Category: A01: Purposeful Summaries

Principal Encourages Cheating

It seems counterintuitive that a principal, whose job it is to enforce and promote a love of learning, would encourage teachers to help students cheat. However, at Cayuga Elementary School, that is what is allegedly happening.

Teachers at Cayuga Elementary have confessed that they were told by their boss, the principal of the school, to “do whatever had to be done” in order to improve scores on the upcoming state exam. Those statements are backed up by research showing that the odds of a pattern of erasures on a fourth grade reading test were one in 100 million.  With a national education system that puts so much emphasis and power on exam scores, it does not seem so far-fetched. Since improving the district’s test scores, cheating or not, Cayuga has been granted more flexibility in curriculum and more money. According to reports, Principal Cortez was going out of her way to cheat on these exams. Between bluntly telling teachers to check student’s answers before writing them in the booklets, or coming in suspiciously early and going into a locked room where the test booklets were kept, Cortez did anything possible to improve the test scores.

Overall, Cortez might not be the only one to blame. When a school’s performance is being based solely on one state test, even a powerful figure may feel like there are few choices besides cheating. The fact that possible cheating was able to reward the Cayuga district with more funding and more curriculum flexibility even though the students were not really performing at the expected level, shows that maybe school evaluations must go a little deeper than just one state exam.

Do Multivitamins Really Work?

It seems counterintuitive that multivitamins, which have been promoted by countless doctors and media outlets, could really be doing nothing to strengthen human health. In reality, multivitamins may just be perpetuated by business who want to make a profit.

The supplement industry is a 28 billion dollar business and it’s continuing to grow. Today, about one in three people take multivitamins. However, research has shown that not only are vitamin deficiencies rare in the US, but the multivitamins don’t do much to make the average person more healthy. In fact, some supplement takers may actually be exceeding the recommended amount of vitamins. To top it all off, research has concluded that nearly one third of labels on multivitamins are misguided or somehow at fault. So the multivitamin that claims to boost immune systems, may actually be causing vitamin overdose which could lead to several health issues such as birth defects or heart disease.

All in all, most healthy Americans do not truly need daily multivitamins. Despite persuasive ads that make people believe that multivitamins could help them in more ways than one, businesses are just feeding off of the nutritional insecurities that Americans tend to have.

Men Defining Rape

It seems counterintuitive that men have dictated the meaning of rape since the beginning of time despite the fact that rape happens to both genders, and more often women. However, that is what has happened over the course of history.

It all began in 1290 in Britain when Todd Akin attested that if a woman got pregnant then she could not have been raped, since only consent allows conception. In this case, technically, it is legal to rape a woman if she became pregnant because in their eyes it was not rape. As a male, it would be impossible for him to know for sure that in every case where a woman became pregnant she gave consent. The only parties that would know would be the people directly involved in the behavior, and it would be unique to every case. Another example of a man deciding when it is or isn’t okay to rape a woman took place in 1670. Sir Matthew Hale dictated that a man could legally rape his wife because she was bound to him. Even though these example seem far in the past, this is still happening today. The majority of males from the Republican Party press for bills that defund services for rape victims. Their justification is that “non-forcible” rapes should not be covered by federal funding. As with the case in 1290, how is a man to judge whether a rape is non-forcible? The woman victim is the one who knows whether or not she was forced, not the man who judges whether or not to fund her abortion.

The future is not all dark, though. Over time there has been a new wave of feminism that is challenging male power on the topic of rape. Many men do not take these women seriously but they continue to fight and some changes have been seen. The male domination on this topic has led many women to be fearful of even telling anyone about their rape. It is time that men begin letting women have a say on rape, so that all victims can feel safe and protected.

 

It seems counter-intuitive that a government would give its citizens heroin for free. Heroin in many countries is taboo to the extent that it is not only illegal but frowned upon. Governments tend to reprimand individuals who use illegal drugs, but not Vancouver. Vancouver is giving heroin to it’s addicts for free.

Vancouver has had a history with drug related crime for years due to the vast amount of heroin addicts present in the city. Initially, a safe zone was instilled for addicts were they could use heroin with the supervision of a nurse without the threat of being arrested. This place is known as Insite. Here they give them clean syringes, antiseptic wipes, and other equipment that makes taking heroin a bit safer.

Now, instead of just giving someone instruments for heroin use, in extreme cases they distribute heroin to them for free as well. This counter-intuitive idea is not for everyone. Currently only 26 people in Vancouver are given heroin due to their inability of their bodies to take to the heroin alternatives being studied and the heroin must be prescribed by a doctor.

By giving these individuals heroin and a place to use it, this program is a form of harm reduction. Drug users are synonymous with  crime such as armed robbery, breaking and entering, sex trafficking, etc. This is due to the physiological and physical dependency on the drug. By giving them a place to use the drug, the instruments, and the drug itself.

Although at first glance the program Insite is absurd, after learning about the good it is capable of as far as the community is concerned, it is exactly what the city needs. By eliminating the reason a group of people commit crime and giving them what their body is hooked on so they will not die, is killing two birds with one stone.

https://mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decriminalized-all-drugs-here-s-what-s-happening#.UHn1lq2E3

It seems counterintuitive that a country could decriminalize all drugs, and yet, the amount of overdoses in that country decrease over time. About 15 years ago, Portugal did this. You can now have a maximum of a 10 day supply of any drug with no legal consequences there. The 15-24 year old population has decreased their volume of drug usage significantly. In addition to that, drug induced deaths and infections from needles have both also declined. This makes me wonder how these statistics can be true, just from simply giving the people easier, consequence-free access to illegal narcotics. I just think that what makes drugs so popular among teens and young adults is the risk factor. People get an indescribable thrill from doing things they are not supposed to do. When you randomly declare that narcotics are no longer illegal, i think the majority of drug users were eventually discouraged from using because they no longer felt as though they were breaking the rules. This example is living proof that different forms of reverse psychology can be effective. Not that this method is guaranteed to be effective everywhere, but it was a good thing in Portugal. But who knows; it could be equally effective other places as well, considering that drug usage does not seem as cool when everybody can do it without repercussions.
http://wxxinews.org/post/dying-man-s-last-wish-ends-fight-donate-his-organs

It seems counterintuitive that a person could willingly end their life to save the life of another person. A resident of South Orange, New Jersey was nearing the end of his battle with ALS, and wanted to cut his battle short to make his death meaningful in a positive way for somebody else going through their own struggles. He was denied at first, but strongly believed in what he was doing so continued to push the envelope. Approximately 22 people dying per day in the United States while waiting for an organ transplant is an astounding number. This statistic proves how meaningful something like that is, because you know new organs are in high demand for many people. In the long run, they were able to find a match, and the transplant was successful. Nevertheless, it is still crazy to think that this man could fight as long as he did, and technically pull the plug on himself. An act of courage that serious provides hope for humanity now and in the future. Extending another person’s life in the process of losing your own is an incredibly selfless way to die. It has to be extremely difficult to make that decision, but that is the definition of living a purposeful life. The man was able to bring happiness to his loved ones for as long as he could, and then bring the happiness that comes along with saving a life to a family in need.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/05/toms-shoes-buy-one-give-one

It seems counterintuitive that a company can increase their profit margin by giving their product away. Toms shoes claims that for every pair of Toms they sell, they give a par to somebody in need in a developing country. Taking into consideration how cheap it is to make Toms, giving them away does not hurt at all when you look at all of the exposure the company is getting. There are plenty of people that want to help the cause. People see that they help children and need and are immediately on board. The company probably sells them for double or triple what they cost to manufacture, meaning that free pairs still lead to a huge profit on a global scale. Not to be taken out of context, I believe this is a great idea and has helped countless amounts of needy children and families over the years. Nevertheless, it has been discovered that Toms has very limited information on their website regarding how many people they have helped or how many shoes they have sold. Interesting statistics that somebody supporting the cause would love to see, are not there. I have seen pictures of underprivileged children wearing Toms and I know many people have been helped by this, but it is just slightly suspicious why facts like this cannot be seen on the site. Without a doubt, they are a productive and helpful company. But, in a world where everything is a business when it comes down to it, you wonder who actually does things like this for the right ethical reasons. Much like most other companies, Toms would have never started and would not still be here today if they knew they would not be putting money in their own pockets as well.

Heroin for Heroin addicts?

http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-02-04/vancouver-combats-heroin-giving-its-addicts-best-smack-world

It seems counter intuitive that heroin is suddenly being prescribed to heroin addicts in Canada. This rehabilitation method that Canada has not to long ago adopted is not meant to stop addicts from using heroin but, in the words of Allen Schauffer, correspondent for Al Jazeera, “lets provide you with heroin so you are the least dangerous drug addict you can possibly be.”. The program is only available for those with the very worst addictions. Essentially stating that recovery would be, too difficult of a process for a heroin addict so the government would rather give you heroin, rather than having one commit a crime to obtain the heroin. This is basically one big blackmail scheme. The addicts get their heroin or else they may be forced to commit petty crime. Many obviously disagree with this program, but as an example this program has been used in European countries and has turned out to be successful.

Do Multi-vitamins work?

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/02/econundrums-do-vitamin-supplements-work

It seems counter intuitive that multi vitamins the pieces of candy we as children were fed daily, to not only stay healthy but to get healthier are now deemed useless. Nearly a third of Americans take Multi vitamins regularly. Whilst there is no evidence of these vitamins increasing a persons health status. Companies like the Vitamin Shoppe are raking in over $700 million dollars annually, by basically selling people sugar tablets. Some officials state that taking multis can prevent chronic illneess but a 2009 study shows that multis did not prevent any of the ilnesse studied such as heart disease, lung cancer, colon cancer and breast cancer. Could people have been throwing away all of their hard earned money all these years? Possibly. Multis still do give one the vitamins needed but some brands may give an exceeding dosage. For example one brand has given double the amount of daily recommended dosage of vitamin A and zinc.

---

How earbuds damage the ear

http://kidshealth.org/en/teens/earbuds.html

It seems counter intuitive that earbuds, the most commonly used portable sound device, can give someone permanent hearing damage. They are essentially tiny speakers insanely close up to your ear. Now listening to music with them at low volumes is safe, but as soon as that volume gets higher you can run the risk of permanent hearing loss. Motorcycle engines are as loud as 100 decibels. having the sound of that in ones ear for a little less than half an hour can cause damage. Ipods and mp3 players at 70% volume put out 85 decibels almost any higher and those ear buds will start doing damage. Society is living in a very technologically advanced time, and this is granting kids access to mp3 players and earbuds at a very young age. Therefore increasing the chances of hearing damage and loss in teens. Are earbuds a product that need warning labels on them? Or do earbuds need to be age restricted?

The  Mormon Baptism of Anne Frank

It seems counterintuitive that Anne Frank, the well known Jewish Holocaust victim and author of a best-selling diary, be baptized by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons). And yet, it has happened, multiple times.

Violating a 2010 pact between Jewish Leaders and the Mormon Church, which stated that the church would prevent proxy baptism requests for victims of the Holocaust, a Mormon temple in the Dominican Republic did what it wasn’t supposed to do, and baptized Frank. If searched up on a Mormon-exclusive database that is used for genealogy and to submit a deceased person’s name for the chance of a proxy baptism, Frank’s name will show up with the word “completed” next to the words “Baptism” and “Confirmation”. This all seems outlandish, but it isn’t the first time to have happened.

From 1989 to 1999, Mormons have given Anne Frank’s name over a dozen times to be included in proxy rites, with the ritual  actually being carried out at least nine times.

Mormons posthumous proxy baptisms for Holocost victims and Jews who are not directly related to them have persisted, even after Mormon and Jewish leaders came to an agreement in 1995 for the church to stop these types of baptisms, with only if the victim or Jew in question was a direct ancestor of the submitter  being allowed. This makes Frank’s baptism even more shocking, as she was an unmarried teenager with no descendants. Another similar incident involved Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel. Even though she is still a living Holocaust survivor who helped campaign for the 2010 pact, she was recently submitted to the database as “ready” for the posthumous proxy baptism.

All that the Mormon Church had to say about the matter was that it keeps its word and that there is a firm commitment not to accept the names of the victims for proxy baptism. Only time will tell if this statement is true.

The Counterintuitive Nature of Armored Planes and The World

It seems counterintuitive that planes be armored only in the places where there weren’t any bullet holes after a dangerous mission. And yet, once looked into, it makes perfect sense.

Common thinking would be that the areas where the planes were penetrated by bullets would be where to put the new armor. Clearly, those are the places that attracted the most fire, and therefore needing  the most protecting. This is fairly obvious, but also quite wrong.

If a plane makes it back to its base safely, even with  bullet holes in certain areas, then there is the proof that those damaged sections are not very dangerous to the pilot. If the wings are filled with bullet holes, but still operate well enough for the plane to land, then they do not need to be armored up.

This leaves the places in need of armor as the ones that barely or don’t have any bullet holes. These are the places that are exposed and can cause a greater threat if damaged. Planes with bullet holes in these places never come back.

Armored planes, however, are not the only examples of counterintuitivity in our world. Take a situation with an Air Force flight instructor and his two students. The one students who performed brilliantly the maneuver the first time, was  statistically shown to have performed has well the second go round. However, the second student, who was yelled at after screwing up the initial maneuver, was shown to perform the second maneuver much better.

Likewise, people tend to go to the doctor only when their illness has gotten really bad. Once over with the appointment, they feel much better. It isn’t always because the doctor did something, however. Sometimes it is a natural psychological consequence that people experience due to the appointment.

A final example has to do with how weak people are at calculating how much variance there is to the things that take place during the day. Not every natural variance in life has a reason for it, but people still enjoy making up reasons anyways. It’s in our counterintuitive nature.

The Mundane Death… By Shower

It seems counterintuitive that a death by shower can be more important than a death by gunman. And yet the truth has a tendency to appear this way.

As Americans, we always obsess over the wrong happenings, failing to watch for the real dangers in the process. We exaggerate the risks of events that are beyond our control and that will cause our deaths in spectacular fashion- gunman, plane crash, genetically modified crops, etc.- while underestimating any of the risks that may come from events that we have total control over.

A common cause of death in older individuals is falling , whether in a shower, down steps, or from a ledge. Another death is caused by the falling of a dead tree over a tent housing campers. Even though the campers knew that the tree was dead, they decided to take their chances and set up camp right under. This type of careless behavior leads to the deaths of many people.

It is better for people to let themselves experience “constructive paranoia”, which is the hypervigilant attitude toward any repeated low risks. Many individuals who have already adopted this mindset do so after witnessing the deaths of others due to carelessness.

Don’t let  the hypervigilance  limit your life. Take part in dangerous activities, and live life to the fullest. Just try to make sure that you are paying attention to the little things that could cause some type of serious accident.

Cute, sexy, sweet, funny

It seems counterintuitive that the things people find cute or sweet, such as a baby or apples, don’t inherently show those characteristics but instead become what humans have evolved to find them. However, everything that we perceive around the world becomes a construct on how we perceive the world and everything we were evolved to perceive.

The simple fact that we perceive the objects around us by evolutionary advantages starts makes sense. A person can assume, ‘of course sugar tastes sweet because whatever makes up  sugar is sweet so therefore sugar is sweet,’ but that is not the case. All of these perceptions are based on a person’s brain interpreting things such as taste, which the brain then gives the sensation of the sweet taste. The reason why sugar and sugary foods taste so sweet is due to the fact that glucose is a very high source of energy. There is nothing in glucose’s molecular structure that determines that the food would taste sweet. Instead, it makes sense to search out and prefer the foods that would give a much higher energy source; so over time the brain found the foods with these glucose molecules much more desirable and gave these food the sensation of sweetness.

The same can be told about many other things that we believe to be inherent. A baby is ‘cute’ because we need it to be cute. Humans are hardwired to nurture their offspring, so we find our offspring cute so we immediately want to protect it. A human is deemed to be ‘sexy’ because the things that we find attractive showcases what we find beneficial in evolution wise and gives people the urge to mate; so we found those things attractive.  In fact, we can switch the objects such as sugar and arugula around but would inevitably think the same things. If something as bitter as arugula becomes a huge source of energy, we would then start to crave and perceive that food as something desirable.

The process of evolution and what humans need subconsciously shapes everything of the world that we perceive.  These sensations have become so embedded inside of our brains that it seems that is was luckily a coincidence that we find things such as ice cream sweet, but whatever can benefit the human race will eventually become desirable in our brains.

 

A new equation for intelligence

It seems counterintuitive that something as complex as intelligence can be replicated inside something as simple as an equation but the underlying drive that intelligence is based on maybe be able to be summarized by one single equation.

So what would be these huge convoluted equation that would try to incompace somthing as abstract as human intelligence? It so happens to be a simple 4 variable equation,”F = T ∇ Sτ”; where F is equal to the force that tries to keep any options as possible in the future, T equal to the strength of keeping options open, S equal to the diversity of the possible futures, and τ or tau equal to the time it would encompase. This equation seems to be completely random, but this equation is what solely drives the program known as Entropica.

Saying that an equation that drives a single software program encompasses all of intelligence does seem farfetched, but with this equation alone Entropica has solved many different problems that it seemingly should not have. Giving entropica a pole on cart, Entropica immediately assumed and achieved to keep the pole upright without being instructed to keep the pole up. Giving Entropica the simple game of pong, Entropica was able to play the game of pong against itself. Giving Entropica a map of the world, Entropica was able to direct the ships in the most optimal method of travel, including things such as discovering the Panama Canal on its own and then using it to further benefit the ships travel. Even giving Entropica something as complex as stocks, Entropica immediately figured out a strategy commonly used called the buy-low, sell-high strategy (which the name explains itself) and started to gain a profit. These very human like achievement by something that it

This program only equipped with the equation to optimize the options in the future started to achieve things that it wasn’t even directed to and found suprisingly efficient results. To say that all of intelligence is based off of one equation is farfetched, as it cannot replicate things such as human creativity or beauty that emotions drive. However, the very underlying drive of intelligence and what may drive may be simply drawn by “F = T ∇ Sτ”.

Why Trophy Hunting Can Be Good for Animals

It seems counterintuitve that allowing people to kill off endagered species would be beneficial to the species. After all, all trophy hunting is doing is killing something that is already in danger of extinction. However, in some situations it is much more benificial to allow trophy hunting than banning it.

The issue is even though trophy hunters are perceived to be a massive threat to the endangered species, they are not even close to the threat of poachers and habitat loss. As trophy hunters are regulated by what they kill and may kill one endangered animal, poachers illegally and massively kill endangered species in order to gain valuables such as ivory from the animals. Along with this, farmers are taking the land that these endangered species live in for their agriculture, which limits the population of the species as well.

The reason why trophy hunting can actually be helpful is even though they are killing off animals is that some nations are utilizing this demand and making a profit of it for animal conservation. From allowing someone to kill an such as an elephant or rhino for a price, the countries are able to take the money to help these animals. This money can become a huge source of income for wildlife organizations and may even go to communities which incentivizes them to protect the wildlife from poachers. In fact, this helped rhinos go from a population of 100 to 18,000.

The premise of killing animals to save animals seems quite bizarre and even immoral. However, the simple fact is that this process actually does help save endangered species in the long run for the price of one animal. It is much better to have one animal dead than for one species.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/02/econundrums-do-vitamin-supplements-work

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/charts-us-veterans-ptsd-war-iraq-afghanistan

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/12/12/belgium-senate-approves-measure-allowing-doctors-to-euthanize-children/

It seems counter intuitive but possibly true that U.S army men and women as well as the rest of the branches of military should fear the effects of PTSD more than actual battle. A crazy statistic to think about but one that is true is that every 80 minutes a veteran of ours dies by suicide. Some individuals don’t quite understand the reasons to why our vets have such a hard time readjusting to life back at home. Although, have you ever took in to account what our soldiers are actually witnessing during battle? Mostly every soldier in battle will witness one of these traumas; dead bodies, being shot at, sexual harassment, loneliness, being ambushed or finally just missing loved ones for so long. The effects this has on a person mental capabilities is astonishing.

Since 2001 we have had 1.5 million new vets. Out of those vets nearly 240,000 have PTSD and 50,500 have been wounded in action. PTSD stems from trauma you see in action. Effects of trauma can be anything from anxiety to skin rashes or much worse. This eventually leads to PTSD which can lead to depression, suicide, alcoholism, stroke, heart attack and so much more. According to the Washington Post in 2012 more soldiers died by their own hands rather than in battle; suicide was the number 1 cause of death that year.

According to the Department of Veteran Affairs 20 percent of female vets from Afghanistan and Iraq suffer from PTSD. What PTSD can do to a women is scary. They can suffer from risks like infertility, autoimmune disease and sexual problems. The long short of it is that many vets are seeking health care for this tremendously petrifying disease. The war is scary but what comes after it is just as lethal.

 

It seems counter intuitive that multivitamins a product known for helping the body don’t actually work. It is said that nearly one third of Americans use multivitamins regularly. The industry that sets at 700 million in earning keeps growing year after year. Although, do these vitamins actually work? According to author Marion Nestle there are is no evidence that they make healthy people healthier.

Manufactures of the multivitamins claim that they help prevent breast cancer and also keep your heart healthy. Although according to a study by postmenopausal women these vitamins in fact did not do either of their claims, nearly 39,000 other women agreed and came up with the same conclusions. A really scary part of vitamins is that regular users begin to become addicted in a way and sure come to eating more than just one a day thinking it will help more. Eating more vitamins than required may become unsafe. It can affect your folic acid intake and can make you digest too much iron. Folic acid if there be too much can lead to sores which cause cancer. Too much iron can cause heart disease and too much vitamin A in pregnant women can cause birth defects. The intake of these vitamins can be dangerous.

The FDA doesn’t regulate the labeling of supplements. The industry believe sin their products and doesn’t want a warning label. the Food and Drug Administration doesn’t regulate the labeling of supplements. Unfortunately not all companies take care of their products as well. According to a test done by ConsumerLab.com, about one third of 60 common multivitamins labels were found to be wrong. Some of these gummies exceeded the daily usage of certain vitamins like A and C.

Therefore most nutritionist support the cause of not eating these vitamins. Most Americans have a decent diet consumption of vitamins as it is. Don’t waste your money or your health.

 

It seems counter intuitive that most countries such as America and Europe express unity and life so much but then pass a law that extends the practice of Euthanasia. Euthanasia is commonly permeable in most places of Europe. However, the age limit has always been 18 years of age or above. Belgium will become the first country to lift all restrictions on euthanasia allowing children of all ages to be killed. The Belgium senate voted for this law and those who didn’t were mostly christian and didn’t believe in the act. Still, the law will be passed anyway and this could begin to cause an uproar.

According to Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition the current euthanasia law in Belgium states that it is only practicable to those 18 or above and with severe illnesses. However this new law has no age limit and will also make those who have disabilities (mental or not) and older people with Dementia applicable for euthanasia. Schadenberg goes on to say that regardless of disability, life should be valued. To pass legislation that allows termination of life for people with disabilities who are minors is unacceptable. He then goes on to explain that with the technology and resources we have we should give our best effort to come up with solutions to cure their pain.

The main concept is that this new law creates a huge ethical problem(Chris Van Geet). Van Geets own mother was Euthanized because of a depression and instead of being there all they got was a phone call right after. The leaders of Belgium’s Christian, Muslim and Jewish communities appose this law with a passion and feel like so many others this law is immoral. The enormous concern about the new euthanasia law is the abuses that can come with it. According to a study conducted by the Canadian Medical Association Journal, about 32% of euthanasia related deaths were performed without an explicit request. This law is nothing but trouble and way out of line. Without consent of either the patient or the parents, no persons death should be chosen for them.

 

 

1.) Always the Sidekick: Asians on Film

It seems counterintuitive that Hollywood is trying to gain a greater Eastern Asian audience by embracing Asian culture, while still only utilizing Asian talent in stereotyped or minor roles.

The Chinese movie industry is on its way to overshadow Hollywood, and in response, the American film industry is attempting to reach out to Eastern Asian viewers. Unfortunately, even with a lineup of heavily inspired Asian films such as The Wall, Kubo and the Two Strings, and Ghost in the Shell, Hollywood is more inclined to cast or focus on white actors in what should be Asian roles.

However, this line of thinking has backfired on Hollywood. For example, the original Oldboy made in South Korea saw more success at the box office than the whitewashed remake that still played heavily on Asian culture without an Asian cast. Star Wars: Rogue One’s Asian characters had a negative impact on Chinese viewers due to their “tokenized” nature.

Nevertheless, it appears Hollywood refuses to break away from their backwards thinking on Asian casting. If they truly wish to do better in the Eastern Asian box office, they will have to make a change in their use of Asian talent.

2.) Player Protests: When Athletes Stand Up (or Kneel) for Social Justice Issues

It seems counterintuitive that sports, an industry used for entertainment, can be a form of protest and create a national conversation on the issue of social justice. Contrary to that belief, the sports industry is very much creating more talk around social justice.

Ever since Colin Kaepernick refused to stand for the National Anthem almost a month ago, more people have followed suit. Not only in professional American football, but in high school and college football, as well as other sports like soccer. This has also led to increased discussion of the issues that these athletes are protesting against like police brutality.

Considering athletes from the generation of Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan were less inclined to discuss, let alone protest about social justice issues, using the sports industry as a form of protest might seem like a foreign concept. However, athletes such as Muhammad Ali and Arthur Ashe would often use their platform as a means of bringing issues into the limelight.

But is all of this just talk? Fortunately, that is not the case. Colin Kaepernick has promised to donate one million dollars to groups in the bay area that are fighting against social inequality. His team, the 49ers, have vowed to match that.

Many might think that these conversations and forms of protest will slowly fade away, but with professional basketball games starting soon, it is very likely that this trend will only get stronger from here.

3.) South Korea Prepares for ‘Worst Case Scenario’ With North Korea

It seems counterintuitive that South Korea and its allies continue to hit North Korea with sanctions despite them continuing to do whatever they please.

North Korea has been proceeding with stronger and stronger nuclear tests which continue to put South Korea and other bordering nations like Japan at risk. The United States keeps on responding with greater sanctions, but North Korea finds these forms of attack “laughable.”

A possible counter to North Korea is to press China, North Korea’s only ally, into blocking the transportation of fuel and oil. Unfortunately, that would have a significant negative impact on their population. It is not apparent if China would make such a move.

In the end, it appears North Korea will not abide by any demands other nations place on it. Hua Chunying, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, suggests that “the US side should review developments of the issue, and carefully think about pragmatic and effective solutions.” As it stands, what she has to say may be the only way of ensuring safety for nations bordering North Korea and the world altogether since North Korea shows no sign of simply abiding by what other countries have to say.

It seems counterintuitive that many schools across America enforce such strict dress code policies on their students on the premise of creating “a safer educational environment that increases students’ ability to learn.” There’s nothing wrong with that goal except we must ask who the intended beneficiary is? Almost any school board or staff member will answer that these rules and restrictions are geared towards helping all students.

The problem is that this isn’t necessarily the outcome. Most restrictions in the typical middle or high school dress code policy are aimed at the female students. The most commonly enforced rules include restrictions on how much skin can be shown on the shoulders, chest and legs of a student. Many of these restrictions can be, for lack of a better word, overly restrictive.

More important than that is how female students are treated and punished when they violate these policies. Many are often removed from the class room and made to wait to return to class until a parent or guardian can bring them more suitable clothing. Some are even suspended or made to endure a humiliating punishment. One Florida high school student was forced to wear a large neon yellow shirt which boasted the title “DRESS CODE VIOLATOR” over her policy breaking outfit.

If the intention of a dress code policy is to create a healthy learning environment, then why are so many students pulled from class, given unnecessarily harsh punishment and sometimes made to leave school property? Does this not defeat the purpose of the dress code policy altogether? When is a student no longer considered an intended beneficiary of a school’s policies? Meanwhile, the number of rules pertaining to a male student’s attire is typically far less those which pertain to the female counter part. In addition, a common argument for why girls’ dress codes are typically so demanding is that inappropriately dressed female students can cause a distraction for male students, thus hindering their ability to thrive in a conducive learning environment. Now this concept alone is connected to an entirely different argument as to why there is such inequity in the treatment of male and female students.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/soraya-chemaly/every-reason-your-schools_b_8147266.html

I find it counterintuitive that the best way to make money of a new product is to give it away for free. However, there’s far more logic behind this concept than originally meets the eye. When starting a business or releasing a new product, the biggest issue many entrepreneurs face is building a client base. Building a client base requires a certain level of trust on the clients’ part and salesmanship on the merchant’s. They need to convince the client that the product or service is not only something they want but also something they can trust.

In order for a client to invest in a business, they need to have a level of confidence in seller’s ability to provide what they want at a value they can justify. The hard part is convincing them. So rather than sweet talk the client into parting with a chunk of their paycheck, offer the merchandise, with no strings attached, to the client. This will allow them to freely experiment and enjoy the product  without risk or worry that it wasn’t actually worth their time and involvement. Once a client realizes that the product is something they enjoy they’ll become attached and form a type of dependency on it. This is where the profit gets made. Once they’ve become convinced that this venture is worth their time, money and attention, they’ll pay for the product. Not only will this allow a salesman to form a client base, but also offering something for free will reach a larger audience because who doesn’t like free?

https://www.americanexpress.com/us/small-business/openforum/articles/how-to-make-money-by-giving-away-your-product-for-free/

It seems counterintuitive that some parents choose not to vaccinate their children for life threatening diseases for fear of their child developing arguably far less severe problems. Following the publishing of the infamous and fraudulent Wakefield research paper that claimed the development of autism was somehow linked to vaccinations, many parents decided that they’d rather take the risk of their child contracting diseases such as polio or small pox rather than develop autism. Even though the report has been long since discredited, many people still buy into the fear that autistic symptoms are related to vaccinations, which could save a child’s life.

The real trade off is deciding which disease or disorder you would prefer your child develop. Furthermore, not only are you risking the safety of your child but you’re risking the safety of those around you. Many of these diseases are incredibly dangerous and hard to beat, especially considering that many doctors have no real experience with them so an accurate and early diagnosis may be harder than expected.

http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/searching-for-answers/vaccines-autism?page=1

1) Are Multivitamins Dangerous ?

It seems counterintuitive that the multivitamins that claim they improve our health, actually can cause more harm to us then help maintain our health. Data has revealed that people who take multivitamins compared to those who do not take them are not healthier, rather they’re around the same health. The only true benefit to multivitamins would be for the companies who produced and manufacture multivitamins.

Therefore, those who have faith that the multivitamins they are consuming is helping improve their health are mistaken. In fact the multivitamins themselves are either not making someone any healthier compared to if they have not taken them at all or possibly worst. For example a study in 2009 has informed us that some women who have taken some multivitamins have resulted in such diseases as heart disease, lung, breast and colon cancer.

Furthermore, multivitamins not only lack the healthiness we desire from them instead they are a lucrative business for the companies who produce them. With all the people within America who buy vitamins, the effect is the vitamin companies such as The Vitamin Shoppe have billions of dollars. We yearn for healthiness from these vitamins to provide us with the nutrients we need in order to maintain good health however the vitamins that are available are not as healthily as they seem to be. Rather than going into the store and buying the multivitamins we perceive to be beneficial, we should stop and think about the effects some these multivitamins have on our bodies and realize that people who do not eat multivitamins are just as healthy and find an alternative to multivitamins for example if someone takes vitamins for iron instead of consuming the vitamins, eat meats, fish and poultry because contain a good source of iron.

2) Organ Donor Vultures ?

It seems counterintuitive that we portray organ donors in such a positive light such as its good to be a organ donor because people get the chance to save another person’s life however sometimes doctors are so quick to try to obtain a donor’s organs they ignore the donor’s health. If being a donor is such a positive thing, one would believe that organ donors would be treated greatly and the donor’s  health and condition would be a top priority for the doctors.

On the contrary the doctors are not so concerned with the health of the donor but more so concerned with getting the donors organs. By doctors going about organ denotations in such a way they fail to see the flaw in organ denotations. The flaw being created is that people become organ donors with a positive perspective of organ denotations however when the time comes a doctor may ignore the health of the donor and be anticipating the death of the donor.

Nevertheless when it comes to the health of the donor the doctors become skeptical because their priorities are not as the same as they typically assume them to be. Rather than to more so about making sure the organ donor is in good health, the doctors ignore the donors health and wait upon the organ donors death for their organs so they can take and use them how they please.

3) Improve Doctor Accountability

It seems counterintuitive that we look towards doctors for medicines and cures, however when the prescribed medicine fails to work we don’t give the doctor enough credit for the failure. Whenever people make a mistake we hold them responsible, so why do doctors not receive the same treatment. Rather than hold them accountable we discuss other factors that could have effected the failure. The issue doesn’t lie with us pointing out the different factors, the issue that stands before us is we only praise the doctors and seek their help for medicines and cures instead of also holding them accountable because they are people as well no one is perfect every one is bound to make mistakes and when this occurs they should be held accountable for their mistake.

Likewise to the doctors being human and being capable of making mistakes, a study revealed that an estimate 1 million people were harmed in the hospital every year from infections to injuries to surgical mistakes. We are too focused on how we embellish doctors by constantly bringing up how doctors save so many lives and cure diseases. Doctors have such a positive reputation at one point in society many people desired to become doctors as their profession. While doctors maintain such a good reputation they do not express the real issue. How can we allow people to maintain a profession to not be held accountable for the mistakes they c0mmitt?

In essence, to go along with the positive reputation doctors uphold that allows them to receive little to no credibility for their mistakes, a flaw may also be in the system itself. This situation has been occurring for years and perhaps the system doctors used has a role as well. Rather then doctors have a focus on curing the patient the doctor’s system is designed to focus more so on prescribing medicine to a patient instead of the patient’s results and whether or not the patient is healthy. Hospitals, also tie into the situation because the longer a person may stay within the hospital the more that person is charged. Not everyone person is financially stable or capable of staying in a hospital for a good length of time. By people leaving due to hospital bills being to high the duration of time that a doctor has to cure or give this person medicine is cut down as well. For example if a doctor has a patient who only stayed for 2 nights then the doctor must rush in order to find a cure because the patient is not staying for a long duration of time. Whereas another patient who stayed at the hospital for a week may get better treatment because the doctor has more time to treat this patient. Due to the hospitals effecting the doctors to work within a curtain amount of time it can affect the outcome of a patient and for this to change the doctors must speak with the hospital and change this because it may not completely be the doctors fault that they only have but so much time to work, however they must fix the system that they are in, because by them rushing it has caused many mistakes that have taken the lives of people.