Can't BEET it!

Ha ha ha. Sorry for the pun, I just couldn't help myself. I'll try not to go too nuts with this story (because that would be BEET-ing a dead horse!)

Apparently, beet juice is kind of a big deal. They've been looking into it over at Wake Forest University, and it has some pretty beneficial health effects. It's all about the nitrates, which I thought were supposed to be harmful compounds found in processed meat like hot dogs, but then I'm not a university biologist so my knowledge is crap.

The body turns nitrates into nitrites, and nitrites improve blood flow. The Wake Forest researchers divided up their test subjects into a group that ate a lot of nitrates, provided by beet juice, and a group that didn't. Then they switched diets halfway through for the participants to make sure that it really was the food that was having the effect. And in all cases, the research supported the theory that increased nitrate consumption leads to improved blood flow.

From there, they are saying that this improves brain activity, and think it's going to be helpful for older adults.

What I want to know is how nasty it was to have to drink 16 ounces of straight beet juice. That's a full pint glass, and when dealing with glasses of that size, I'd rather have the beer. Does beer help increase the blood flow to the brain? If they're interested in studying that, I want to volunteer to be one of the test subjects!

Beating a Dead Horse: Binge Drinking and Crippled Teens

I'm sure you remember my coverage of Loyola University's last study on binge drinking and long-term health effects. Guess what? They've built on that, and it turns out that binge drinking is (still) bad for you in the long term.

The latest news from Loyola University is that binge drinking messes with your genes. I'm not really clear how this is different from their last study, though. Maybe it's more specific? This time, they've managed to shoehorn teen binge drinking in there, possibly to garner more media attention.

It looks like the 2008 study proved that binge drinking makes for brittle bones. This new study proves that binge drinking messes up your genes. So their hypothesis from the original study, that binge drinking might be messing with your genes, appears to have been proven.

Firewater? Really?

It's always important to examine prejudices to see if there's any truth to them, or if it's just mean-spirited people spreading rumors. Like the idea of Indians and their firewater. Let's face it, that assertion in this day and age is just naked bigotry.

So the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services keeps records on this sort of thing. Actually, their subdivision, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) tracks it, and then releases their data. According to a survey the released in June, American Indians and Alaska Natives had a lower rate of alcohol usage than the national average. Mind you, that's past month alcohol usage.

It's a mixed result. Although the past month usage is lower than the national average, the rate of binge alcohol and illicit drug use is higher than the national average, with one in eight American Indian or Alaska Native adults seeking treatment at a speciality facility for alcohol or drug use. Make of that what you will.

I Love You, Man

I'd also love it if you drank less. And I'd love some acronyms, too. Actually, I'd love a lot of acronyms. Can anyone make that happen?

The University of Texas can make all that happen, and more. Their School of Public Health conducted a research study that threw around more acronyms than a GAO rundown of NIST RFP audits, kicking around acronyms like SMART (Southern Methodist Alcohol Research Trial), MIF (motivational interviewing with feedback), NIAAA (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism) and e-CHUG (don't ask). Their claim is that individualized feedback is effective at stopping alcohol abuse in college.

According to this study, people in college don't realize that their peers drink less than they appear to. Sure, the rumors abound that college campuses are packed with drunken yahoos, but this study claims that there's less drinking going on than people realize, and by educating students about the behavior of their peers, they'll realize that it's okay to drink less.

I suppose that way of thinking is fine, if you're content to follow the herd. Tonight, I'm going to raise a glass to the outliers of society, who not only drink more than their peers, but who are also proud of it.

When Is Intolerance a Good Thing?

According to health experts, having a high alcohol tolerance is a bad sign. I disagree. As we should be tolerant of others who may have different religious, social, or romantic values, we should also be tolerant of alcohol and all of the friendly pranks it can play on our minds, hearts, and livers.

Like most forms of tolerance, alcohol tolerance is easiest to teach to the young. Studies show that binge drinking at an early age can lead to increased alcohol tolerance later on in life. What better way to prepare your children for the rigors of college life than by giving them a celebratory six pack every time they bring home a good report card?

Okay, I'm just kidding (to a point). Binge drinking children aren't cool. But I also think that there's an unnecessary hate out there for having a high alcohol tolerance. Alcohol is our misunderstood friend. Remember, Science has proven that it's better to keep drinking than to stop.

Keep that in mind when you're out having fun tonight. Happy New Year!

Pediatricians Make Lousy Bartenders

Look, drunks make lousy parents. I'm not going to argue that. However, I am willing to discuss the level of intervention that the state should take when it comes to identifying and intervening when it is suspected that a parent has a drinking problem.

No, I'm not writing about something that happened to me (yet). I'm talking about the goody two-shoes parents who told Children's Hospital Boston that it's okay to get screened for alcohol abuse while they're taking their child to the doctor. Of the 879 parents asked, 90% were open to being asked about their alcohol use.

The problem with alcohol screening is that the thresholds are set way too low. This study found that one in every nine parents were found to have a "positive alcohol screen," and 75% of the parents with a positive screen were willing to be screened for alcohol problems during the visit--probably because they didn't know they'd be "problem" cases.

Then the researchers launched further attacks, raising the possibility that the parents who declined the screening were probably also drunks who knew they'd fail the test. If you're not guilty, you have nothing to hide, right? (/sarcasm)

Yes, alcoholics bad, responsible parents good. Still, they've got no right poking into my business, and they can take my ice-cold Schlitz when they pry it out of my ice-cold (dead) hand!

Are You Genetically Reckless, or Behaviorally?

So, children of parents who smoke are more impulsive and more likely to take risks. In fact, both the children and their parents are more impulsive, according to Nationwide Children's Hospital.

It's all about your "delay discounting" ability, which is fancy talk for being able to put off a small reward in the present for a greater reward in the future (although in the case of smoking, it's more like ditching a small reward in the present to avoid a massive punishment in the future, but who am I to argue with science?). The cigarette-smoking parents want their rewards right here and now; it's why they smoke. The study is showing that apples don't fall far from their respective trees since the children of smokers are also choosing the immediate rewards.

Of course, they left off the crucial question: do they make these choices because they were raised that way, or is it part of their genetic makeup? Would it have made a difference if they had laid down some ground rules?

I can put off something good in the present if I'm sure there's something great in store for the future, but I think it's something my parents taught me.

What about you? Where do you think it comes from?

But Binge Drinking Seemed Like Such a Good Idea

I know, I know, you're stunned to hear that binge drinking could be bad for your health. Still, it's shocking but true, and proven by Loyola University that binge drinking can mess with your bones. According to the study, alcohol "disturbs" the genes necessary to maintain your skeletal health.

Oh sure, you're staving off lung cancer, but you're also risking brittle bones when you drink. To me, the phrase "alcohol-induced bone loss" sounds pretty grim, and while I'd welcome the chance to have my bones replaced with more efficient, more durable plastic versions, I don't think that medical science is at that stage yet.

That's why I take calcium supplements. Hey, if you wash them down with White Russians, the milk gives your bones an extra boost as well, right?

The Real Reason You Smoke When You Drink

The risks cancel each other out.

Red wine prevents lung cancer. I don't think we need to elaborate on that point, but just in case, you may be interested in the study from the American Association for Cancer Research.

Sadly, it's only red wine, not beer, white wine, or liquor, but it could be worse. You average two percent less of a risk for lung cancer with each glass of red wine you consume per month. Booze hounds who sucked down one to two glasses of red wine per day reduced their risk of lung cancer by 60 percent. Of course, the scientists were quick to note that the most effective way to reduce lung cancer risk is not to smoke at all, but they're probably the same people who think that you should wear a helmet while riding a bicycle and wash your hands after going to the bathroom, afraid to live life on the edge.

There is one downside to this that I can think of. The French? Yeah, they're gonna be insufferable, all hanging around longer than ever in their cafes with their surly attitudes and refusing to get lung cancer. I guess it's good news for beret salesmen, though.

Religious Kids Have More Incentive To Lie

At least, that's the conclusion that I've drawn from a study conducted by Brigham Young University sociologists. I think my findings are as valid as theirs, even if they were looking at a link between religion and marijuana use.

The study measured "religiosity" in teenagers, defined as how freqently they attended church and how important religion was to them. The researchers examined data sets from a National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health and a state-wide survey of Utah schools. They compared answers to conclude that teens with more "religiosity" were half as likely to use marijuana, drink alcohol, or smoke.

Interestingly enough, this religiosity didn't affect the likelihood of their using cocaine or heroin.

Are we really going to take these teenagers at their word? First, it's completely possible that they're upwardly exaggerating the number of times that they go to church. I do it all the time. Second, wouldn't the kids who ARE more religious want to avoid being judged by their church and their peers for using drugs? Oh, sure, their religion might consider lying to be a sin, but if they're already sinning by using drugs, why wouldn't they lie about it?

I'm not saying that participating in a religious community has no benefits at all, I just want to be cautious about not overestimating them. After all, good parenting is important, too.

A Moment on the Lips, a Lifetime on the Arteries, Heart, and Possibly Breast Tissue

I'm always a fan of studies about drinking, and while this one didn't involve malt liquor, it still reinforced existing beliefs about gender differences.

Harvard is studying women who drink. For science. Well, the study is for science, the women appear to be drinking for the usual reasons. Anyway, Harvard Medical School has found that alcohol does more damage to women when viewed over the long term.

You may know that women metabolize alcohol more slowly than men. Harvard has examined this and found that since the alcohol spends longer in a woman's body, her body tissue is exposed to more alcohol per drink than a man. When this is paired with a study in Japan showing that too much alcohol is bad for the heart and arteries (and earlier studies showing that it can harm breast tissue), a picture emerges showing that women are more susceptible to the inherent health risks in alcohol than their male counterparts.

And that's not even counting the health risks posed by their male counterparts, if they're drinking at a fraternity.

Malt Liquor Is Absorbed Differently (And Awesomely)

Thanks, Science! Researchers have been loading up African-American youths with malt liquor or a mixture of alcohol and diet Sprite. It's great to see science continually going against existing stereotypes.

Anyway, they were getting these kids youths drunk to study how quickly the body absorbed the alcohol. The malt liquor was actually absorbed slower, with blood alcohol concentration peaking 28 minutes after they finished the malt liquor, compared with the soda drink that made it peak 5 minutes earlier.

They're not really sure what that proves, but I'd like to know if the diet soda could help the body metabolize the liquor faster. The whole thing just seems odd.

Oh, by the way. That malt liquor used in the study? It was Olde English.

Welcome to the 21st Century

No matter how small we make our buses, we'll still have to fuel them. And lord knows that our increased efforts to use biofuel has played hell with the availability of corn.

But a Purdue University researcher thinks that we can get get more biofuel from yeast. Specifically, "mutant yeast." I don't imagine that this will end well. Genetic manipulation, mutants, people rendered into biofuel, SOYLENT GASOLINE IS PEOPLE!

Sorry, got a little carried away there. Still, I'm proud of myself for making it through the entire post without making some kind of monster vagisil joke.

Your Lousy Boss Is Trying To Kill You

Oh, science, you never go far enough. Take, for example, a recent study in workplace health. The American College of Environmental Medicine says that good leadership makes its employees healthier. Specifically cited were reduced sick leave and disability time taken by employees whose bosses rated higher for positive leadership attributes.

Reduced compared to what? Are these so-called "good leaders" actually improving the health of their employees, or are they just not damaging their employees? Because that's what I'd like to know.

I think that the health benefits from good leaders and mediocre leaders would be neck-and-neck, but the bad leaders drive employees out of the office, making them take sick days when they can't put up with the stupidity, futility, and redundancy enforced by so many terrible employers who have no idea how to run a business or motivate an employee.

The beatings will stop when the morale improves. Maybe we can deal with crappy bosses if we didn't have to spend so many days with them.

I'm Mildly Confused

According to UVA, alcohol-related consequences are on the decline among college students.

It's interesting to see what they have defined as "alochol-related consequences." There were 10, ranging from police confrontations to unprotected sex, with some less-severe issues like missing class.

The thing is, I'm not sure if this is local to UVA, or nationwide. After all, it seems like some researchers are saying that crime is up among college students.