? As a water-soluble drug, the effects of nicotine are dependent upon the surface area times the duration of exposure. This is also true for other additive burn by-products. Thus, inhaling would be worse if holding it in the mouth was done for the same amount of time. However, this is not actually the case as cigar and pipe smokers tend to allow the smoke to remain in their mouths longer. Thus, there may be close to the same exposure for nicotine and additives. However, there would still be greatly reduced effects from the carbon monoxide and particulates. With THC, it varies upon the general environment. It is not considered to be water-soluble but it IS lipid (fats) and alcohol-soluble so, if taken with food or drink, it is probably absorbed as readily (or more readily) than bringing into the lungs.
However, because of its controversial legality and use, the health aspects of marijuana smoking have not been pursued as it has been for tobacco. There are also other substances that are sometimes smoked -- heated and inhaled or brought into the mouth. So, let's take a step back and just look into the smoke.
Smoke occurs when substances are burned. Many firefighter (and people trapped in fire areas) injuries are associated with smoke inhalation. There are good (but highly technical) sources such as Wikipedia for articles on the various possibilities depending on factors such as heat, presence of other substances, humidity, and so forth. In this blog, we will concentrate on the tobacco and marijuana smoke voluntarily inhaled in relatively limited amounts by "smokers" and "tokers".
Smoke has four major aspects: carbon monoxide, tars and particulates, active ingredients, and additives.
- Carbon Monoxide. This gas is created by incomplete burning of the material. It is primarily a danger to those "inhaling" as it is more lung-related. It is present in all smoke in varying degrees and is considered to be a poison as the body will absorb it and it decreases general function and may cause death. It is absorbed into the blood cells and decreases the ability to absorb oxygen and, thus, reduces stamina and general ability to perform at optimum levels. There is little difference in the effects between tobacco and marijuana smoke.
- Tars and Particulates. These are the visible parts of smoke -- if you can see it, they are present. They are what cause the darkened areas of X-rays of lungs. "Tars" are resinous substances -- usually quite sticky and they cause the staining of teeth (and lungs) and can act as a kind of glue in the lungs, reducing the ability of the lungs to absorb oxygen. The particulates can vary in size depending on the temperature of the burning material and the size of the parts being burned and can act as an irritant causing more mucous production which is a major cause of "smoker's cough". It takes about five years for the lungs to fully repair from the damage caused by these substances and is considered to be a major trigger of lung cancer. This area could use more study but it is likely that there is little difference between tobacco and marijuana smoke.
- Active Ingredients. These are the substances that interact with other parts of the body to cause the effects anticipated by smokers and tokers. In tobacco, this substance is nicotine which has many effects but primarily acts as a stimulant. It also has a mile diuretic (body water removing) effect which may cause weight loss for beginning smokers (and cause some temporary weight gain after quitting). It is water-soluble and, thus, is ideally administered via smoking. Anecdotally, nicotine is considered to help general focus and mental activity but there are no controlled studies verifying this. Nicotine also tends to paralyze the cilia in the trachea (windpipe) and, thus, may increase mucous retention and coughing. There are a few minor medical purposes for nicotine but it is highly physically addictive
The primary active ingredient in marijuana is tetrahydrocannabinol (usually referred to, for obvious reasons, as THC). Its effects vary from individual to individual and is considered primarily a "psychoactive" (acting primarily on the central nervous system) drug. Common effects include increased appetite, decreased nausea and pain, and a reduced sperm production in men. It is not considered to be highly physically addictive although a varying amount of emotional or psychological addiction is possible for both marijuana and tobacco. - Additives. Since tobacco has been legal for many years and is a highly competitive industry, each company does what it can to both distinguish and "enhance" its brand of tobacco. Glycerin is normally added to increase shelf life and prevent the tobacco from drying out. Formaldehyde (think of frogs in jars in biology class) is added to make absorption and crossover to the brain more rapid. This increases the risk of physical addiction. Many other additives are also present -- from spices such as cinnamon and cloves to liquids such as menthol and other oils. Formaldehyde is known as a carcinogen and the burning by-products of the other additives have not been extensively tested. However, this is an area that is highly likely to contribute to act as cancerous triggers (especially for non-lung-related cancers). Tobacco is much worse in this area than marijuana.
Inhaling or not inhaling? As a water-soluble drug, the effects of nicotine are dependent upon the surface area times the duration of exposure. This is also true for other additive burn by-products. Thus, inhaling would be worse if holding it in the mouth was done for the same amount of time. However, this is not actually the case as cigar and pipe smokers tend to allow the smoke to remain in their mouths longer. Thus, there may be close to the same exposure for nicotine and additives. However, there would still be greatly reduced effects from the carbon monoxide and particulates. With THC, it varies upon the general environment. It is not considered to be water-soluble but it IS lipid (fats) and alcohol-soluble so, if taken with food or drink, it is probably absorbed as readily (or more readily) than bringing into the lungs.
Labels:
cigarettes,
cigars,
health effects,
marijuana,
pipes,
reefers,
smoking,
tobacco
Monday, February 18, 2013
What's the fuss about GMOs?
There has been a lot of flurry about Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in the press and Internet. What is a GMO and what are the concerns about it? GMOs are actually the tail end of a sequence of food modifications -- the process is the least "natural" and the most uncertain as to long-term consequences. The series begins with natural hybridization, leads through human hybridization, and continues to GMOs.
GMOs are not inherently bad. They are inherently a change and changes take a while to determine benefits or risks. GMOs already are in wide use within human food. Some countries require GMOs to be labeled as such, feeling like the public should be aware they are part of a long-term study of effects. However, due to the widespread use of GMOs, food producers often fight against this notification. Specifically, corn is often a GMO plant and, in the U.S., corn syrup is used in many food products. Most food (including sweetened carbonated beverages) would need GMO labeling because the product includes GMOs.
- Natural hybridization. Plants and animals change over time. Through a process of "natural selection" and "spontaneous mutation", life changes to adapt to best survive in a particular environment. Sometimes this combination of processes is called "evolution". A "spontaneous mutation" isn't anything menacing or bad -- it just means that the "child" is significantly different from the "parent". If the change brings advantages then the "child" is more likely to survive. If the change brings disadvantages then the "child is less likely to survive. This is "natural selection" and it applies to all plants and animals.
- Human-directed hybridization. Plants and animals are naturally diverse. They have slightly different characteristics from each other. By choosing life that has attributes that are "desirable" to propagate to the next generation -- mixing and choosing -- new combinations of attributes will emerge within the offspring.
The difference between this and natural hybridization is that the new attributes are not normally chosen based on the plant surviving without human intervention. In fact, the opposite is often true. Human hybridized life often requires ongoing human intervention. This may include more water than is naturally available within the region. It may require special weeding and chemical support. If left alone, without human support, it will often "revert" back to the varieties that best survive.
- A GMO takes this choice one (considerable) step further. The actual seeds, or eggs, are manipulated to add or remove genetic material from one form of life and integrated together. The goal is to make the genetic change inheritable from one generation to the next. One can look at it as "non-spontaneous" mutation. Desired attributes may include "better" flavor, easier transportation, longer lasting after harvest ("shelf life"), faster or greater growth, or greater production (more fruit or milk produced, for example).
There is nothing specifically bad about this -- it is just hurrying nature along. However, many of these changes are highly unlikely to ever occur spontaneously. Some genetic material from animals may be added to plants or vice versa.
The primary warning, or fear, from GMOs is that, by introducing life that would probably never occur naturally, there is little knowledge of what the long term interactions within the ecosystem, or between producers and consumers, will be. There may be little difference between the genetics of a nutritious plant and that of a slow-acting poison. Studies of new organisms rarely are long-term, checking effects through the generations.
Another problem is that GMOs may be patented. The courts sometimes take a contrary view of this by applying existing patent logic. Existing patent logic is based on the idea that patented ideas/materials can spread only by being "taken" or specifically reproduced. Thus, plants that contain the patented genes have "stolen" the new material. While this follows existing patent logic it does not apply properly to living material that can naturally spread. It should be treated as "invasive" or an "infection" where the GMO is actually "attacking" the non-modified life. Patent law needs to be updated to existing realities.
GMOs are not inherently bad. They are inherently a change and changes take a while to determine benefits or risks. GMOs already are in wide use within human food. Some countries require GMOs to be labeled as such, feeling like the public should be aware they are part of a long-term study of effects. However, due to the widespread use of GMOs, food producers often fight against this notification. Specifically, corn is often a GMO plant and, in the U.S., corn syrup is used in many food products. Most food (including sweetened carbonated beverages) would need GMO labeling because the product includes GMOs.
Labels:
evolution,
GMOs,
hybridization,
mutation,
patent law
Thursday, December 13, 2012
The Science and Economics of Nutrition, Summary
We've seen that nutrition involves bringing into the body a full set of "building blocks" such that the body can build, repair, and maintain itself.
Starvation occurs when the body does not have enough calories to maintain its "operational needs" -- not enough fuel to keep going. When the body does not have enough calories, it first burns stored fats and then starts burning proteins -- which include muscles and organs (such as the heart) and eventually causes death.
Malnutrition occurs when the body does not have enough of all of the different "building blocks" to create, repair, and maintain the various components of the body. This is particularly devastating to the young when they are initially forming the body -- it can cause long-term effects. (In adults, temporary malnutrition can be recovered from unless it lasts too long.). Illness and inability to perform daily tasks well are often the outcome of malnutrition.
In the U.S., we are fortunate that private charitable food banks and government programs make starvation almost non-existent. However, malnutrition exists to a considerable degree with a greater concentration among the poor.
There are four components of achieving good nutrition. These are knowledge of good nutritional needs, action taken based on that knowledge, time, and money. Most of the focus is on knowledge -- but many educational programs in school attempt to avoid science and rely on "rote" formulas. This lack of foundational understanding of nutrition makes the task of achieving good nutritional balance difficult in an atmosphere of mass media marketing. False, or misleading, claims are easily accepted. Sometimes it causes rote formulas to be followed such as "red meat is bad" without understanding WHY read meat CAN be "bad".
Money directly enters into nutritional decisions. Good nutrition is more expensive than poor nutritive, high calorie choices. Given a sufficient budget, however, it is possible to provide good nutritional meals but it requires time to plan, choose, and prepare good meals.
I have never encountered a "30 minute meal" that I can prepare in 30 minutes. A parent who is working two (or three) part-time minimum wage jobs does not want to allocate the time -- there is homework to work with, houses to clean, medical appointments and soccer games to juggle. Well balanced restaurant meals are expensive but fast food alternatives are widely, and energetically, marketed and sold to the public.
Frozen vegetables are more nutritious but take more time to prepare than canned. Given a choice between a $1 apple and a $1 candy bar -- which do you think most children would choose?
Many books and even television series have been produced about good nutrition. In order for it to be applied, however, the underlying principles need to be understood in order to map that information to good choices that can be applied each day.
Starvation occurs when the body does not have enough calories to maintain its "operational needs" -- not enough fuel to keep going. When the body does not have enough calories, it first burns stored fats and then starts burning proteins -- which include muscles and organs (such as the heart) and eventually causes death.
Malnutrition occurs when the body does not have enough of all of the different "building blocks" to create, repair, and maintain the various components of the body. This is particularly devastating to the young when they are initially forming the body -- it can cause long-term effects. (In adults, temporary malnutrition can be recovered from unless it lasts too long.). Illness and inability to perform daily tasks well are often the outcome of malnutrition.
In the U.S., we are fortunate that private charitable food banks and government programs make starvation almost non-existent. However, malnutrition exists to a considerable degree with a greater concentration among the poor.
There are four components of achieving good nutrition. These are knowledge of good nutritional needs, action taken based on that knowledge, time, and money. Most of the focus is on knowledge -- but many educational programs in school attempt to avoid science and rely on "rote" formulas. This lack of foundational understanding of nutrition makes the task of achieving good nutritional balance difficult in an atmosphere of mass media marketing. False, or misleading, claims are easily accepted. Sometimes it causes rote formulas to be followed such as "red meat is bad" without understanding WHY read meat CAN be "bad".
Money directly enters into nutritional decisions. Good nutrition is more expensive than poor nutritive, high calorie choices. Given a sufficient budget, however, it is possible to provide good nutritional meals but it requires time to plan, choose, and prepare good meals.
I have never encountered a "30 minute meal" that I can prepare in 30 minutes. A parent who is working two (or three) part-time minimum wage jobs does not want to allocate the time -- there is homework to work with, houses to clean, medical appointments and soccer games to juggle. Well balanced restaurant meals are expensive but fast food alternatives are widely, and energetically, marketed and sold to the public.
Frozen vegetables are more nutritious but take more time to prepare than canned. Given a choice between a $1 apple and a $1 candy bar -- which do you think most children would choose?
Many books and even television series have been produced about good nutrition. In order for it to be applied, however, the underlying principles need to be understood in order to map that information to good choices that can be applied each day.
Labels:
economics,
good choices,
minimum wage,
nutrition,
science
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
