BBC News (June 19, 2019) Women not aware enough of breast cancer link to alcohol. BBC News. Available at https://www.bbc.com/news/health-48677953 (Accessed June 19, 2019).

Consumption of alcohol is a risk factor for developing breast cancer. Women who drink 2 units of alcohol a day increase their risk of developing breast cancer from 8% to 11%. Because I am a woman with a family history of breast cancer but I only drink minimal amounts of alcohol at social events, my perceived susceptibility of developing breast cancer is still only based on my family history. However, my perceived severity of breast cancer is high because I could get very sick and/or die from it. This information about alcohol increasing the risk of breast cancer affects my thoughts by making me think I should continue to drink minimal amounts of alcohol, as it is a risk factor I can control. I did not have any background knowledge that drinking alcohol increased the risk of breast cancer. Comparing my knowledge that drinking alcohol may affect heart health and can affect liver health helped me realize that it can affect other parts of the body as well. This led me to understand that it increases the risk of breast cancer. I interpreted the number of units of alcohol that increases the risk of breast cancer (2) as far lower than the recommended alcohol limits for men and women per day (14). Slovic’s work described how if a risk is familiar one might not think of it as risky as an unknown risk. Slovic’s work does not apply to my own perceptions of the risks of breast cancer. Even though drinking alcohol is a familiar risk like driving a car as opposed to an unknown risk like nuclear weapons and genetically modified food I took this into account in my perceptions. Although 14 units of alcohol is the recommended limit to drink a day and a familiar risk I perceived that to lower my risk for breast cancer I would need to drink a much lower amount, less than 2 units of alcohol a day.

Mammoser, Gigen. (June 13, 2019). Starting School Later in the Morning Helps Teens Get Their Homework Done. Heathline. Available at https://www.healthline.com/health-news/pushing-back-school-help-teens-get-homework-done (Acessed June 17, 2019).

A.) Because kids’ and teens’ sleep cycles change over the course of puberty, they tend to wake up later at around eight or nine in the morning. But unfortunately, school usually starts way before then, distrubing their sleep cycles and making them more tired and unfocused during school hours and thereafter. To find a way to make teens more energized and focused throughout the school day, a study was done where a school district volunteered to start the school day about an hour later at or after 8:30 am.

B.) Over the course of the school year starting from the fall of 2017 until the spring of 2018, the study took place at Cherry Creek School District, where more than 15,000 students in the grades 6-11 participated in the study by taking surveys on their condition in response to the new time change. The intervenion was incredibly effective as students had more sufficient sleep and on the weekends lessened oversleeping by 38 minutes. Fewer students reported being too sleepy to do homework and there was a signifigant increase of academic engament during school hours.

C.) While I can’t think of anything to be seen as confounding, as sleeping-in leading to more energization throughout the day seems to be pretty striaght-forward. Speakig from personal experience, I definately felt more energized throughout the school day when I woke up at around eight am instead of the usual five am. However, the study design could be improved upon. For example, whose to say that the students who reported their conditions didn’t just lie so that they could sleep in more instead; having to go to school later doesn’t necessarily mean that they will go to bed around an apporpriate time. I think that the teachers and parents should have also had a survey distributed to see if the students claims really are true, and thus have more consistent findings.

D.) I think it’s very possible for this to catch on again, as this has happened before in the past. I myself used to go to school that started at around 9:00 am when I was in elementary, however, for some reason my school district set the start time earlier and earlier from middle school to high school to the point where I would wake up at around 5:00 am. In theory, I think if this study was proposed to my school district for instance, as being more healthy for the students, they would be willing to consider changing it back to 9:00 am. Though I think the reason it was set earlier is because of the fact that parents need to get to work on time and can’t do that if their kids need a ride to school. Though a way to solve that would be to reinstate school buses again, and maybe possibly change the starting time of workplaces themselves. It could possibly be marketed as “new” and “innovative” since now there are studies that prove what is the most effective for sleep cycles and class focus. This study could also be interpreted to the sleep cycles of employees and wanting to monopolize their time and energy to their work. Essentially, this will only be changed if it benefits adults as well, as adults are the ones who would make a decision on this implementation.

https://www.thenewsguard.com/news/study-shows-lgbt-youth-at-increased-risked-of-substance-use/article_f145d240-88b0-11e9-8b3f-1b81f3c9b03a.html

Klampe, Michelle. (June 9, 2019). Study shows LGBT youth at increased risked of substance use. The News Guard. Available at https://www.thenewsguard.com/news/study-shows-lgbt-youth-at-increased-risked-of-substance-use/article_f145d240-88b0-11e9-8b3f-1b81f3c9b03a.html (Accessed June 19, 2019).

This article discusses the increased usage of substances by LGBTQ identifying young women. Klampe says that the “odds of substance use among females who identify as sexual minorities… is 400 percent higher than their heterosexual female peers” (2019). This difference in substance use starts as young as 13 years old and can increase as these women enter their 20s. In general, research has shown that LGBTQ youth may appear to use substances almost three times more than their counterparts (Klampe, 2019). Although I am a bit out of the age group that they ran their initial study on, I am still within the range of interest. It is likely that if I am not aware of my actions, I can become susceptible to this issue, especially depending on the people that I am surrounded by and their relationship with substances. In my opinion, substance use is a pretty severe problem because it affects a person’s entire lifestyle – from physical health to mental health to work performance. It can be very detrimental to someone’s overall life. I think it is really important for young people to be aware of their relationship with alcohol, nicotine, and/or marijuana because it can escalate out of control as people begin to depend on these substances as coping mechanisms for the hardships in their lives. LGBTQ youth deal with higher rates of discrimination, depression, and violence, so it makes sense that they may abuse substances. However, these statistics say more about how much help the community needs because substances only further add to the issues people may face. In my experience, I have seen my LGBTQ friends use substances more, and at a younger age, than my heterosexual peers, because my LGBTQ friends dealt with more mental health issues and family instability. It is important to address substance abuse because it can impact the entire community, much like HIV/AIDs. Substance use is a disease that many people do not acknowledge, but it can drastically change people’s health outcomes. To interpret the numbers, I broke down 400% to about 4x more in order to conceptualize it with people.

It seems to me that Slovic is claiming that the unknown and uncontrollable factors frighten people more than familiar causes, such as automobile incidents. In this case, I think Slovic’s work would apply. Although the media discusses celebrities’ overdoses and fatal endings due to substances, there is not much discussion on how substances affect everyone else. People also are unaware of what is considered substance abuse, so they do not always know when their usage is becoming excessive or harmful. Substance use has become normalized in our society, so it is becoming harder for people to understand the gravity of its consequences.

Sandoiu, Ana. (June 13, 2019). Red meat and death risk: Study offers new insights. Medical News Today. Available at https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/325456.php (Accessed June 16, 2019).

A. and B.) The article details that people who increase their intake of red meat in their diet had a higher risk percentage of death than people who decreased their intake. It all stems from an eight-year study conducted by Professor Yan Zeng of Shanghai University, and Frank Hu and Fredick J. of Harvard University. They studied about 53, 553 women and 27, 916 men without any cardiovascular diseases and cancer at the start of the study (Sandoiu 2019). From years of observation and research, they found that an increase of red meat by half a serving per day increased the mortality rate by 10%, and for half a serving of both processed and unprocessed red meat, it increased the mortality rate by 13%. “Prof. Zheng and team found that people who increased their total amount of daily processed meat intake by half a serving or more were 13% more likely to die from any cause. Increasing unprocessed meat by the same amount daily led to a 9% rise in all-cause mortality risk” (Sandoiu 2019). In comparison to the groups that decreased their red meat consumption, their mortality rate did not change. They also found that this effect did not change no matter the subgroup of age, physical activity, dietary quality, smoking status, and alcohol consumption. The mortality rate lowered when subjects decreased their red meat intake and instead ate alternatives such as nuts, fish, skinless poultry, dairy, eggs, vegetables over the course of the study (Sandoiu 2019). The conclusion of this study was that if you eat less red meat and instead used other means of protien, you’ll lower your chances of premature death.

C.) I feel like I have a high chance to be affected by this health revelation because red meat is in my diet, and while I’m not consistent in what I eat, I do have brief periods of eating red meat in a discernable amount that could possibly raise my risk of mortality. I think it would be pretty bad if I managed to gain an illness because of this as I have a potential risk of a lot of dieseases due to my genetic history. Examples being, type 2 diabetes, cancer, stroke, alzheimers, etc; Some of them, more closer to me than others. This article has made me more cautious of how much red meat I should consume from now on when I choose dishes for my next meal.

D.) While I can’t say I have a deeply emotional response to this article, my mental process was more along the line of what I need to do in oder to prevent my mortality rate going up in terms of monitoring my diet, and my family members’ diet. There’s nothing really specific I can draw upon besides the fact that I know that red meat is not all that good for the body prior to reading this article. Knowing how much red meat should be consumed is similar to the food pyramid that we are all taught in elementary school. Less than a serving of meat (3-5 oz), and 5 to 13 servings of fruits and vegetables everyday. This also reminds me of counting clories that people typically do in order to burn off the right amount each day. I didn’t really use much in terms of processing the numbers, as I feel what the article was conveying to me was simple enough to process.

E.) I can relate to Slovik’s assessment of risk because while I am concerned about development of diseases due to unsavory red meat consumption, I am not particulary panicky about it as it is something I am vaguely familiar with, or something I’ve heard about my enitre life whether the numbers are correct or incorrect. Talking about diet is one of the most common topics in regards to health, and this extra bonus doesn’t necessarily shake me up as finding out about some unkown disease or an upcoming pandemic. Even if heart disease is the number one killer in the U.S, knowing how to tackle it brings ease to my mind regardless of the fact that I have a high chance of dying from it.

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2019-06-03/lesbian-gay-youth-at-higher-risk-for-self-harm

Mozes, Alan. (June 3, 2019) Lesbian, Gay Youth at Higher Risk for Self-Harm. U.S. News. Available at https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2019-06-03/lesbian-gay-youth-at-higher-risk-for-self-harm (Accessed at June 3, 2019).

The behavior discussed in the article is of non-suicidal self-harm and how it is higher for those in the LGBT community versus the Heterosexual community. According to the article LGBT teens self-harm rate was between 38%-53% while the self-harm rate from heterosexual teens was much lower 10%-20%. This makes the relative risk rate between 2.65-3.8. So LGBT teens are 3.8 times more likely to self-harm than straight people. Since I am finishing up my teen years as a member of the LGBT community I feel like I am less susceptible now, however I did fall susceptible to self-harm as a teenager. Being older means that I have a stronger support system and better understanding of the impact of therapy. Developing the issue was very bad and took a long time to overcome and be able to talk about it. While the article clarifies that the self-harm studies was specifically non-suicidal, once starting to self-harm it can easily lead to suicidal idealization. Not only can it lead to suicidal thoughts, once one begins self-harming it can lead to higher risk of infection from open wounds not properly taken care of, as well as worsening depression as it becomes an unhealthy coping mechanism that becomes difficult to replace with a healthy one. This article affected my thoughts about self-harm for LGBT teens because while it discusses most of the direct causes are isolation and bullying, it can also develop because of the higher risk of mental illness such as depression and anxiety LGBT teens face. A lot of emphasis is put on the higher rates of suicide in the LGBT community but I feel that now with these statistics and the fact that it is not on a decline, that we need to focus also on prevention or information about self-harm.

This story meant a lot for someone who is LGBT and who has dealt with self-harm and mental illness and realizing that while my mental illness was not brought on due to me being LGBT as I had a supportive group of friends and family, I know that being a lesbian added to my anxiety and stress. Even when one has a better childhood it still does not mean that the outside factors of not knowing who will be accepting and who won’t, if it is safe to be myself in public or not can add a lot of stress. Combine the stress of an already hate filled world with the confusing time of being a teen and questioning ones sexuality will of course lead to mental health issues and self-harm issues. For this article I drew on personal experiences as well as those shared by in person friends or online friends who also struggled with self-harm and being LGBT. I considered that all teens face extreme stress during that time of their life, and that it can only be exacerbated when there is something else about you that is deemed different and therefore a reason to hate. Since the numbers were in a range I assumed it had to do with different parts of the LGBT facing their own levels of self-harm based on acceptability. For example Trans members probably have a higher percentage of self-harm than gay men because gay men are slightly more accepted in our society.

Slovic’s work on risk and the public perception of risks do not really relate to self-harm. However similar mindset can be applied to figure out why LGBT are at a higher risk of self-harm having to do with public perception. Slovic talks about how it is important how the public are introduced to something in relation to how big of a risk they will see it as. The public’s perception of the LGBT community is still one of fear and misunderstanding, some accept some only tolerate but in order for the self-harm rate to drop LGBT teens must feel accepted and loved for who they are. While public perception is slowly changing it needs to change quicker and better for the risk of self-harm to go down. LGBT teens still feel isolated, taught they are dirty and wrong by evangelists and current political stances. Some of the so called LGBT representation on tv can hurt teens even more and make them feel more isolated. We are the ones for comedic relief, or the ones who die, or the ones who even in fiction are discriminated against it only serves to isolate them further. I feel to help lower the self-harm rate then first public perception of us must change.