!!!!!

Science!!!!! :)

Saturday, November 27, 2010

Food Inc Reflection

1.) After watching Food Inc, what are your impressions of how science, technology, and society are interrelated?  
          I think that science and technology are combined to create completely new edible foods to release into society.  We use our knowledge of food, the world, and chemicals (science), to create new foods by mixing them together.  The technology comes in, with us finding new ways to create chemicals, new ways to harvest food, new ways to raise animals etc, and using technology to do that.  Once we combine the technology and science, we create incredible edible products that, while we may be able to eat them, are bad for the environment and us.

2.) How did the film describe science & technology as a positive or negative impact on society or the environment?  
          This film describes science as a negative impact on the environment, but a positive impact on society.  When we create new foods, find new ways to raise animals and harvest plant foods, we are harming the environment.  We put more CO2 in the air when we do that, produce more greenhouse gasses, and we actually spread bacteria/viruses like E-coli around the planet.  Science & technology has a positive impact on society, because when we do all the new things listed above, we become faster, produce more, create more jobs, and do a whole bunch of things that are much more economical than if we did everything the old-fashioned way.  The one 'con' of science and technology that affects society is the fact that serious disease can spread into our food.  When we eat that food, we get sick and die.

3.) How do our consumer choices affect what is out on the market and therefore, our own survival?  
          Our consumer choices have a massive affect on what is out on the market.  If we want something out there, then it will be provided.  If we don't want something out there, than it won't be.  If we stop buying a product, that company will either go out of business or decide not to sell that product because it is a waste of time, money, and other resources.  If we want a certain product, a company will notice that demand and start providing it to make more money. 
          We can affect our own survival by making the right choices.  Once we know what is bad for us, what's really behind the label, what's happened to our meat before it's been slaughtered, we can stop buying them.  We can buy organically from farmers that don't support the big companies, prevent E coli from spreading from the mass production of meat, and much much more, just by making healthy choices.  If we stop buying the company will stop making and providing it.


4.) How are we as humans connected to how the Earth is used? 
          We as humans consume so much more of the Earth's resources than other animals.  We probably consume more than all the other animals on the planet use, put together.  We use too much of Earth since we are at the top of the food chain.  We basically control Earth.  That is how we are connected to how Earth is used.  Earth is kind of at our mercy - we can decide what to do with it (use up resources, save the planet, trash it...).  We have to learn how we can live sustainable lives in order to keep Earth healthy.

5.) When do we say no to more high tech devices and go back to what caused the problem in the first place?  Why are we only into the "HOW" and not the "WHY?"
          We are only into the "HOW" and not the "WHY", because some among our number don't believe that the "WHY" is economical.  In the E coli issue, all we have to do is feed our cows grass instead of corn, to prevent it, but NO, we have to find a way to CLEANSE our cows of E coli because grass is expensive.  I think that another reason why companies are into the "HOW" and not the "WHY", is because they are reluctant to get rid of technology.  Maybe they think that the more technology they use, the better.

6.)  What is the difference between natural farming and industrial farming?  Which is better?  Are they both necessary?  
         Natural farming allows the animals to run free, see the light, and basically just grow up naturally.  Industrial farming forces the livestock to live in SUPER close quarters, eat hormones, not really see the light of the sun...you might call it torture.  Industrial farming feeds chickens growing hormones that make them grow twice as big as regular chickens int HALF the time, AND grow bigger breasts because that's what most people like to eat.  Right now, both types of farming are necessary, because there aren't enough farmers that will consent to natural farming to provide enough livestock for the entire country.  If we suddenly got rid of all the industrial farming farmers, a whole bunch of people would probably be forced to become vegetarians. 


7.) If technology and industry have improved so much that we are getting faster, fatter, bigger, and cheaper, how are science and technology involved in our survival? 
           Science and technology may actually be affecting our survival for the worse.  In the States, we are growing fatter, slower, and less fit as people, which is poor for our health.  Even though our factories are bigger, faster, and cheaper, we are not healthier.  Food companies are combining science and technology to produce new, artificial meals.  Everything is getting more convenient – fast food, drive through, frozen pizza, Lunchables, 1 min. oatmeal…and, they’re all super tasty!  The reason why they’re tasty and convenient is because a lot of them are pumped full of unhealthy chemicals or use big, bloated chickens/cows/pigs in them.  We are spreading life-threatening viruses through mass production, and all this is affecting our survival.


8.) What economic costs, environmental costs, ethical costs, health costs, and cultural costs did you observe while watching the film?   

          I observed environmental costs, health costs, cultural costs, and ethical costs while watching the film.  There is a health cost because we’re spreading viruses and making people more obese; there are cultural costs because the 'old ways' of farming are being destroyed; there is an ethical cost, because food production company owners, workers, and farmers have to choose between money and doing the right thing; and there is an environmental cost because of all the bad things food production companies are doing - they're clearing forests to plant corn to feed the animals, they're clearing land to house the animals, and much, much more.  
As a result, Food Inc. opened my eyes to what's really happening to my food helped me decide what I'm going to do about it.

  

Monday, November 22, 2010

Current Events - Flamingos Use Makeup

          A new study shows that flamingos use a type of natural makeup to make themselves look pretty during mating season!  For a long time, scientists have believed that flamingo feather hues are affected by the sun, or stained by organic matter.  However, this theory has been proven wrong by a team of scientists, who noticed that right after chicks stopped hatching, the flamingos began to fade.  Later, the strong pink color comes back during the next mating season. 
          The color of flamingos is produced by carotenoids.  The birds are able to obtain and maintain the pinkness through their diet - carotenoids are absorbed through the algae and crustaceans flamingos eat.  Flamingo feathers naturally contain the pigment compound, but the new discovery is the fact that oil produced near the bird tails also hold much, much more of it.
         Scientists have known for years about this oil, as it is waterproof and helps the feather survive longer.  The flamingos preen the substance into their feathers to help keep themselves healthy.  The researchers have found out that during mating time, the birds clean more than usual.  When the oil gets into their feathers, it enhances the feather colors, making them strong, vibrant, and attractive to mates - after all, the darker the color, the better a mate it will make.

Originally written by: Matt Kaplan
November 10,2010
For more information, go to:http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/11/101110-flamingos-makeup-mating-science-animals/

I thought that this article was very interesting.  I've always thought that flamingos are colorful year-round and that the reason some are more faded than others is because they are old.  I never dreamed that oil could be the secret to being pink!  I was thinking that maybe, using the flamingo oil, we could invent new types of eco-friendly paint, as long as we don't harm the animal itself.  Of course, after watching Food Inc and how the chickens and cows are treated, I wouldn't want this to turn into some huge factory...All in all, this article was an interesting surprise!

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Owl Pellet Reflection

6.64% bird, 1.34% shrew, 21.14% mouse, 17.33% vole, and 50.18% rat were eaten by the owls that we investigated.
          Our class calculated all the different types owl prey we have found in owl pellets we dissected about a month ago.  We found out that owls eat rats, birds, shrews, mice, and voles.  The biggest percentage of animals eaten were rats - more than fifty percent!  Above is a pie chart of the different percentages of the animals owls ate that the class has recorded. 
          When ranking the most frequently consumed owl prey, I would say that first comes rat, then vole, then mouse, bird, and lastly, shrew.  I was surprised there, because rats are among the biggest of the prey animals listed above.  I expected smaller shrews, or even mice to be at the top of the list, because they are smaller and easier to catch.  I was wrong, since rats are at the top, and maybe that's because rats are slower and easier to see.
          If a predator expends energy when hunting, and it can either hunt 35 insects (1g each), or 1 vole (35g), it would be much smarter to hunt the vole.  If you have to hunt once, stop and eat, hunt again, stop and eat, it would be like eating a snack every five minutes.  If an owl caught one vole, it would be like eating one dinner.  You wouldn't have to keep on wasting energy getting up, walking to the kitchen, and preparing the snack every time.  It would take up a lot more energy for an owl to hunt for 35 insects rather than 1 vole.
          If the shrew population went into a deep decline, I seriously doubt that it would affect the owl population much.  Only about 1% of an owl's diet consists of shrew.  That's one in a hundred prey animals.  An owl can live without one tiny piece of prey for a day. 

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Current Events - Goldfish Sacrifice Their Lives for South Korean Toilets

          According to a certain source, goldfish are sacrificing their lives in order to check the water purity of South Korean toilets.  Note that they are not doing this willingly - the Convention and Exhibition Center is hosting this event and are using the fish to do this.  The goldfish are testing the purity of water released into Korean restrooms.  The testing is very simple: if the goldfish dies, the water is impure, but if the animal lives, the liquid is fit for restroom water.  The People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), protest against the South Korean way of protecting the government toilets.  They state that fish can feel pain the same way as dogs, cats, and humans, and that it's just as important to protect them as well as the government.  Picture of goldfish below.
           I think that the South Korean government should NOT be doing this.  It's totally unfair the poor fish, and there is tons of new technology that can determine how clean water is out there.  It is really cruel to hurt animals just to see if bathroom water is sanitary enough!  I agree with the PETA.  There are many better solutions to goldfish on this planet, and we shouldn't be harming creatures that have every right to live as us, to determine something as low as restroom water.  It just isn't fair.

Originally written by: Discovery News employee
Written on: Novemeber 12, 2010
For more information, you can go to: http://news.discovery.com/animals/goldfish-water-purity-g20.html

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Human Footprint Reflection

          When thinking about the human footprint, there are a couple of terms that need to be defined - sustainability, human footprint, and ecological footprint.  "Sustainability" is being able to endure, to keep on going.  I think that trees could be an example of a sustainable resource, because we can keep planting them whenever we cut them down and they will go on.  "Human footprint" is the mark that Homo sapiens, as a species, create on planet Earth.  We leave a trail of pollution, trash, and death behind us - our human footprint.  An ecological footprint is what we use to measure the quantity of nature that is allotted to us, and how much we actually consume.  Earth has absolutely EVERYTHING to do with our ecological footprint.  If we use up too many natural resources, global warming will take over, the polar ice caps will melt, many different species of animals will go extinct, islands will be flooded over, hundreds of thousands of things that COULD go wrong WILL go wrong.  Some things that could make a deeper water ecological footprint would be to take too many showers, fill our baths up to their full extent, and use the dishwasher every day.   When we deepen our transportation footprint, we actually are accessing things that we WANT, but don't necessarily NEED.  Some ways that could make our energy footprint bigger would be to leave our phones plugged in all night when they're already full of juice and leaving the lights on when you really don't need to.  We help make our garbage footprint larger by wasting food by throwing it out and not recycling items that can be recycled.  The last category of the ecological footprint, food, can be deepened by always buying packaged foods from distant countries.  When we consume too much, we throw out too much, which means we fill up the land mines and areas of the ocean with trash.  Animals on land and in sea attempt to eat some of that garbage, and either choke or die of poisoning.  That then wrecks the food chain, and a whole lot more animals die because of that.
            I have used both websites to calculate my human footprint, and I got pretty similar answers.  One site told me that if everyone in the world lived like me, we would have to use up 2.3 planet Earths, and the other told me we would have to have 2.4 planet Earths.  I think that my family and I really use up a lot of water by each taking 1 shower a day, running the dishwasher almost every day, and traveling to different continents over the the seasonal breaks.  What we could do to try to lessen our footprint would be to unplug appliances that do not need to be charged.  Sometimes, my mom leaves her laptop charged in for days at a time, and our family ipod is almost always plugged in, even when it's full of juice already.  We could also stop eating meat as much as we do now, and try to eat more locally grown fruits and vegetables.  I thought that my family was pretty eco-friendly, but after I did the surveys, I feel much more humbled about it.
            Reading about global and personal earthly impacts really surprised me.  I never expected that only 1/3200 of the the Photic Zone where there is enough sunlight that breaks through the ocean water to enable photosynthesis to take place.  I thought that most of the ocean was sunny and fertile.  I also feel bad that we humans use about 1/2 of the land on the Earth.  We are only one out of millions and billions of species on the planet.  We use and trash one half of the planet, and leave only half of it for all the rest of the animals that need to survive.  I was also really surprised about the fact that the wealthiest 5% of the world's population eat about 45% of all the meat and fish consumed by humans, use 58% of energy, and own 87% vehicles of the world, while only 5% of fish and meat is eaten, 4% of energy is consumed, and 1% of the world's vehicles are owned, by 20% of the world's least wealthy population.  I never realized that there was so much difference between the wealthy and the poor.
            Watching the video,  "Human Footprint," in class was also a very impacting experience.  I never thought that just one person could consume SO MUCH in their entire life.  Watching all those eggs falling down from that bucket was, I think, the thing that I remember best.  I feel so bad for killing all those chick-to-be's already, and I've only lived 12 years of my life! :(

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Current Events - Deformed Bird Beaks Hint at Toxins in Nature

         A beak abnormality in birds such as chickadees located in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska can help scientists find hidden toxins that we didn't know existed outside factories before.  These poor birds are growing beaks at a terribly alarming rate - these beaks not only grow, but they can curve and even cross with each other.  These problems cause the animals feeding problems.
As you can see in this picture I uploaded, chickadees can't open their beaks all the way, which prevents them from cracking seeds and all the other things they need to do to eat.  Beak deformities are very rare in adult birds, and since there are so many of them altered, people can tell that something is wrong.  According to the article, birds only grow weird beaks when exposed to parasites, viral infections, and strange contaminants in the environment.  When a lot of birds are affected with deformed beaks, it proves that something has altered the environment they live in. Sadly, the article didn't state whether or not they have a solution for this problem, so I do not know what is being done to help the poor birds.
       I think that this is very serious.  If the chickadees have trouble eating or mating because of these weird beak problems, that could lead to a large decrease in the amount of local birds.  If the birds are gone, a decrease in the amount of bird predators could follow.  It would be disrupting the food chain, and a lot of animal lives could be lost because of it.  I think that scientists should find out what is causing this, and they should try to solve it.  It's not fair to the birds and to all the other animals that will be affected by a decrease in the bird population of Alaska.

Originally written by: Krist Mahr
Written On: November 8, 2010
For more information, go to: http://ecocentric.blogs.time.com/2010/11/08/tweaked-beaks-how-bird-deformities-help-flag-undetected-toxins/

Monday, November 8, 2010

Current Events - HARRY POTTER IS KILLING OWL WILDLIFE IN INDIA

          A news article has stated that Harry Potter might be causing decreases of wild owls in India.  According to India's wildlife minister, Jairam Ramesh, when Indian children become fans of Harry Potter, they pressure their parents for Harry Potter paraphernalia.  Since Harry Potter's pet and one of his best friends is his owl, Hedwig, those parents contact illegal animal smugglers (poachers), in order to get other owls for their kids. 
Harry Potter Snowy Owl

          According to another source, thousands of owls are already taken from the wild and killed every year at the Indian festival, Diwali.  This is because superstitious people/worshippers urge their followers to use items such as owl fat, bones, eyeballs, egg shells, skulls, feathers, livers, claws, hearts, and many other organs and owl parts in their rituals.
          If too many owls are killed, the amount of owl prey in India will most definitely increase.  This means that the rabbits, rats, and mice that eat grass and seeds may overpopulate, which could cause a decrease in grass.  This could cause a decrease in the mice and rodent population which, overall, would cause a decrease in other predators such as coyotes and wolves that live on mice and rabbits.
          My personal opinion on this is negative.  I don't think that children and parents need to illegally steal owl in order to satisfy Harry Potter cravings.  Thousands of children that read Harry Potter live without owls, and if a parent will contact a POACHER to get the animals, then they are showing that they are bad parents.  They are spoiling their children, AND setting a bad example to the kids.  Owls are also hard to care for, because they need to be let out periodically for the fresh air, and no one knows if they'll actually come back.

Originally written by:  Jennifer Viegas
Written on: November 5, 2010
For more information on the owl issue, go to: http://news.discovery.com/animals/harry-potter-is-hurting-owls-in-india.html