vendredi 20 novembre 2009
Cell phone dangerous but necessary.
The cell phone reject a lot of harmful electromagnetic radiation causing tumors and its strongly recommended to keep a cell phone as far as possible from the body.
But as we say that we also realize that the cell phone is necessary and undispensable in the communication part of life. Most of the work is now done or at least planned or started by cell phone (you can do a lot of things with all those iPhone's applications). And even more, childrem becoming teenagers feel the desire of getting one. The world is getting tougher, and the schools, work places or leisures are getting farther. You can easily understand a parent giving a cell phone to his 13 years old child when he has to travel daily in train, subway and others vehicles getting him away from home. Some others are more like you have to use it only in emergency. If you dont need it, turn it off so the radiation wont be emitted. But if someone is trying to reach you, how can you do it with a turned off cell phone?
But life isn't impossible without cell phone although inconceivable. It is a hard life though. You can easily get out of your home and live your day without a cell phone, but you will have now, in this world of progress, the feeling of being naked, unable to do anything, and if your work requires a constant contact with other people, now you have a problem. You would probably feel less safe too.
The technology is going forward and the progress wont stop. The need is increasing and the offer is way more temptative. With new applications and options, you can discover new ways of using your cell phone, pushing the world into different societies of consommations
mercredi 18 novembre 2009
Digital tools: this is new for me.
You can see our presentation and ressource document.
jeudi 5 novembre 2009
An old breathing technique could help many people suffering from asthma.
After consulting a doctor for vision problem, he tried to get rid of those so he wouldn't cause more damages to his body. But his trial was badly supported with several terrifying attacks and more and more travels to the emergency. He couldn't stand it and after a couple of years of a constantly reducing quality of life, he was going to go back on steroids so he could breath better.
But last year, he heard about a 50 years old breathing method, the Buteyko method. The Russian doctor Konstantin Buteyko named and developped it in 1952.
After watching a video on Youtube where its procedure and effects were demonstrated, he mimicked it and actually felt lighter and was breathing easier."I could actually feel my airways relax and open," he said. The participants of the video, themselves suffering from a very strong asthma explained that even being difficult to practice, the method reduced their needs of steroids and medication by about 75%.
When David Weibe explain his situation before the use of this technique, it's hard to believe the shape he is now in. He was using his rescue inhaler more than 2o times a day and was " [he] was a mess" he said. He then came to the Buteyko Center USA and then practiced breathing exercises without, or almost, using his inhaler.
After three months, he was taking no more drugs and was using his inhaler once a day.
But the reason of this technique is that Buteyko noticed that during an asthma attack, people panic and breath faster. Hyperventilation is caused by a too fast and too deep breath, and it lowers the level of Carbon Dioxyde in the blood instead of oxygen.
There are two Buteyko practitioners in Woodstock; Sasha and Thomas Yakovlev- Fredricksen which were trained in Moscow by a Buteyko disciple, Andrey Novozhilov.
The main purpose of their two courses of five sessions each is to gradually enable the client to lengthen the time between two actions of breathing.
This study is a new hope for people suffering from violent asthma.
mercredi 4 novembre 2009
Swine flu: Pregnant women in a safe state, but an alert one for Gaza City
Cocaine vaccine.
Yale School of Medicine housing a Study concerning a vaccine against cocaine addiction is my local story for my journalism class. Several websites and newspapers like CNN and the New York Times reported the study. Even though both explained the main concept of the study, apparently led by Dr Thomas Kosten, the CNN article really explained in details the study and answered some of my questions but didn’t fill the reader’s ignorance about Dr Kosten’s identity and job, while the Times’ didn’t say much about the study and was completely devoting his article to Dr Kosten and the many reactions to his study. They simply mentioned something about the use of the antibiotics but no more. And I wanted to learn more about it and I started wondering things, details, deeper information, questions, so that I started preparing an interview. I collected information that I put on my wiki page on bhsjournalism.pbworks.com and made of this page my resource information. Dr Kosten is a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas. I read more attentively the articles from the newspapers and learned that Dr Bridget Martell, from Yale School of Medicine, was part of this study, and I wanted to know more about her role, and why they actually studied on that. So I contacted her by mail and I asked her, after introducing myself and making clear that my approach was within the framework of the journalism class of my High School, if we could meat or have a brief conversation so I could ask her some questions. She accepted and proposed a brief discussion over the phone, even though I would have preferred to see her. Our first appointment was a disaster. She had a medical emergency and she couldn’t warn me so I waited for four hours after calling three times, waiting for an answer. We finally agreed that it would be too difficult for her to actually take some real time to speak with me, because of the intensity of her job. I sent her a mail including my questions and she will answer those within the week. I’m happy to finally interview her but I’m disappointed because a mail questioning isn’t a real interview. The best thing that could have happened was if I actually had met her but it was impossible.
I am still waiting for her answers so I will be able to share those and my impressions with you. But I would like you to tell me what your impressions and questions are.
By the way, as I did to Dr Martell, I'd like to ask you: Do you think that this study is really relevant?