Dear Lowdown:
How do you make a good fruit smoothie?
Sheena Artajo (Chicago)
Ms. Artajo:
A “good” fruit smoothie is really quite painless to prepare, but I am not going to teach you how to make a “good” fruit smoothie. Why only aim for “good”? Instead, I will enlighten you as to how to prepare a luscious, savory, tantalizing, mouthwatering smoothie. It takes more than simply throwing together some fruit and yogurt and hoping for the best. If you are merely looking for a good-tasting frothy drink, go have a milkshake. However, if you want a delicious and nutritious smoothie, there are many ways to flatter your taste buds and your body. Not only will this drink taste exquisite, but your spirit will be lifted as well. Three simple elements constitute a powerfully wonderful smoothie: fruits, a thickener, and a liquid.
If you want to practice this ancient art of smoothie making, we must first consider the history of the smoothie in order to fully understand its significance. A primeval type of smoothie was first produced in India some 4,000 years ago by combining yogurt, fruit, spice, salt, and honey to create a drink called lassis (“Smoothies and Their Origin”). Mogul emperors also drank a refreshing beverage similar to lassis, except it is called sharbat (“Smoothies and Their Origin”). “Mogul” can mean influential, so these emperors must have known the soulful, influential benefits of these similar smoothie drinks. The smoothie was first introduced to America in the 1930s as puréed fruit drinks from Brazil, but smoothies did not become popular until the 1960s (“Smoothies and Their Origin”). I won’t even discuss how pitiful it is that smoothies took so long to become popular. Smoothies were then commercialized in the 1970s, when vegetarianism and health food stores became popular (“Smoothies and Their Origin”). From there, we have what we now know and love as smoothies. Smoothies must have had some impact on one’s soul in order for people the world over to still be drinking them today.
The primary ingredient that all smoothies must have is, of course, fruit. This fruit can be a solid or a liquid, organic or filled with chemicals, frozen or room-temperature, and sliced or diced. The fruit component is a free-for-all. You can add as much as you like or none at all. Just remember, fruit is a part of the natural world. By adding fruit to your delightful smoothie, you are becoming one with the cosmos. Experimentation is key when trying to make a magnificently delicious smoothie; texture and flavor play a role as well. Some fruits commonly used are blueberries, strawberries, raspberries, pineapples, and bananas. You can try different ingredients too, even going for something as exotic as a papaya or a mango. Just be sure that all of the fruit is puréed before you take it out of the blender, unless you want globs of banana flowing into your mouth while you’re trying to drink and enjoy your beverage. This can severely dampen your overall enjoyment of the smoothie, unless, of course, you enjoy chunkier smoothies. In general, to make one serving, you will want about one fourth of a cup of fruit in order for the taste to be spot on and the vitamins to be in good supply (Lynn).
Even though fruit might be the most basic element of a smoothie, the thickener is also a main component. While the thickener is a valuable component to the taste of your smoothie, you can also view the thickener as character and pizzazz added to your soulful smoothie. There are multiple options for a thickener, including yogurt or ice. Vanilla or plain yogurt usually does the trick, but you can always experiment with other flavors for a tangy twist. Ice is an excellent option for a thickener if you have more fresh fruit than frozen. The hard part about this step is adding the right amount, not too much and not too little. When making a smoothie for only one serving, about half a cup of thickener is ideal (Lynn). The thickener helps give the smoothie its texture and creaminess, but too much can leave the smoothie dull-tasting. The type and amount of thickener you add to a smoothie is quite reflective of you as an individual. Therefore, make sure you include the perfect amount and type of thickener so your smoothie is as rich, refreshing, and as full of pizzazz as your personality.
The final basic component of the perfect smoothie is a liquid. Juices or milks are always the best bet to make your smoothie smooth. Add in grape juice, orange juice, apple juice, soy milk, skim milk, or even whole milk. The juices are often great sources of antioxidants and can count as another whole serving of fruit. Soy milk is also a great option because of the protein, calcium, and isoflavones (“How to Make a Smoothie”). If you are not partial to the taste of soy milk, the flavor of the fruits will overpower it anyway. The liquid addition to your smoothie is quite a unique one, and you are incorporating parts of your persona into the drink. Remember that supreme smoothies consist of one part fruit, one part liquid, and two parts thickener, so for one smoothie you will want about one fourth a cup of your-choice liquid (Murray). The liquid has a major impact on the color of the smoothie, so be wise when combining multiple types. A good way to prepare for adding liquid to your smoothie is to review your colors. Yes, we are going all the way back to pre-school. Orange and white (orange juice and milk) will make a lovely yellow color, but orange and purple (orange juice and grape juice) will actually make brown, and who wants a brown smoothie?
If the food you eat throughout the day isn’t already loaded with chemical edibles, you may opt to add a type of powder to your smoothie. There are many types of powders available in the smoothie-making world, including supplements for protein, vitamins, or fiber, and you may need this artificial addition because of dietary or health reasons. As a warning, some artificial supplements may distract from the purity of the experience and therefore contaminate the soul. You should not have your spirit reflect an imitation or fabrication. Once all of your innovative ingredients have been added to the blender, make sure you mix your smoothie until all of the contents have been fully crushed and liquefied. Be aware of loose tops and the loud, petrifying noises of blenders, or else the smoothie-making process will not be enjoyable. Once your creation seems to be lump-free, enjoy! If, however, your soul does not have the energy to make one of these revitalizing smoothies, a trip to Jamba Juice is suitable as well.
Sincerely,
Caroline D’Andrea
Works Cited
Gallagher, Stephanie. “How to Make a Smoothie.” About.com. The New York Times
Company, 2010. Web. 15 Nov. 2010.
“How to Make a Smoothie.” PerfectSmoothie.com. PerfectSmoothie.com, 2009. Web.
15 Nov. 2010.
Lynn, Emmy. “Basic Fruit Smoothie Recipe.” BellaOnline. Minerva Webworks LLC,
2010. Web. 15 Nov. 2010.
Murray, Jennifer. “How to Make a Fruit Smoothie.” Suite101.com. Jennifer Murray, 21 Nov.
2008. Web. 15 Nov 2010.
“Smoothies and Their Origin.” Filling Low Calorie Foods. N.p, 18 Apr. 2010. Web. 15 Nov.
2010.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Monday, March 14, 2011
What I’m Really Trying to F*@#ing Say
Dear Lowdown:
Why are swear words swear words?
- Mesfin Mulu (Chicago)
Dear Mesfin:
Ever since a young age, everyone has always been told what words you can and cannot say. Why is “patootie” totally acceptable when “ass” isn’t? Certain words have become forbidden, considered illicit, and deemed disrespectful by society. The words aren’t necessarily created in order to be malicious, or bad, but instead society decides a word is unacceptable. Often times swear words actually have entirely different meanings, but instead alternate taboo meanings are thrust upon them. Swear words allow people to express themselves passionately when censored vocabularies fail them. A passionate “fuck you” can be a lot more satisfying when compared to a well articulated and thought out insult.
Although many swear words have dual meanings that are often times completely free of vulgar connotation, they adopt new meanings as societies search for more spirited ways of expression. Shit, which is synonymous to feces, has a much greater power than its counterpart and has adopted even more meanings as it has been used more and more in various vulgar ways. “There’s feces everywhere” simply sounds comical when compared to “there’s shit everywhere,” which clearly shows a greater strength of reaction to the situation. “Ass,” which initially was synonymous with donkey, has now adopted a completely different meaning and vulgar connotation. Instead of transporting their goods on an ass, people now spend all day on their lazy asses. Although the latter usage of the word “ass” has nothing to do with its original meaning, the word has evolved to be more commonly used in taboo context. Swear words usually vary greatly between different languages and cultures. In Spanish, “tu erés la leche,” has roughly the same meaning as “you are the shit” in English, but the phrase literally translates to “you are the milk.” Swear words in one language become words of perfectly virtuous meaning in another. Even between cultures sharing the same language some swear words seem to be lost in translation. In the United States the word “bloody” has absolutely no foul connotation, while in the UK it is considered to be one of the foulest means of expression. Societies determine what are considered to be swear words, seemingly independent of any form of reason. Words gain these stigmas simply because of the satisfaction that eventually arises from saying them with such a foul connotation. The taboo meanings eventually stick to the words because of natural human excitement. A sort of exhilaration or even relief is felt when one expresses themselves. This feeling is only strengthened by the use of more dramatic words, often times in the form of swearing. Through this excitement, societies gain what is almost on addiction to the use of foul words, forever replacing their previously innocent denotations.
Although swear words all serve the same purpose of more furvent human expression, they are divided into three different forms: dysphemistic, idiomatic, and cathartic swearing (About Profanity Use Among Americans). The opposite euphemism, dysphemistic swearing is when a mild word is replaced with a more unpleasant one. This form of swearing is considered to be negative because it creates unpleasant images and can be used to degrade others (About Profanity Use Among Americans). A good example of this is intercourse – the polite might say ‘canoodling,’ but those of a cruder tongue may say ‘fucking.’
Idiomatic swearing, unlike dysphemistic swearing, is rather innocent. Idiomatic swearing is often times meaningless and is frequently used in an unnecessary fashion to fit into a certain lifestyle (About Profanity Use Among Americans). So when it isn’t actually necessary for a guy to say ‘that girl is so fucking hot,’ it may make his ‘bro’ think that he’s cooler. The use of Idiomatic swearing helps people to express themselves by forming a public persona through their uncensored language or simply helps them to fit in. Cathartic swearing is similar to idiomatic swearing in that it is not harmfully directed at anyone. Cathartic swearing is when words burst out of the mouth as a form of impulsive reaction to something (About Profanity Use Among Americans). For example, if you were to fall over, break something important and/or expensive, or to accidentally inflict pain upon yourself, you may use this type of swearing.
Societies create swear words in order to have means of fervent expression without complexity. The forbidden nature of these words makes the emotion behind them seem stronger than that of more innocent synonyms. By having these more dramatic swear words, people are able to feel as if they are expressing themselves more clearly when they cannot do so with exemplary vocabularies. Swear words provide an easy-way-out and supply many with the means to express themselves without actual thought processing. People can only truly be accepted into a society when they can communicate their feelings to others, and for many people, this is more easily achieved through the use of swear words. Instead of using expressive language, individuals can rely upon swears to help them convey their emotions. As swearing becomes more acceptable within a society, more people become content with a lower level of vocabulary. This lowered expectation of vocabulary ultimately reflects a societies’ general lack of emphasis upon intelligence and education. Because people become reliant upon swear words to express themselves, they loose interest in a seemingly inherent need to discover means to express themselves through expressive language. By becoming dependent upon swear words, a society gives up on the o-so-difficult task of learning a language. Overall, swear words are used by people to be understood by others and to fucking fit into a society who’s intelligence is slowly butchered and dumbed-down by the lackadaisical usage of swearing.
Sincerely,
Jess Yackey
Bibliography
"HowStuffWorks "How Swearing Works"" Howstuffworks "People" Web. 23 Nov. 2010.
.
Ripley,, By Kimberly. "About Profanity Use Among Americans | EHow.com." EHow |
How To Do Just About Everything! | How To Videos & Articles. Web. 29 Nov.
2010..
Why are swear words swear words?
- Mesfin Mulu (Chicago)
Dear Mesfin:
Ever since a young age, everyone has always been told what words you can and cannot say. Why is “patootie” totally acceptable when “ass” isn’t? Certain words have become forbidden, considered illicit, and deemed disrespectful by society. The words aren’t necessarily created in order to be malicious, or bad, but instead society decides a word is unacceptable. Often times swear words actually have entirely different meanings, but instead alternate taboo meanings are thrust upon them. Swear words allow people to express themselves passionately when censored vocabularies fail them. A passionate “fuck you” can be a lot more satisfying when compared to a well articulated and thought out insult.
Although many swear words have dual meanings that are often times completely free of vulgar connotation, they adopt new meanings as societies search for more spirited ways of expression. Shit, which is synonymous to feces, has a much greater power than its counterpart and has adopted even more meanings as it has been used more and more in various vulgar ways. “There’s feces everywhere” simply sounds comical when compared to “there’s shit everywhere,” which clearly shows a greater strength of reaction to the situation. “Ass,” which initially was synonymous with donkey, has now adopted a completely different meaning and vulgar connotation. Instead of transporting their goods on an ass, people now spend all day on their lazy asses. Although the latter usage of the word “ass” has nothing to do with its original meaning, the word has evolved to be more commonly used in taboo context. Swear words usually vary greatly between different languages and cultures. In Spanish, “tu erés la leche,” has roughly the same meaning as “you are the shit” in English, but the phrase literally translates to “you are the milk.” Swear words in one language become words of perfectly virtuous meaning in another. Even between cultures sharing the same language some swear words seem to be lost in translation. In the United States the word “bloody” has absolutely no foul connotation, while in the UK it is considered to be one of the foulest means of expression. Societies determine what are considered to be swear words, seemingly independent of any form of reason. Words gain these stigmas simply because of the satisfaction that eventually arises from saying them with such a foul connotation. The taboo meanings eventually stick to the words because of natural human excitement. A sort of exhilaration or even relief is felt when one expresses themselves. This feeling is only strengthened by the use of more dramatic words, often times in the form of swearing. Through this excitement, societies gain what is almost on addiction to the use of foul words, forever replacing their previously innocent denotations.
Although swear words all serve the same purpose of more furvent human expression, they are divided into three different forms: dysphemistic, idiomatic, and cathartic swearing (About Profanity Use Among Americans). The opposite euphemism, dysphemistic swearing is when a mild word is replaced with a more unpleasant one. This form of swearing is considered to be negative because it creates unpleasant images and can be used to degrade others (About Profanity Use Among Americans). A good example of this is intercourse – the polite might say ‘canoodling,’ but those of a cruder tongue may say ‘fucking.’
Idiomatic swearing, unlike dysphemistic swearing, is rather innocent. Idiomatic swearing is often times meaningless and is frequently used in an unnecessary fashion to fit into a certain lifestyle (About Profanity Use Among Americans). So when it isn’t actually necessary for a guy to say ‘that girl is so fucking hot,’ it may make his ‘bro’ think that he’s cooler. The use of Idiomatic swearing helps people to express themselves by forming a public persona through their uncensored language or simply helps them to fit in. Cathartic swearing is similar to idiomatic swearing in that it is not harmfully directed at anyone. Cathartic swearing is when words burst out of the mouth as a form of impulsive reaction to something (About Profanity Use Among Americans). For example, if you were to fall over, break something important and/or expensive, or to accidentally inflict pain upon yourself, you may use this type of swearing.
Societies create swear words in order to have means of fervent expression without complexity. The forbidden nature of these words makes the emotion behind them seem stronger than that of more innocent synonyms. By having these more dramatic swear words, people are able to feel as if they are expressing themselves more clearly when they cannot do so with exemplary vocabularies. Swear words provide an easy-way-out and supply many with the means to express themselves without actual thought processing. People can only truly be accepted into a society when they can communicate their feelings to others, and for many people, this is more easily achieved through the use of swear words. Instead of using expressive language, individuals can rely upon swears to help them convey their emotions. As swearing becomes more acceptable within a society, more people become content with a lower level of vocabulary. This lowered expectation of vocabulary ultimately reflects a societies’ general lack of emphasis upon intelligence and education. Because people become reliant upon swear words to express themselves, they loose interest in a seemingly inherent need to discover means to express themselves through expressive language. By becoming dependent upon swear words, a society gives up on the o-so-difficult task of learning a language. Overall, swear words are used by people to be understood by others and to fucking fit into a society who’s intelligence is slowly butchered and dumbed-down by the lackadaisical usage of swearing.
Sincerely,
Jess Yackey
Bibliography
"HowStuffWorks "How Swearing Works"" Howstuffworks "People" Web. 23 Nov. 2010.
Ripley,, By Kimberly. "About Profanity Use Among Americans | EHow.com." EHow |
How To Do Just About Everything! | How To Videos & Articles. Web. 29 Nov.
2010.
Catch Some Z's
Dear Lowdown:
How large of an influence does sleep (or lack of it) play in athletic performance?
- Harley Laubach (Chicago)
Dear Harley:
I’m sure everyone can agree that you feel better and can accomplish more after a good night’s sleep. You don’t have to struggle to keep your eyelids open. You can focus better at school or at work. You just generally have more energy. Without a good night’s sleep, every time you blink it’s a battle to wrench your eyelids open again and refocus your eyeballs. You stare at the white board or your computer, not actually accomplishing anything or absorbing any information to your under-rested brain. You don’t even have the energy to walk back to the train, or parking garage as it may be, to head for home at the end of the day. It’s exactly the same for athletic performance. If you get a good night’s sleep, you will be able to perform significantly better.
Imagine the sleepy athlete: a gymnast competing in a regional competition, getting ready to perform her uneven bars routine. She takes a deep breath, uncontrollably yawning, her mouth stretching wide and revealing all her pearly white teeth like a hippo rising from the depths of a pond for its morning stretch. She walks forward, a dazed look on her face as she blinks her eyes slowly, and performs a perky gymnast bow, popping her ribs forward and stretching her arms backward and up with a little flick of her wrists. She mounts the bars and begins to swing, back and forth rhythmically with a jump from one to the other every so often. In lolling rhythm she begins to feel increasingly drowsy, she blinks hurriedly, but that one extra blink is all it takes. She misses the bar on a flying leap and tumbles to the ground, spraining an ankle as it awkwardly collides with the semi-soft mat. One night of little sleep could cause this detrimental, crippling accident. A little sleep can hinder this and steer this unfortunate athlete to success instead of injury and embarrassment.
My sister can attest to the fact that sleep does help athletic performance. She often plays sports with her buddies at recess and informs me that after she gets a good night sleep she is better equipped to play. “When you sleep you can relax your muscles so when you do your activity your muscles are fresh so you can use them well. After I get a good rest, then I want to get exercise so I run a lot more during soccer on the playground and that helps me to get the ball.” Even the great skater Apolo Ohno agrees with my sister about the importance of sleep and said that after he got a good night sleep he could feel the difference in his performance, though I think he may need some work on his sleep schedule, as he’s constantly yawning at events.
Many studies have been done about the topic of sleep and its correlation to athletic performance and many of them come to the same conclusion. There was a test completed in 2008 at Stanford University in which serious swimmers were evaluated in order to record both their sleeping patterns and their athletic statistics. The swimmers kept their normal sleeping patterns for the first two weeks of the study and then for the next six to seven weeks they slept for 10 hours or more a night. After sleeping longer, the athletes swam faster times, jumped off the blocks faster, kicked faster, and turned faster. These swimmers performed significantly better when they slept longer and, in addition, they felt less tired throughout the day and experienced fewer random mood swings throughout the week. The participants also experienced “higher ratings of vigor and lower ratings of fatigue” (American Academy of Sleep Medicine). A similar test was completed on the basketball team at Stanford and similar results were collected.
At the University of Chicago Medical School, a sleep test was performed on young men between the ages of 18 and 27. At the beginning of the test, for the first three nights, they slept eight hours a night. They slept four hours a night for the next six nights and then 12 hours a night for the last seven nights. The U of C test showed that sleep deprivation led to glucose being metabolized less efficiently, therefore providing your body with less energy. Glucose and glycogen supply the human body with almost all of its energy. Glycogen is stored glucose that inhabits the liver and muscles, and sleep deprivation can lead to a decrease in the synthesis of glycogen. Additionally, during a period of sleep deprivation, your body produces more cortisol which is a stress hormone. This hormone relates to impairment of both your memory and your athletic recovery. Higher levels of cortisol in your body can hinder tissue repair and growth. This can be extremely detrimental to athletes because it can lead to injuries instead of increased strength. Also, endurance levels went down with less sleep and rates of exertion perception went up.
I can also provide you with some valuable personal advice because I, along with many other athletes, have personally felt the detrimental effects of sleep deprivation. I am a very active person as I dance six days a week. Some of you might be scoffing at this point, as many ignorant people out there believe dancing is quite simple and easy. Let me tell you, my friends, dancing is a million times harder than it looks. It requires endless grueling hours in the studio, both in daily classes and numerous rehearsals. It takes training and straining the body to work in positions that are unnatural and extreme: 180 degree turn-out at the hips, legs thrown to the ear, balancing your body on the tips of your toes. It takes great amounts of energy to achieve these twisted, severe movements and shapes with the body, especially after they must be performed after a long day of school and homework. After a night of good rest, say 8 or 9 hours, I always feel as if I can accomplish much more in the studio. I pick up the combinations better. I can achieve more difficult exercises with fewer mistakes. I glace at the clock less often. I can jump higher and lift my legs higher. All in all, everything at the ballet studio is improved when I’ve had more sleep. My suspicion about sleep having an effect on ballet performance is indeed correct as I have unearthed a study to support it. According to this study, conducted in Berlin, that happens to be posted on the U.S. National Library of Medicine website, a ballet dancer’s health can significantly deteriorate as they are deprived of sleep. I attempt to be in bed at the latest by 10:30 every night to make sure that my body receives enough rest to start metabolizing that glucose. For all of you ballerinas, and other athletes out there, I reckon it would be helpful if you followed my example.
Now that you are aware that sleep has a mammoth effect on athletic performance, let me leave you with a few essential tips to help you obtain as much sleep as possible and hopefully perform your best athletically. Firstly, prepare a sleep schedule for yourself and make it as important as the rest of your scheduled training. This way, you will make sure that you acquire enough rest. Second, before a crucial athletic event or competition, increase your hours of nightly sleep to prepare yourself. Make sure that you don’t fall into sleep debt and always keep a detailed schedule for sleeping. Finally, take short naps during the day to provide your body with as much sleep as possible. Remember what Apolo Ohno stated before the Olympics: “I’ve been training hard, eating well, and getting plenty of sleep. Well, I should say I’m trying my best to get plenty of sleep.” He obviously knows what the smart thing to do is. So to all you readers out there, turn off your TVs and computers and go catch yourself some ZZZ’s.
Sincerely,
Caroline Shadle
Bibliography
American Academy of Sleep Medicine. "Extra Sleep Improves Athletic Performance."ScienceDaily 10 June 2008. 21 November 2010.
Chronobiol Int. "Sleep quality in professional ballet dancers." U.S. National Library of Medicine. 26 August 2009. 21 November 2010.
Hatfield, Heather. "How to Sleep Like an Olympic Athlete." WebMD - Better Information. Better Health. Web. 31 Dec. 2010..
Ohno, Apolo A. "Apolo Anton Ohno's Secret to Staying Healthy During the Games." Health.com: Health News, Wellness, and Medical Information. Web. 31 Dec. 2010..
Quinn, Elizabeth. "Sleep Deprivation Can Hinder Sports Performance." About.com. 22 January 2008. 21 November 2010.
How large of an influence does sleep (or lack of it) play in athletic performance?
- Harley Laubach (Chicago)
Dear Harley:
I’m sure everyone can agree that you feel better and can accomplish more after a good night’s sleep. You don’t have to struggle to keep your eyelids open. You can focus better at school or at work. You just generally have more energy. Without a good night’s sleep, every time you blink it’s a battle to wrench your eyelids open again and refocus your eyeballs. You stare at the white board or your computer, not actually accomplishing anything or absorbing any information to your under-rested brain. You don’t even have the energy to walk back to the train, or parking garage as it may be, to head for home at the end of the day. It’s exactly the same for athletic performance. If you get a good night’s sleep, you will be able to perform significantly better.
Imagine the sleepy athlete: a gymnast competing in a regional competition, getting ready to perform her uneven bars routine. She takes a deep breath, uncontrollably yawning, her mouth stretching wide and revealing all her pearly white teeth like a hippo rising from the depths of a pond for its morning stretch. She walks forward, a dazed look on her face as she blinks her eyes slowly, and performs a perky gymnast bow, popping her ribs forward and stretching her arms backward and up with a little flick of her wrists. She mounts the bars and begins to swing, back and forth rhythmically with a jump from one to the other every so often. In lolling rhythm she begins to feel increasingly drowsy, she blinks hurriedly, but that one extra blink is all it takes. She misses the bar on a flying leap and tumbles to the ground, spraining an ankle as it awkwardly collides with the semi-soft mat. One night of little sleep could cause this detrimental, crippling accident. A little sleep can hinder this and steer this unfortunate athlete to success instead of injury and embarrassment.
My sister can attest to the fact that sleep does help athletic performance. She often plays sports with her buddies at recess and informs me that after she gets a good night sleep she is better equipped to play. “When you sleep you can relax your muscles so when you do your activity your muscles are fresh so you can use them well. After I get a good rest, then I want to get exercise so I run a lot more during soccer on the playground and that helps me to get the ball.” Even the great skater Apolo Ohno agrees with my sister about the importance of sleep and said that after he got a good night sleep he could feel the difference in his performance, though I think he may need some work on his sleep schedule, as he’s constantly yawning at events.
Many studies have been done about the topic of sleep and its correlation to athletic performance and many of them come to the same conclusion. There was a test completed in 2008 at Stanford University in which serious swimmers were evaluated in order to record both their sleeping patterns and their athletic statistics. The swimmers kept their normal sleeping patterns for the first two weeks of the study and then for the next six to seven weeks they slept for 10 hours or more a night. After sleeping longer, the athletes swam faster times, jumped off the blocks faster, kicked faster, and turned faster. These swimmers performed significantly better when they slept longer and, in addition, they felt less tired throughout the day and experienced fewer random mood swings throughout the week. The participants also experienced “higher ratings of vigor and lower ratings of fatigue” (American Academy of Sleep Medicine). A similar test was completed on the basketball team at Stanford and similar results were collected.
At the University of Chicago Medical School, a sleep test was performed on young men between the ages of 18 and 27. At the beginning of the test, for the first three nights, they slept eight hours a night. They slept four hours a night for the next six nights and then 12 hours a night for the last seven nights. The U of C test showed that sleep deprivation led to glucose being metabolized less efficiently, therefore providing your body with less energy. Glucose and glycogen supply the human body with almost all of its energy. Glycogen is stored glucose that inhabits the liver and muscles, and sleep deprivation can lead to a decrease in the synthesis of glycogen. Additionally, during a period of sleep deprivation, your body produces more cortisol which is a stress hormone. This hormone relates to impairment of both your memory and your athletic recovery. Higher levels of cortisol in your body can hinder tissue repair and growth. This can be extremely detrimental to athletes because it can lead to injuries instead of increased strength. Also, endurance levels went down with less sleep and rates of exertion perception went up.
I can also provide you with some valuable personal advice because I, along with many other athletes, have personally felt the detrimental effects of sleep deprivation. I am a very active person as I dance six days a week. Some of you might be scoffing at this point, as many ignorant people out there believe dancing is quite simple and easy. Let me tell you, my friends, dancing is a million times harder than it looks. It requires endless grueling hours in the studio, both in daily classes and numerous rehearsals. It takes training and straining the body to work in positions that are unnatural and extreme: 180 degree turn-out at the hips, legs thrown to the ear, balancing your body on the tips of your toes. It takes great amounts of energy to achieve these twisted, severe movements and shapes with the body, especially after they must be performed after a long day of school and homework. After a night of good rest, say 8 or 9 hours, I always feel as if I can accomplish much more in the studio. I pick up the combinations better. I can achieve more difficult exercises with fewer mistakes. I glace at the clock less often. I can jump higher and lift my legs higher. All in all, everything at the ballet studio is improved when I’ve had more sleep. My suspicion about sleep having an effect on ballet performance is indeed correct as I have unearthed a study to support it. According to this study, conducted in Berlin, that happens to be posted on the U.S. National Library of Medicine website, a ballet dancer’s health can significantly deteriorate as they are deprived of sleep. I attempt to be in bed at the latest by 10:30 every night to make sure that my body receives enough rest to start metabolizing that glucose. For all of you ballerinas, and other athletes out there, I reckon it would be helpful if you followed my example.
Now that you are aware that sleep has a mammoth effect on athletic performance, let me leave you with a few essential tips to help you obtain as much sleep as possible and hopefully perform your best athletically. Firstly, prepare a sleep schedule for yourself and make it as important as the rest of your scheduled training. This way, you will make sure that you acquire enough rest. Second, before a crucial athletic event or competition, increase your hours of nightly sleep to prepare yourself. Make sure that you don’t fall into sleep debt and always keep a detailed schedule for sleeping. Finally, take short naps during the day to provide your body with as much sleep as possible. Remember what Apolo Ohno stated before the Olympics: “I’ve been training hard, eating well, and getting plenty of sleep. Well, I should say I’m trying my best to get plenty of sleep.” He obviously knows what the smart thing to do is. So to all you readers out there, turn off your TVs and computers and go catch yourself some ZZZ’s.
Sincerely,
Caroline Shadle
Bibliography
American Academy of Sleep Medicine. "Extra Sleep Improves Athletic Performance."ScienceDaily 10 June 2008. 21 November 2010
Chronobiol Int. "Sleep quality in professional ballet dancers." U.S. National Library of Medicine. 26 August 2009. 21 November 2010
Hatfield, Heather. "How to Sleep Like an Olympic Athlete." WebMD - Better Information. Better Health. Web. 31 Dec. 2010.
Ohno, Apolo A. "Apolo Anton Ohno's Secret to Staying Healthy During the Games." Health.com: Health News, Wellness, and Medical Information. Web. 31 Dec. 2010.
Quinn, Elizabeth. "Sleep Deprivation Can Hinder Sports Performance." About.com. 22 January 2008. 21 November 2010
The Modus Operandi of French Society
Dear Lowdown:
A popular blogger once noted that Paris was the only city where locals did not appreciate his efforts to speak the language. Is there any historical reason for why the French don’t like it when visitors speak French? Why are they so rude?
Sincerely,
Mr. Woolsworth
My dear Mr. Woolsworth, your question is missing something very important: validity. (I say this, of course, with only the utmost respect.) To suggest that Parisians are intolerant or rude is to overlook an extraordinarily obvious point: it is not the French who are unkind, but it is instead the foreigners. But no matter, I will gladly guide you through the reasons behind any provocative Parisian attitudes that a traveler may encounter.
Any visitor to Paris would be well advised to follow a very simple and direct set of rules. Allow me to be your humble advisor; it is time to learn the noble French rules of tourist etiquette. If you choose to take this advice, no Parisian would dare insult you. And if they do, you will also learn to insult them back in the most offensively brilliant way. So please, relax and pay precise attention. Turn down “Mignon Mignon” and pour yourself a cool glass of Sauvignon Blanc as you learn the wonderful ways of the French.
I feel that it would be first appropriate to introduce you to the glorious French past, in the hope that it might allow you to better understand the Parisian mindset. France is a nation that prides itself on expertise—we have bred world-class artists, chefs, politicians, musicians, and more. Our language has been carefully adapted over the course of three millennia, crafted to match the French culture, beautiful enough to be understood without translation. For centuries, foreigners have visited our shores to marvel at our numerous accomplishments. Some of these visitors feel that discussing “French things” in French demonstrates appreciation for our culture. Au contraire. To face a visitor who does not understand the importance of the language is in a sense an insult to the very foundation of French society. To those who have, out of ignorance, morphed our native tongue into a mish-mass of jumbled vocabulary, have no fear; the issue can be easily rectified and forgiven. Just avoid speaking French until you can actually speak French.
With this context in mind, it may perhaps be easier to understand the detached reactions of Parisians when confronted with one of the 80 million tourists that scurry across our nation every year (“The World’s Top Tourism Destinations”). Many of these pasty little urchins arrive in the capital city donning ill-fitting khaki Bermuda shorts, overzealously aiming their disposable cameras at every architectural marvel, speaking too loudly and laughing too raucously. The coarse and uncivilized actions of these folks are frankly a pain in the native Parisian’s derriere.
When going about our daily business, it is every Parisians nightmare to hear a distorted French accent call out a question pondering the location of, say, the Eiffel Tower (this is a very common question). In fact, the next time that I hear one of those voices, I may be forced to take it upon myself personally to smack them. For a resident, it is an insult for a tourist to visit the one of the greatest works of architectural genius and not even have the wit to pack a map into their oversized olive fanny packs. Moreover, Parisians would truly prefer to not witness tourist couples crush the lush green grass that surrounds the Tower, lounging beneath the shining sun, and sharing bright strawberries that stain their lips a tacky shade of red; pretending that they love our city more than we.
Sadly, the tendency of visitors to abuse the French language is just a single example of many atrocities perpetrated by tourists. The most common stereotype associated with tourists is a shameful lack of fashion sense. An everyday Parisian imagines you adhering to the following morning routine: rising sluggishly from wrinkly rumpled white beds sheets, sliding your un-groomed toenails into a pair of tattered and dull slippers before lazily rising from a shoddy bed frame. You are, from the start, a sleep-deprived, baggy-eyed mess. From there, you proceed to throw together an atrociously hideous outfit consisting of threadbare denim jeans and an un-pressed linen shirt. This nonchalant style of dress clashes miserably with the splendor of Parisian style. It earns no respect here.
In contrast to foreign customs, it is not uncommon for Parisians to plan outfits ahead of time, and to dress up to run simple errands. Skin and hair care is emphasized, and few women leave home without applying cosmetics and spritzing just a bit of eau de parfum (Lehmann). In Paris, each individual explores the breadth of fashion and endeavors to redefine the epitome of style. In Paris, the morning routine is much more thought-out and our people are always chic, assembling outfits that achieve sophisticated silhouettes. Mind you, while consistent, our grooming and style are meant to be as effortless as they are flawless. We strive only to enhance beauty, not create it. Parisians are well aware that no amount of powder blush can make up for a true display of emotion; we accept the fact that no lack of charm can be masked by superb style. Parisians merely maintain a certain je ne sais quoi which cannot be manufactured. The unwillingness of visitors to adhere to French customs in dress is, in itself, rude behavior: to be an eyesore in a city of such beauty is just despicable in the eyes of Parisians.
Another inadequacy commonly observed in tourists relates to first encounters and other social interactions. When meeting someone new, there are several important details to keep in mind. First and foremost, firmly grip a Parisians hand and pump twice and then let go—a greeting is no place to foolishly fling your forearm up and down. Ideally, a third party should do the introducing, as it is not common for a stranger to walk up and begin to chatter aimlessly (Lehmann). This particular characteristic of French etiquette seems to differ from other styles. Perhaps the root of any French rudeness perceived by a visitor is simply a simple misunderstanding—you might care deeply about asking a fellow bus rider about the most elegantly adorned bistro in all of Paris, but your cheery Parisian counterpart will typically care much more deeply about tending to their day-to-day business. We are not boorish creatures, but we do prioritize our interactions differently; in most cases, foreign frivolity comes second to vital daily matters. So please, do not take offensive to silent responses.
But my dear Mr. Woolsworth, there are plenty of other indiscretions independent from style and conversation that shan’t be overlooked. The French would look favorably upon tourists who refrain from indulging in what we consider to be inappropriate behavior. Examples of such behaviors are as follows: do not ask a new acquaintance “what they do;” that is much too personal and should not be discussed until a stronger relationship is forged. Do not speak to strangers on public transportation; idle chit chat is frowned upon. Do not forget to tip your bellman one Euro per piece of luggage; not doing so is disrespectful. Do not switch your knife and fork as you eat. Do not give a hostess a bottle of wine. Do not tear your bread into a million little pieces at the dinner table (Lehmann).
Now, if you are in Paris and abide by these rules, no French individual should take it upon themselves to trouble you. However, if you happen stumble upon a Parisian with a bad attitude (though such individuals are a rarity) do not hesitate to hurl an insult back at them. I believe that “Le cerveau il etait en option chez toi” should be sufficient. Though I have provided you with a highly offensive phrase, please remember to refrain from implementing a condescending or arrogant tone when conversing with the French—to do so is considered to be extremely rude, particularly because all of the French avoid doing so themselves. Without manners and humility, it is very difficult to gain trust or respect in France, Mr. Woolsworth.
Please note: The phrase “le cerveau il etait en option chez toi” translates directly to “the brain was optional for you,” meaning (essentially) that you lack any intellectual and social capabilities.
Sincerely,
Jackson Beard
Works Cited
Lehmann, Johanna. “Mind Your Manners—French Etiquette.” EzineArticles.com. N.p., 8 February 2008. Web. 20 November 2010.
“The World’s Top Tourism Destinations.” Information Please Database. Pearson Education, 2008. Web. 20 November 2010.
A popular blogger once noted that Paris was the only city where locals did not appreciate his efforts to speak the language. Is there any historical reason for why the French don’t like it when visitors speak French? Why are they so rude?
Sincerely,
Mr. Woolsworth
My dear Mr. Woolsworth, your question is missing something very important: validity. (I say this, of course, with only the utmost respect.) To suggest that Parisians are intolerant or rude is to overlook an extraordinarily obvious point: it is not the French who are unkind, but it is instead the foreigners. But no matter, I will gladly guide you through the reasons behind any provocative Parisian attitudes that a traveler may encounter.
Any visitor to Paris would be well advised to follow a very simple and direct set of rules. Allow me to be your humble advisor; it is time to learn the noble French rules of tourist etiquette. If you choose to take this advice, no Parisian would dare insult you. And if they do, you will also learn to insult them back in the most offensively brilliant way. So please, relax and pay precise attention. Turn down “Mignon Mignon” and pour yourself a cool glass of Sauvignon Blanc as you learn the wonderful ways of the French.
I feel that it would be first appropriate to introduce you to the glorious French past, in the hope that it might allow you to better understand the Parisian mindset. France is a nation that prides itself on expertise—we have bred world-class artists, chefs, politicians, musicians, and more. Our language has been carefully adapted over the course of three millennia, crafted to match the French culture, beautiful enough to be understood without translation. For centuries, foreigners have visited our shores to marvel at our numerous accomplishments. Some of these visitors feel that discussing “French things” in French demonstrates appreciation for our culture. Au contraire. To face a visitor who does not understand the importance of the language is in a sense an insult to the very foundation of French society. To those who have, out of ignorance, morphed our native tongue into a mish-mass of jumbled vocabulary, have no fear; the issue can be easily rectified and forgiven. Just avoid speaking French until you can actually speak French.
With this context in mind, it may perhaps be easier to understand the detached reactions of Parisians when confronted with one of the 80 million tourists that scurry across our nation every year (“The World’s Top Tourism Destinations”). Many of these pasty little urchins arrive in the capital city donning ill-fitting khaki Bermuda shorts, overzealously aiming their disposable cameras at every architectural marvel, speaking too loudly and laughing too raucously. The coarse and uncivilized actions of these folks are frankly a pain in the native Parisian’s derriere.
When going about our daily business, it is every Parisians nightmare to hear a distorted French accent call out a question pondering the location of, say, the Eiffel Tower (this is a very common question). In fact, the next time that I hear one of those voices, I may be forced to take it upon myself personally to smack them. For a resident, it is an insult for a tourist to visit the one of the greatest works of architectural genius and not even have the wit to pack a map into their oversized olive fanny packs. Moreover, Parisians would truly prefer to not witness tourist couples crush the lush green grass that surrounds the Tower, lounging beneath the shining sun, and sharing bright strawberries that stain their lips a tacky shade of red; pretending that they love our city more than we.
Sadly, the tendency of visitors to abuse the French language is just a single example of many atrocities perpetrated by tourists. The most common stereotype associated with tourists is a shameful lack of fashion sense. An everyday Parisian imagines you adhering to the following morning routine: rising sluggishly from wrinkly rumpled white beds sheets, sliding your un-groomed toenails into a pair of tattered and dull slippers before lazily rising from a shoddy bed frame. You are, from the start, a sleep-deprived, baggy-eyed mess. From there, you proceed to throw together an atrociously hideous outfit consisting of threadbare denim jeans and an un-pressed linen shirt. This nonchalant style of dress clashes miserably with the splendor of Parisian style. It earns no respect here.
In contrast to foreign customs, it is not uncommon for Parisians to plan outfits ahead of time, and to dress up to run simple errands. Skin and hair care is emphasized, and few women leave home without applying cosmetics and spritzing just a bit of eau de parfum (Lehmann). In Paris, each individual explores the breadth of fashion and endeavors to redefine the epitome of style. In Paris, the morning routine is much more thought-out and our people are always chic, assembling outfits that achieve sophisticated silhouettes. Mind you, while consistent, our grooming and style are meant to be as effortless as they are flawless. We strive only to enhance beauty, not create it. Parisians are well aware that no amount of powder blush can make up for a true display of emotion; we accept the fact that no lack of charm can be masked by superb style. Parisians merely maintain a certain je ne sais quoi which cannot be manufactured. The unwillingness of visitors to adhere to French customs in dress is, in itself, rude behavior: to be an eyesore in a city of such beauty is just despicable in the eyes of Parisians.
Another inadequacy commonly observed in tourists relates to first encounters and other social interactions. When meeting someone new, there are several important details to keep in mind. First and foremost, firmly grip a Parisians hand and pump twice and then let go—a greeting is no place to foolishly fling your forearm up and down. Ideally, a third party should do the introducing, as it is not common for a stranger to walk up and begin to chatter aimlessly (Lehmann). This particular characteristic of French etiquette seems to differ from other styles. Perhaps the root of any French rudeness perceived by a visitor is simply a simple misunderstanding—you might care deeply about asking a fellow bus rider about the most elegantly adorned bistro in all of Paris, but your cheery Parisian counterpart will typically care much more deeply about tending to their day-to-day business. We are not boorish creatures, but we do prioritize our interactions differently; in most cases, foreign frivolity comes second to vital daily matters. So please, do not take offensive to silent responses.
But my dear Mr. Woolsworth, there are plenty of other indiscretions independent from style and conversation that shan’t be overlooked. The French would look favorably upon tourists who refrain from indulging in what we consider to be inappropriate behavior. Examples of such behaviors are as follows: do not ask a new acquaintance “what they do;” that is much too personal and should not be discussed until a stronger relationship is forged. Do not speak to strangers on public transportation; idle chit chat is frowned upon. Do not forget to tip your bellman one Euro per piece of luggage; not doing so is disrespectful. Do not switch your knife and fork as you eat. Do not give a hostess a bottle of wine. Do not tear your bread into a million little pieces at the dinner table (Lehmann).
Now, if you are in Paris and abide by these rules, no French individual should take it upon themselves to trouble you. However, if you happen stumble upon a Parisian with a bad attitude (though such individuals are a rarity) do not hesitate to hurl an insult back at them. I believe that “Le cerveau il etait en option chez toi” should be sufficient. Though I have provided you with a highly offensive phrase, please remember to refrain from implementing a condescending or arrogant tone when conversing with the French—to do so is considered to be extremely rude, particularly because all of the French avoid doing so themselves. Without manners and humility, it is very difficult to gain trust or respect in France, Mr. Woolsworth.
Please note: The phrase “le cerveau il etait en option chez toi” translates directly to “the brain was optional for you,” meaning (essentially) that you lack any intellectual and social capabilities.
Sincerely,
Jackson Beard
Works Cited
Lehmann, Johanna. “Mind Your Manners—French Etiquette.” EzineArticles.com. N.p., 8 February 2008. Web. 20 November 2010.
“The World’s Top Tourism Destinations.” Information Please Database. Pearson Education, 2008. Web. 20 November 2010.
The Creation of a Tasty Masterpiece
Dear Lowdown:
How do big companies like Pespi and Coca-Cola mass produce and carbonate millions of cans of soda each day?
- Matt Hayes (Chicago)
Dear Matt:
Click. Sip. Ahhh. The sound made each time we take a sip out of that little soda can, the bubbles rise from the roof of our mouth to our nose and we all sit back and wonder: how did the manufacturers get that much deliciousness into one can of soda? Well, it is actually a simple process and those large companies do not carbonate all the cans themselves. The companies have their own little band of helpers called bottlers; who actually carbonate all the cans for the companies. However, as the bottlers sell the product to consumers like you, they leave out information about the enormous health risk you have from drinking all that carbonation, but that will be mentioned later.
Companies such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi do not do all the work themselves, but they do provide the main ingredient. In the Coca-Cola System, the company only manufactures concentrates, the syrup and beverage bases, then sells them to bottling companies (more than 300 of them), all over the world. Pepsi also does the same, selling their bases to bottlers apart of the Pepsi Bottling Group (PBG). PBG was formed in 1999 (to expand the Pepsi industry), selling and distributing Pepsi beverages and became the world’s largest manufacturer of Pepsi. PBG has operations in places like the U.S., Russia, Canada, Spain, Mexico, and Turkey. These bottlers are the ones who produce, package, distribute and merchandise the products. Talk about doing all the dirty work. Those bottling companies distribute the finished product to supermarkets, convenience stores, mass merchandisers, and to retailers such as Wal-mart, Walgreen’s Drug Emporium, Applebee’s Outback Steaks, etc. The companies’ customers eventually sell the drink to the consumer or you, (which eventually you’ll gulp down with a sandwich at lunch time.)
So, the right question would be: how do these bottlers carbonate and mass produce millions of cans around the world? Well, simple. With the extraordinary invention of machines, the bottlers are able to mass produce the soda. How do these machines carbonate that soda? Well, the machines first have to clarify and sterilize the water, making sure no impurities are in the water, so that they do not degrade the taste of the drink. Then, there is a giant tank, or a dosing station, where the syrup is sterilized or pasteurized using ultra-violet radiation. Later on, the water is carefully mixed in with syrup in these machines called proportiners, and the vessels are then pumped with carbon dioxide. The product is finally filled into bottles or cans at a high flow rate and thanks to William Painter who created the great invention of the “crown cap” or bottle cap; we are able to maintain that lovely carbon dioxide in our soft drinks. However, the exact amount of machines and employees that aid in the process of bottle-making cannot be determined since it varies from each bottling company.
Now that you have an idea of how Pepsi and Coca-cola make their delicious drink, there are many consequences to think of after drinking all that carbonation. That little can of soda is made up of ninety-four percent of carbonated water which is infused with carbon dioxide, which is why the consumer can feel that carbonation on their tongue and lips. The company’s scientists figured that carbon dioxide is perfect to use within soft drinks because it is inexpensive, non-toxic, and easy to liquefy. So, if the scientists say it is okay, we should be fine, right? Wrong. Carbon dioxide is extremely acidic and it can cause tremendous amount of heartburn or acid reflux. If that was not enough, try cleaning your oven with a bottle of coke. Some types of soda’s acid is so strong, it can break down and dissolve grease or even other stains and leave anything looking brand new. Luckily, as the Coca Cola Company has noted, the acid in the stomach is much stronger, so you do not have to worry about losing your lunch.
Oh, and let’s not forget to mention how bad all that sugar is for you. The company’s syrup, or beverage base, is usually in a liquid or dry form and makes up only seven to twelve percent of your soft drink. Yet, consuming all that sugar can eventually lead to tooth decay, type two diabetes, a raised insulin level, heart disease and everyone’s favorite, obesity. Also, sodas like Coca-Cola and Pepsi are filled with no nutrition but lots of calories, which probably means more time at the gym trying to work those calories off. Let’s not be fooled by the misleading can of “Diet” soda. Many people believe that diet soda is better than regular soda when in reality; diet soda is filled with artificial sugar, causing you to actual want more soda. Even the caffeine in soda will cause consumers to become additive. The caffeine can also cause dehydration in your body because it causes your kidneys to work harder in pushing out extra liquid. Instead of filling up of sugary sodas, try substituting in water, juice or even tea and your body will thank you later on. So, next time you are slurping on that sweet soft drink, thank those bottlers for creating the amazing tingling on your lips and doing all the hard work. However, you might want to switch from soda to water from time to time, if you enjoy keeping your teeth from looking like an eighty-year old smoker, who has not brushed in days.
You’re Welcome,
Aliyah Oyemade
How do big companies like Pespi and Coca-Cola mass produce and carbonate millions of cans of soda each day?
- Matt Hayes (Chicago)
Dear Matt:
Click. Sip. Ahhh. The sound made each time we take a sip out of that little soda can, the bubbles rise from the roof of our mouth to our nose and we all sit back and wonder: how did the manufacturers get that much deliciousness into one can of soda? Well, it is actually a simple process and those large companies do not carbonate all the cans themselves. The companies have their own little band of helpers called bottlers; who actually carbonate all the cans for the companies. However, as the bottlers sell the product to consumers like you, they leave out information about the enormous health risk you have from drinking all that carbonation, but that will be mentioned later.
Companies such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi do not do all the work themselves, but they do provide the main ingredient. In the Coca-Cola System, the company only manufactures concentrates, the syrup and beverage bases, then sells them to bottling companies (more than 300 of them), all over the world. Pepsi also does the same, selling their bases to bottlers apart of the Pepsi Bottling Group (PBG). PBG was formed in 1999 (to expand the Pepsi industry), selling and distributing Pepsi beverages and became the world’s largest manufacturer of Pepsi. PBG has operations in places like the U.S., Russia, Canada, Spain, Mexico, and Turkey. These bottlers are the ones who produce, package, distribute and merchandise the products. Talk about doing all the dirty work. Those bottling companies distribute the finished product to supermarkets, convenience stores, mass merchandisers, and to retailers such as Wal-mart, Walgreen’s Drug Emporium, Applebee’s Outback Steaks, etc. The companies’ customers eventually sell the drink to the consumer or you, (which eventually you’ll gulp down with a sandwich at lunch time.)
So, the right question would be: how do these bottlers carbonate and mass produce millions of cans around the world? Well, simple. With the extraordinary invention of machines, the bottlers are able to mass produce the soda. How do these machines carbonate that soda? Well, the machines first have to clarify and sterilize the water, making sure no impurities are in the water, so that they do not degrade the taste of the drink. Then, there is a giant tank, or a dosing station, where the syrup is sterilized or pasteurized using ultra-violet radiation. Later on, the water is carefully mixed in with syrup in these machines called proportiners, and the vessels are then pumped with carbon dioxide. The product is finally filled into bottles or cans at a high flow rate and thanks to William Painter who created the great invention of the “crown cap” or bottle cap; we are able to maintain that lovely carbon dioxide in our soft drinks. However, the exact amount of machines and employees that aid in the process of bottle-making cannot be determined since it varies from each bottling company.
Now that you have an idea of how Pepsi and Coca-cola make their delicious drink, there are many consequences to think of after drinking all that carbonation. That little can of soda is made up of ninety-four percent of carbonated water which is infused with carbon dioxide, which is why the consumer can feel that carbonation on their tongue and lips. The company’s scientists figured that carbon dioxide is perfect to use within soft drinks because it is inexpensive, non-toxic, and easy to liquefy. So, if the scientists say it is okay, we should be fine, right? Wrong. Carbon dioxide is extremely acidic and it can cause tremendous amount of heartburn or acid reflux. If that was not enough, try cleaning your oven with a bottle of coke. Some types of soda’s acid is so strong, it can break down and dissolve grease or even other stains and leave anything looking brand new. Luckily, as the Coca Cola Company has noted, the acid in the stomach is much stronger, so you do not have to worry about losing your lunch.
Oh, and let’s not forget to mention how bad all that sugar is for you. The company’s syrup, or beverage base, is usually in a liquid or dry form and makes up only seven to twelve percent of your soft drink. Yet, consuming all that sugar can eventually lead to tooth decay, type two diabetes, a raised insulin level, heart disease and everyone’s favorite, obesity. Also, sodas like Coca-Cola and Pepsi are filled with no nutrition but lots of calories, which probably means more time at the gym trying to work those calories off. Let’s not be fooled by the misleading can of “Diet” soda. Many people believe that diet soda is better than regular soda when in reality; diet soda is filled with artificial sugar, causing you to actual want more soda. Even the caffeine in soda will cause consumers to become additive. The caffeine can also cause dehydration in your body because it causes your kidneys to work harder in pushing out extra liquid. Instead of filling up of sugary sodas, try substituting in water, juice or even tea and your body will thank you later on. So, next time you are slurping on that sweet soft drink, thank those bottlers for creating the amazing tingling on your lips and doing all the hard work. However, you might want to switch from soda to water from time to time, if you enjoy keeping your teeth from looking like an eighty-year old smoker, who has not brushed in days.
You’re Welcome,
Aliyah Oyemade
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Cause of Death
Dear Lowdown:
What does it mean when someone dies of “old age”? Is there some medical condition such as heart failure (and if so why not just call it heart failure), or is it a euphemism for “we don’t know” (and if so is it still in use)?
Daniel Patronsky (Chicago)
Dear Daniel:
Although “old age” is used widely in informal language, it is not a medical term, and coroners or medical examiners never use it as an official cause of death. Instead of old age, it is medically correct to announce a “death by natural causes.”2 This is because old age is too unspecific to qualify as an actual medical term for a cause of death. With age comes the eventual breakdown of various functions in the body, so there is always a more precise cause of death.2 Medical examiners would much rather cite heart disease as the cause of death than something as vague as old age. You mentioned heart failure, which is basically what happens eventually to all of us mortals. However, as a medical term, there isn’t a clear definition that is universally acknowledged for heart failure. Rather, the leading cause of death worldwide has continuously been heart and cardiovascular disease, such as cardiac arrest; this accounts for about 30% of all deaths.11 The number is so large because these are diseases of the heart and blood vessels and encompass a wide range of problems.
The most recent well-known death by natural causes – specifically, cardiac arrest – I can think of is Brittany Murphy’s. If you’re not aware of the famous actress, she was just 32 when she died last December.3 She didn’t seem to have any injuries, and officials didn’t suspect a murder or a suicide.8 When she was further examined, the coroner concluded that she had died of cardiac arrest.7 Because it seemed that a naturally-occurring heart condition did her in, it was ruled as a death by natural causes. However, one question lingers – “How did a young, (seemingly) healthy woman die so suddenly of cardiac arrest?” Although uncommon, it does happen, but many skeptics and doubtful doctors disagree about the nature of her death.
Cardiac arrest occurs when the heart stops beating normally and blood can no longer circulate properly to and from the heart to keep the person alive.1 However, when death occurs, it is because the heart has stopped beating, so the term “cardiac arrest” generally provides little insight into how she died – namely, what happened to induce cardiac arrest. Brittany Murphy’s death is still surrounded by speculation – there’s talk of a possible illness, eating disorder, or overdose.7 Yet, she is said to have died by natural causes because people can’t come to a definite conclusion; we’re forced to say, euphemistically, that we just aren’t sure.
On the other hand, you don’t have to die from some mysterious reason for your passing to be a death by natural causes. Your death will be ruled as such if medical examiners realize that the cause of death was an illness or an internal malfunction – events that were not provoked artificially in any way.10 But if you commit suicide, die from assisted suicide, or are killed in a homicide (the horror!), you have not died from natural causes. Death can occur by a wide range of natural causes, from devastating diseases like cancer and leukemia, to quick events like strokes or heart attacks, to seemingly minor flu viruses.2
On a side note about death and diseases, many Republicans were up in arms about a proposal of Obama’s that would give the government the “power to kill off senior citizens”, especially if they have incurable or costly diseases.4 This rumor proliferated throughout the nation during the summer of 2009 about “death panels”, a term dubbed by Sarah Palin about a portion of the health care reform bill proposing end-of-life planning. Although it was much earlier in 2008 that a law had been passed allowing Medicare patients to undergo end-of-life planning, the controversy over the proposal in the health care reform bill heated up this past year.9
Basically, end-of-life planning allows a patient to discuss with their doctor, ahead of time, the terms of their care should they unexpectedly fall gravely ill and incapable of making health decisions. However, opponents of end-of-life planning, such as Sarah Palin, have rallied against it, saying that doctors would advise patients with critical diseases to forgo life-sustaining treatment, therefore saving the government millions of dollars in treatment.4 The backlash and rumors led to Obama dropping the regulations from the health care reform bill. However, since January 1st, a new Medicare policy states that the government would pay doctors who counsel patients on end-of-life planning.6 This time, however, these regulations are rolling out quietly, so as not to provoke the media.
Although the policies have been criticized, end-of-life planning isn’t a bad idea. 70% of Americans do not have living wills – the majority of the nation has no plan in the event of a health emergency.9 According to the research by Schumacher, merely talking to your doctor more, honestly and openly, results in a higher quality of life for the patient and for those family members after a death. With end-of-life planning, you can make a living will and appoint a trusted person to take care of important health decisions if you are rendered incapable to do so. You wouldn’t imagine cooking a new recipe from scratch without any directions, or driving to a place you’ve never been before without any directions, so why do so many people forgo thinking about their future life plans until it’s too late? Although the subject of death tends to be morbid, it doesn’t have to be. Without this planning, you could be in a hospital bed and your closest family member might not have the ability to make any decisions on your part, simply because you didn’t take simple precautions to name your health care proxy. End-of-life planning is ultimately about taking care of you and your family; it only makes sense to take advantage and learn about health care options that benefit you.
Hope this helps,
Tracy Lin
Works Cited
1. Bakalar, Nicholas. "SCAA | Education Materials." Welcome to TCS Software, Inc. ::
Dublin, OH. Web. 27 Dec. 2010.
.
2. Bryant, Clifton D. Handbook of Death & Dying. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,
2003. Print.
3. Hutchison, Courtney, and Monica Nista. "Brittany Murphy's Death Remains A Mystery
ABC News." ABCNews.com - ABCNews.com: Breaking News, Politics, World News,
Good Morning America, Exclusive Interviews - ABC News. 22 Dec. 2009. Web. 27
Dec. 2010.
4. Joe Weber. "Death Panels Are Back: “Obama Lied and My Mama Died” | Death and
Taxes." Indie Music News, Pop Culture, Politics and Entertainment | Death and
Taxes. 27 Dec. 2010. Web. 04 Jan. 2011.
5. Nedely. "Re: Death by Natural Causes - What Does It Mean? (dental, Doctor, Heart) -
Health and Wellness -Doctors, Illness, Diseases, Nutrition, Sleep, Stress, Diet,
Hospitals, Medicine, Cancer, Heart Disease - City-Data Forum." Web log
comment. Stats about All US Cities - Real Estate, Relocation Info, House Prices,
Home Value Estimator, Recent Sales, Cost of Living, Crime, Race, Income, Photos,
Education, Maps, Weather, Houses, Schools, Neighborhoods, and More. 25 Dec.
2009. Web. 27 Dec. 2010.
6. Pear, Robert. "Obama Returns to End-of-Life Plan That Caused Stir." NYTimes.com. The
New York Times, 25 Dec. 2010. Web. 3 Jan. 2011.
.
7. PopEater Staff. "Brittany Murphy Likely Died From Natural Causes, Says Coroner |
PopEater.com." Celebrities | Entertainment News | Celebrity Gossip | Celebrity
Photos | PopEater.com. 21 Dec. 2009. Web. 27 Dec. 2010.
8. Rose, Sandra. "Medical Minute: Death By Natural Causes." Sandra Rose. 5 Jan. 2010.
Web. 27 Dec. 2010.
9. Schumacher, J. Donald. "Why End-of-life Planning Is Smart, Necessary - CNN.com."
CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. 28
Dec. 2010. Web. 03 Jan. 2011.
10. Swenson, Jim, and Susannah Sample. "Death by Natural Causes." NEWTON/ANL Home
Page. 11 Apr. 2005. Web. 27 Dec. 2010.
.
11. World Health Organization. "Annex Table 2 Deaths by Cause, Sex and Mortality Stratum
in WHO Regions, Estimates for 2002." Chart. The World Health Report 2004. France:
Keith Wynn, 2004. 120-21. Print.
What does it mean when someone dies of “old age”? Is there some medical condition such as heart failure (and if so why not just call it heart failure), or is it a euphemism for “we don’t know” (and if so is it still in use)?
Daniel Patronsky (Chicago)
Dear Daniel:
Although “old age” is used widely in informal language, it is not a medical term, and coroners or medical examiners never use it as an official cause of death. Instead of old age, it is medically correct to announce a “death by natural causes.”2 This is because old age is too unspecific to qualify as an actual medical term for a cause of death. With age comes the eventual breakdown of various functions in the body, so there is always a more precise cause of death.2 Medical examiners would much rather cite heart disease as the cause of death than something as vague as old age. You mentioned heart failure, which is basically what happens eventually to all of us mortals. However, as a medical term, there isn’t a clear definition that is universally acknowledged for heart failure. Rather, the leading cause of death worldwide has continuously been heart and cardiovascular disease, such as cardiac arrest; this accounts for about 30% of all deaths.11 The number is so large because these are diseases of the heart and blood vessels and encompass a wide range of problems.
The most recent well-known death by natural causes – specifically, cardiac arrest – I can think of is Brittany Murphy’s. If you’re not aware of the famous actress, she was just 32 when she died last December.3 She didn’t seem to have any injuries, and officials didn’t suspect a murder or a suicide.8 When she was further examined, the coroner concluded that she had died of cardiac arrest.7 Because it seemed that a naturally-occurring heart condition did her in, it was ruled as a death by natural causes. However, one question lingers – “How did a young, (seemingly) healthy woman die so suddenly of cardiac arrest?” Although uncommon, it does happen, but many skeptics and doubtful doctors disagree about the nature of her death.
Cardiac arrest occurs when the heart stops beating normally and blood can no longer circulate properly to and from the heart to keep the person alive.1 However, when death occurs, it is because the heart has stopped beating, so the term “cardiac arrest” generally provides little insight into how she died – namely, what happened to induce cardiac arrest. Brittany Murphy’s death is still surrounded by speculation – there’s talk of a possible illness, eating disorder, or overdose.7 Yet, she is said to have died by natural causes because people can’t come to a definite conclusion; we’re forced to say, euphemistically, that we just aren’t sure.
On the other hand, you don’t have to die from some mysterious reason for your passing to be a death by natural causes. Your death will be ruled as such if medical examiners realize that the cause of death was an illness or an internal malfunction – events that were not provoked artificially in any way.10 But if you commit suicide, die from assisted suicide, or are killed in a homicide (the horror!), you have not died from natural causes. Death can occur by a wide range of natural causes, from devastating diseases like cancer and leukemia, to quick events like strokes or heart attacks, to seemingly minor flu viruses.2
On a side note about death and diseases, many Republicans were up in arms about a proposal of Obama’s that would give the government the “power to kill off senior citizens”, especially if they have incurable or costly diseases.4 This rumor proliferated throughout the nation during the summer of 2009 about “death panels”, a term dubbed by Sarah Palin about a portion of the health care reform bill proposing end-of-life planning. Although it was much earlier in 2008 that a law had been passed allowing Medicare patients to undergo end-of-life planning, the controversy over the proposal in the health care reform bill heated up this past year.9
Basically, end-of-life planning allows a patient to discuss with their doctor, ahead of time, the terms of their care should they unexpectedly fall gravely ill and incapable of making health decisions. However, opponents of end-of-life planning, such as Sarah Palin, have rallied against it, saying that doctors would advise patients with critical diseases to forgo life-sustaining treatment, therefore saving the government millions of dollars in treatment.4 The backlash and rumors led to Obama dropping the regulations from the health care reform bill. However, since January 1st, a new Medicare policy states that the government would pay doctors who counsel patients on end-of-life planning.6 This time, however, these regulations are rolling out quietly, so as not to provoke the media.
Although the policies have been criticized, end-of-life planning isn’t a bad idea. 70% of Americans do not have living wills – the majority of the nation has no plan in the event of a health emergency.9 According to the research by Schumacher, merely talking to your doctor more, honestly and openly, results in a higher quality of life for the patient and for those family members after a death. With end-of-life planning, you can make a living will and appoint a trusted person to take care of important health decisions if you are rendered incapable to do so. You wouldn’t imagine cooking a new recipe from scratch without any directions, or driving to a place you’ve never been before without any directions, so why do so many people forgo thinking about their future life plans until it’s too late? Although the subject of death tends to be morbid, it doesn’t have to be. Without this planning, you could be in a hospital bed and your closest family member might not have the ability to make any decisions on your part, simply because you didn’t take simple precautions to name your health care proxy. End-of-life planning is ultimately about taking care of you and your family; it only makes sense to take advantage and learn about health care options that benefit you.
Hope this helps,
Tracy Lin
Works Cited
1. Bakalar, Nicholas. "SCAA | Education Materials." Welcome to TCS Software, Inc. ::
Dublin, OH. Web. 27 Dec. 2010.
2. Bryant, Clifton D. Handbook of Death & Dying. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,
2003. Print.
3. Hutchison, Courtney, and Monica Nista. "Brittany Murphy's Death Remains A Mystery
ABC News." ABCNews.com - ABCNews.com: Breaking News, Politics, World News,
Good Morning America, Exclusive Interviews - ABC News. 22 Dec. 2009. Web. 27
Dec. 2010.
4. Joe Weber. "Death Panels Are Back: “Obama Lied and My Mama Died” | Death and
Taxes." Indie Music News, Pop Culture, Politics and Entertainment | Death and
Taxes. 27 Dec. 2010. Web. 04 Jan. 2011.
5. Nedely. "Re: Death by Natural Causes - What Does It Mean? (dental, Doctor, Heart) -
Health and Wellness -Doctors, Illness, Diseases, Nutrition, Sleep, Stress, Diet,
Hospitals, Medicine, Cancer, Heart Disease - City-Data Forum." Web log
comment. Stats about All US Cities - Real Estate, Relocation Info, House Prices,
Home Value Estimator, Recent Sales, Cost of Living, Crime, Race, Income, Photos,
Education, Maps, Weather, Houses, Schools, Neighborhoods, and More. 25 Dec.
2009. Web. 27 Dec. 2010.
6. Pear, Robert. "Obama Returns to End-of-Life Plan That Caused Stir." NYTimes.com. The
New York Times, 25 Dec. 2010. Web. 3 Jan. 2011.
7. PopEater Staff. "Brittany Murphy Likely Died From Natural Causes, Says Coroner |
PopEater.com." Celebrities | Entertainment News | Celebrity Gossip | Celebrity
Photos | PopEater.com. 21 Dec. 2009. Web. 27 Dec. 2010.
8. Rose, Sandra. "Medical Minute: Death By Natural Causes." Sandra Rose. 5 Jan. 2010.
Web. 27 Dec. 2010.
9. Schumacher, J. Donald. "Why End-of-life Planning Is Smart, Necessary - CNN.com."
CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. 28
Dec. 2010. Web. 03 Jan. 2011.
10. Swenson, Jim, and Susannah Sample. "Death by Natural Causes." NEWTON/ANL Home
Page. 11 Apr. 2005. Web. 27 Dec. 2010.
11. World Health Organization. "Annex Table 2 Deaths by Cause, Sex and Mortality Stratum
in WHO Regions, Estimates for 2002." Chart. The World Health Report 2004. France:
Keith Wynn, 2004. 120-21. Print.
"Doors Closing On Your Left..."
Dear Lowdown:
As a paranoid CTA rider, I sometimes imagine when I’m half-leaning against the train doors that they will suddenly fly open, so I always try to balance myself against the glass panel instead. Has the conductor actually ever opened the doors at the wrong side though, leading to the tumbling death of twenty passengers at Cermak Chinatown (or any elevated train station where the doors opposite to the side of the platform lead to a sixty-foot fall) because they didn’t listen to the warning of, “Please do not lean against the doors”? And what is the purpose of that warning, if not to prevent demonstrations of physics and gravity? While we’re on the topic of CTA freak accidents, let’s say someone has snuck into the conductor’s cart on the CTA train, wrestled the conductor to prevent them from stopping the train in this emergency situation, and switched the doors open. Would the doors actually open, or does the train have some sort of mechanism to only open the doors when the train has stopped? I’ve never heard about passengers falling off CTA trains, but I don’t think these accidents are too unlikely…
- Daisy Fong (Chicago)
Dear Daisy,
While passengers at the Cermak Chinatown Red Line “L” stop have never been the victims of a door malfunction at that particular stop, there have been a few accidents leading to some skepticism about the safety of the trains we ride. The poor trains seem sketchy enough already, and then a something happens to make them seem even less reliable. You may recall an incident that happened almost a year ago involving the Red Line, a stroller, and a door. A woman at the Morse Red Line stop was pushing her 22-month old baby in a stroller, when the doors of the train supposedly closed on the stroller, dragging the baby and buggy, eventually leading to the baby’s fall about ten feet past the platform.
Thankfully, the baby was safe. The CTA still does not know the exact reasons for the occurrence, and uncertainty still remains after extensive tests done on the car. The tests did not reveal anything evidently wrong with the car, meaning that either the stroller did not really get stuck or the incident was a one-time catastrophe.
To put it bluntly, the doors of the train should not open while in motion. According to an article in the Chicago Tribune, the conductor or driver of the train can override the sensor system with a special key. However, there have been several instances where the doors have not responded the way they should, without the conductor’s knowledge. Much like an elevator door, the doors on the train have sensors, and the train operator has a control panel that can indicate any problems. In the situation with the stroller, the control panel did not indicate any problems, and it is possible that the part of the stroller that got stuck was small enough that the sensors didn’t activate.
There were a few other door complications, though none as drastic as the stroller story, and nothing resulting in injuries: One woman, Tonya Tibbs, had a similar experience where her suitcase handle got caught between the doors, leaving her mid-sized luggage hanging out of the train until her fiancé managed to pry it free (Swartz, “CTA Rider: Door Closed on my Bag”). Perhaps the handle was a similar size to the segment of the stuck stroller. However, it seems that a human being will activate the sensors to open the door without a problem. Nevertheless, keep an eye on your bag, and seriously, stand clear of the doors if they are closing.
Just because the doors cannot open while in motion does not mean that it is impossible for them to open at a stop, and remain open in transit. Passengers at Cermak Chinatown may have been safe, but riders of the Red Line in between Addison and Sheridan had a scary experience: as a train pulled away from the Addison stop, the doors, in one of the cars, failed to close. The passengers were sent on a wild ride in the early hours of the morning, leaving many with wind-swept hair. The emergency button was pushed several times, but no response was received. At the early hour in the morning that these passengers were riding, it is lucky they had any mode of transportation at all. It became apparent that the CTA operator had no idea what was going on (Lutz), however at that time in the morning, who really does? We live in world full of mechanized things that are bound to malfunction at some time. I would call it a miracle that the trains can carry carload after carload of crowded, grumpy people headed to work every day and not spontaneously combust.
As a funny coincidence, the luggage incident and the open-door incident both happened within a few weeks of the stroller story. The woman with the luggage reported her mishap had occurred on the Blue Line, but the other two stories took place on the Red Line. The CTA revealed that doors tend to malfunction under severe, cold weather. After further investigation of the National Weather Archives, November of 2009 seemed to be beautifully mild: mid-fifties with little rain. So weather wasn’t a factor in the train doors malfunctioning. According to the CTA, in 2008 the “CTA replaced the sensitive edges on all rail cars in its fleet and have reduced the number of instances of door problems to three percent of all mechanical problems affecting rail cars” (Swartz). Maybe it’s coincidence that these accidents all happened at the same times, despite apparently wonderful weather. Considering that on a given weekday, an average of 1.7 million people ride the CTA, and that the trains make 2,157 trips daily to 144 stations, and we receive word of only a few minor door incidents per year, you are pretty safe riding the train. Compared to the 300,000 traffic accidents per year in Chicago, with around 141 fatal crashes (in 2009), riding a train seems much safer than traveling in a car (Hilkevitch). Despite the large number of car accidents, people still drive, so despite the very few door incidents, there is no reason to refrain from riding the train.
And do keep in mind that our trains are constantly being improved upon. Keep your eyes open for the new 5000-series of the ‘L’ cars. They are being seriously tested for any fault, and there are several new safety designs to keep passengers secure; doors especially have more advanced sensors that ensure the train cannot leave unless the doors are fully shut (and locked). Flashing lights above the doors notify passengers when the doors are in use, and the door chimes will play during closing (CTA: 5000-Series Rail Cars). Hopefully, this will mean that the conductor won’t have to say “please stand clear of the doors, doors are closing” every single time the train is about to leave a station, as has been occurring recently. Other safety features will amp up security, leaving you to ride to your destination protected and happy. Clearly, the CTA is taking its mistakes and working to fix them to improve customer satisfaction and decrease mortality, so there won’t be anyone falling off the train anytime soon, and you are free to enjoy the lovely, crowded rush-hour train ride fear-free.
Sincerely,
Hannah Francis
Works Cited
Chicago Tribune. "'The Train Took My Baby' - Chicago Tribune." The Chicago Tribune. 04 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010..
CTA. "The 5000-Series 'L' Cars - CTA's New Train Cars." Chicago Transit Authority | Cta | 1-888-YOUR-CTA. Web. 11 Nov. 2010..
Doyle, Mike. "Are CTA Employees to Blame for Annoying New Warning Announcements on the ‘L’? | CHICAGO CARLESS." Chicago Careless. 2 July 2010. Web. 11 Nov. 2010.
Hilkevitch, Jon. "CTA Union Leader Urges Action on Train 'door Problem'" Chicago Breaking News. 18 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010..
Hilkevitch, Jon. "Traffic Deaths." Chicago Breaking News. 19 July 2010. Web. 02 Jan. 2011..
Lutz, BJ. "Doors Closing? Passengers Say One Didn't." NBC Chicago. 17 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010..
"National Weather Service Climate." NOAA's National Weather Service. Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010..
Swartz, Tracy. "CTA Rider: Door Closed on My Bag - RedEye." ChicagoNow. 4 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010..
Swartz, Tracy. "CTA Rider: Red Line Doors Didn't Close - RedEye." ChicagoNow. 17 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010.
As a paranoid CTA rider, I sometimes imagine when I’m half-leaning against the train doors that they will suddenly fly open, so I always try to balance myself against the glass panel instead. Has the conductor actually ever opened the doors at the wrong side though, leading to the tumbling death of twenty passengers at Cermak Chinatown (or any elevated train station where the doors opposite to the side of the platform lead to a sixty-foot fall) because they didn’t listen to the warning of, “Please do not lean against the doors”? And what is the purpose of that warning, if not to prevent demonstrations of physics and gravity? While we’re on the topic of CTA freak accidents, let’s say someone has snuck into the conductor’s cart on the CTA train, wrestled the conductor to prevent them from stopping the train in this emergency situation, and switched the doors open. Would the doors actually open, or does the train have some sort of mechanism to only open the doors when the train has stopped? I’ve never heard about passengers falling off CTA trains, but I don’t think these accidents are too unlikely…
- Daisy Fong (Chicago)
Dear Daisy,
While passengers at the Cermak Chinatown Red Line “L” stop have never been the victims of a door malfunction at that particular stop, there have been a few accidents leading to some skepticism about the safety of the trains we ride. The poor trains seem sketchy enough already, and then a something happens to make them seem even less reliable. You may recall an incident that happened almost a year ago involving the Red Line, a stroller, and a door. A woman at the Morse Red Line stop was pushing her 22-month old baby in a stroller, when the doors of the train supposedly closed on the stroller, dragging the baby and buggy, eventually leading to the baby’s fall about ten feet past the platform.
Thankfully, the baby was safe. The CTA still does not know the exact reasons for the occurrence, and uncertainty still remains after extensive tests done on the car. The tests did not reveal anything evidently wrong with the car, meaning that either the stroller did not really get stuck or the incident was a one-time catastrophe.
To put it bluntly, the doors of the train should not open while in motion. According to an article in the Chicago Tribune, the conductor or driver of the train can override the sensor system with a special key. However, there have been several instances where the doors have not responded the way they should, without the conductor’s knowledge. Much like an elevator door, the doors on the train have sensors, and the train operator has a control panel that can indicate any problems. In the situation with the stroller, the control panel did not indicate any problems, and it is possible that the part of the stroller that got stuck was small enough that the sensors didn’t activate.
There were a few other door complications, though none as drastic as the stroller story, and nothing resulting in injuries: One woman, Tonya Tibbs, had a similar experience where her suitcase handle got caught between the doors, leaving her mid-sized luggage hanging out of the train until her fiancé managed to pry it free (Swartz, “CTA Rider: Door Closed on my Bag”). Perhaps the handle was a similar size to the segment of the stuck stroller. However, it seems that a human being will activate the sensors to open the door without a problem. Nevertheless, keep an eye on your bag, and seriously, stand clear of the doors if they are closing.
Just because the doors cannot open while in motion does not mean that it is impossible for them to open at a stop, and remain open in transit. Passengers at Cermak Chinatown may have been safe, but riders of the Red Line in between Addison and Sheridan had a scary experience: as a train pulled away from the Addison stop, the doors, in one of the cars, failed to close. The passengers were sent on a wild ride in the early hours of the morning, leaving many with wind-swept hair. The emergency button was pushed several times, but no response was received. At the early hour in the morning that these passengers were riding, it is lucky they had any mode of transportation at all. It became apparent that the CTA operator had no idea what was going on (Lutz), however at that time in the morning, who really does? We live in world full of mechanized things that are bound to malfunction at some time. I would call it a miracle that the trains can carry carload after carload of crowded, grumpy people headed to work every day and not spontaneously combust.
As a funny coincidence, the luggage incident and the open-door incident both happened within a few weeks of the stroller story. The woman with the luggage reported her mishap had occurred on the Blue Line, but the other two stories took place on the Red Line. The CTA revealed that doors tend to malfunction under severe, cold weather. After further investigation of the National Weather Archives, November of 2009 seemed to be beautifully mild: mid-fifties with little rain. So weather wasn’t a factor in the train doors malfunctioning. According to the CTA, in 2008 the “CTA replaced the sensitive edges on all rail cars in its fleet and have reduced the number of instances of door problems to three percent of all mechanical problems affecting rail cars” (Swartz). Maybe it’s coincidence that these accidents all happened at the same times, despite apparently wonderful weather. Considering that on a given weekday, an average of 1.7 million people ride the CTA, and that the trains make 2,157 trips daily to 144 stations, and we receive word of only a few minor door incidents per year, you are pretty safe riding the train. Compared to the 300,000 traffic accidents per year in Chicago, with around 141 fatal crashes (in 2009), riding a train seems much safer than traveling in a car (Hilkevitch). Despite the large number of car accidents, people still drive, so despite the very few door incidents, there is no reason to refrain from riding the train.
And do keep in mind that our trains are constantly being improved upon. Keep your eyes open for the new 5000-series of the ‘L’ cars. They are being seriously tested for any fault, and there are several new safety designs to keep passengers secure; doors especially have more advanced sensors that ensure the train cannot leave unless the doors are fully shut (and locked). Flashing lights above the doors notify passengers when the doors are in use, and the door chimes will play during closing (CTA: 5000-Series Rail Cars). Hopefully, this will mean that the conductor won’t have to say “please stand clear of the doors, doors are closing” every single time the train is about to leave a station, as has been occurring recently. Other safety features will amp up security, leaving you to ride to your destination protected and happy. Clearly, the CTA is taking its mistakes and working to fix them to improve customer satisfaction and decrease mortality, so there won’t be anyone falling off the train anytime soon, and you are free to enjoy the lovely, crowded rush-hour train ride fear-free.
Sincerely,
Hannah Francis
Works Cited
Chicago Tribune. "'The Train Took My Baby' - Chicago Tribune." The Chicago Tribune. 04 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010.
CTA. "The 5000-Series 'L' Cars - CTA's New Train Cars." Chicago Transit Authority | Cta | 1-888-YOUR-CTA. Web. 11 Nov. 2010.
Doyle, Mike. "Are CTA Employees to Blame for Annoying New Warning Announcements on the ‘L’? | CHICAGO CARLESS." Chicago Careless. 2 July 2010. Web. 11 Nov. 2010.
Hilkevitch, Jon. "CTA Union Leader Urges Action on Train 'door Problem'" Chicago Breaking News. 18 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010.
Hilkevitch, Jon. "Traffic Deaths." Chicago Breaking News. 19 July 2010. Web. 02 Jan. 2011.
Lutz, BJ. "Doors Closing? Passengers Say One Didn't." NBC Chicago. 17 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010.
"National Weather Service Climate." NOAA's National Weather Service. Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010.
Swartz, Tracy. "CTA Rider: Door Closed on My Bag - RedEye." ChicagoNow. 4 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010.
Swartz, Tracy. "CTA Rider: Red Line Doors Didn't Close - RedEye." ChicagoNow. 17 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)