The Beaker: Vol. 4, Issue 1

The Beaker California Dro ught

Raspberry Pi

HIV & Ebola

Vol. 4, issue 1

Contributors Editors in Chief--------------------------------------------Gokul Swamy Sona Trika Design Editors----------------------------------------------Kira Bender Ellen Shea Content Editor----------------------------------------------Alan Tang Writers-----------------------------------------------------Arman Arbab Lynn Bi* Ahana Chakraborty Hannah Elarabawy Sukruth Kadaba Flora Li Junyan Mak Nicholas Rui* Ellen Shea Shaan Trika** Advisor-----------------------------------------------------Frank Liao * denotes RB writer ** denotes Beaker Jr. Writer

Letter From The Editors Dear Readers, Welcome to your first issue of The Beaker for the 2015-2016 school year!

A new year means a new team and we are excited to hit the ground running with this summer release. We would also like to give a big thank you to Austin and Daniel for their hard work and support, and wish them both the best of luck in college and beyond.

This issue features several hot topics including the California drought and the latest on the HIV and Ebola viruses. Despite the heavier rainfall brought to drier areas in 2015, the drought is of serious concern. HIV-1 has been eliminated in cells in vitro, and Ebola, though less-oft discussed these days, is still an important virus to study. We hope that you gain a better understanding of the science behind these issues and find them as interesting as we did. The Beaker Jr. middleschool competitions continue to be successful with younger students becoming increasingly curious about science. This issue’s Beaker Jr. section covers a potentially dangerous phenomenon that all music addicts and concert lovers should be aware of. To explore the nature of human behaviour, Arman Arbab has written a fascinating, in-depth piece that intertwines science, history, and literature. Additionally, our friends at RB were so intrigued by what is happening here at The Beaker that they asked to write a couple articles of their own. We are thrilled that our work is reaching nearby schools and happy to see our peers getting involved!

So Nighthawks, welcome again to another year of The Beaker.

Hopefully, our team can pique your interest for all things STEM. Sincerely, Gokul Swamy and Sona Trika Editors in Chief radix-education.org/beaker beaker@radix-education.org

*Left Photo by Jerry Chen

Table Of Contents Are We Wired To Get Wired? (4)

Beaker Jr: Can’t See It, Can’t Hear it (5)

Opinion: Global Warming is a Real Issue (6)

Removing the Root (8)

The Radical Behaviorism of Burrhus Frederic Skinner (10)

(cont.)

From Golden State to Brown State: The Loss of Water Security (14)

Hitting the Sweet Spot (16)

Take a Byte! (17)

Ebola Virus Disease: A New Epidemic (18)

3

Are We Wired to Get Wired?

Studies identify genes that reveal information about caffeine metabolism

by Junyan Mak

Can’t live without coffee? A new study from Harvard’s School of Public Health has identified two new genes that help determine the impact of caffeine consumption. Depending on which gene a person possesses, he or she will be affected more by consuming the same amount of caffeine than a person with the other gene.

This genetic variance is important in understanding why people respond to the same stimulus in different ways.

According to Marilyn Cornelis, a research associate in the Department of Nutrition at Harvard School of Public Health, “Coffee and caffeine have been linked to beneficial and adverse health effects. Our findings may allow us to identify subgroups of people most likely to benefit from increasing or decreasing coffee consumption for optimal health” [1].

Pinpointing specific genetic variants has always been challenging. However, by conducting a genome-wide analysis of 120,000 regular coffee drinkers, Cornelis’ study showed that people must intake individual-specific amounts of caffeine to ex-

4

perience optimal effects. These two gene variants have been identified as POR and ABCG2, which are related to caffeine metabolism, as well as to two other gene variants, BNDF and SLC6A4, that influence the effects of the caffeine. These four genes help wake us up in the early mornings and kickstart our brains. In addition to directly increasing metabolism, the strongest genetic factors are shown to be linked to increased coffee intake [1].

In a study done by Brigham and Women’s Hospital, researchers created a review of 3 large studies over a 20 year period. They observed that participants who increased their daily coffee consumption by more than one cup a day over four years had an 11% lower risk of diabetes.

Because of this direct relationship, researchers from University of Toronto have proven people with the gene for slow caffeine metabolism had a 36% higher risk of heart attack if they drank up to three cups of coffee a day, compared with people carrying the same gene who only drank one cup a day. On the opposite end of the spectrum, those with the version of

the gene responsible for fast caffeine metabolism were observed to have a substantially lower risk of heart attack when drinking up to even three cups of coffee a day [1].

As stated by Harvard’s School of Public Health, several studies have linked coffee with positive health effects such as lowering the risk of Parkinson’s disease, liver disease, and Type II diabetes. Effects on cancer development and cardiovascular issues have not been substantially proven, however, and remain somewhat controversial. Although caffeine effects appear to be heritable, they vary widely among certain individuals. These four genes have not been focused on much in the past, so this breakthrough is a huge step forward in coffee and health comparative research. As Daniel Chasman states, “Like previous genetic analyses of smoking and alcohol consumption, this research serves as an example of how genetics can influence some types of habitual behavior.” These new observations offer new insight on taste conditioning and the habit forming effects coffee has which takes place in the mood circuitry part of the brain.

Beaker Jr: Can t See It, Can t Hear It Fortissimo, Forte, Mezzo Forte, Piano, Pianissimo

By Shaan Trika Every day, we hear a mélange of sounds -soft and graceful tones like birds chirping to harsh and grating noises like chainsaws. The impacts of these dangerous sounds accumulate to give us hearing loss problems in the long run.

The intense sounds we are bombarded by on a daily basis have deleterious effects on our sense of hearing in our inner ear, middle ear, and our cochlea [1]. Results published by Daily Mail reveal that hearing loss affects around 10 million people today -- the numbers are rising as we speak. Listening to music at a volume over 80 decibels increases the risk of hearing loss.

Damage can also occur if you listen to music over 120 decibels even for a few seconds.

Listening to music at 95 decibels for just two hours can be destructive. If you are at a rock concert, the volume is usually at least 100 decibels [2]. Because we cannot consciously recognize that our hearing ability is slowly deteriorating, this process is dubbed “hidden” hearing loss.

The two types of auditory deficiency are conductive and sensorineural hearing loss.

Conductive hearing loss usually takes place in the outer or middle ear. This problem may lead to “inefficient transfer of sound,” which means that the cochlea does not receive enough sound waves that it can interpret and send to the brain.

Sensorineural hearing loss occurs when the ear is detecting sound waves but not all of them are being sent to the auditory cortex [1]. Extremely loud and unsafe noises can permanently impair the inner ear, “destroying delicate hair cells or nerve fibers without causing pain or providing any other obvious warning signs than occasionally ringing in the ears” [5]. The synapse between the nerve terminal and the hair cell is the “most vulnerable part of the neuron” [5]. "’Each missing synapse represents a cochlear

nerve fiber that has been disconnected due to retraction of the terminal segment -- it will never reconnect, it no longer responds to sound, and, within a few months or years, the rest of the neuron will disappear’” (Liberman qtd. in “Science Daily”).

It is easy to believe that because listening to loud music and going to blaring concerts has become common and acceptable, doing so is perfectly safe. To avoid having to wear hearing aids in the future, it is important to protect your ears by consciously taking steps to turn the headphone volume down and stand as far away from concert speakers as possible. If it is already too late, there is a way to prevent further damage. Hearing aids are the answer; they are small devices that can fit inside your ear to refine your hearing. If you are experiencing issues, it is of crucial to invest in these devices to prevent further impairment.

Young teenagers are extremely vulnerable to this affliction. More than 600,000 people admit to feeling embarrassed when wearing hearing aids, causing hidden hearing loss statistics to rise higher than ever [2]. The best path to avoid this ailment is to understand the implications of and take preventative measures against this phenomenon. Only then will we be able to take action and see what we once couldn’t hear.

Please email us at beaker@radix-education.org if you or someone you know is interested in writing for The Beaker Jr.

Opinion: Global Warming is Real Issue In an unprecedented turn of events, the Pope came out as a supporter of the science behind climate change.

Of course, in a completely precedented turn of events, politicians like Rick Santorum geared to challenge this opinion [1]. Despite holding a degree as a chemical technician, Pope Francis was told

by Santorum to “leave science to the scientists,” an ironic statement for a climate-change denier to make.

Presidential candidate Jeb Bush joined the ranks of politicians to condemn the Pope’s completely sensible position by saying that “religion ought to be about making us better as people and less about things that end up getting in the political realm” [2]. Of course, Bush’s positions on religion in politics are never internally inconsistent, which is presumably the reason why Bush said, in opposition to the recent Supreme Court gay marriage ruling, that “[i]t is now crucial that as a country we protect religious freedom and the right of conscience and also not discriminate” [3].

While distressing on the whole, these skeptical climate-change statements are nothing new on the political stage. In reference to ISIS and climate change, presidential contender Mike Huckabee quipped in January that “[a] beheading is a far greater threat to an American than a sunburn” [4], a misunderstanding that was almost as disturbing as that one time Senator Jim Inhofe threw a snowball on the senate floor in order to disprove global warming, once and for all [5]. Also, Zayn is coming back to One Direction.

Only that third one was a joke.

But while scientists occasionally disagree as to exactly how climate change will play out, the fact that climate change is

6

happening is no longer up for debate, no matter how many politicians would like to believe that.

A paper from as early as 2000 by Lonnie G. Thompson from Ohio State University noted that the temperature of the previous glacial cycle was “cooler and more variable” [6], and a 2004 study by Kaser et al. from the University of Massachusetts discovered that “a drastic drop in atmospheric moisture at the end of the 19th century” is likely the reason why the glaciers on Mt. Kilimanjaro have been retreating [7].

But the American political scene today takes great effort to sidestep the urgency presented by these papers; many politicians also argue that climate change is already too far along to be stopped, so the United States shouldn’t try to do anything at all. These so-called “climate fatalists” argue that the United States is not, in and of itself, a large enough influence to significantly deter or reverse global climate change, creating the impression that they don’t understand the concept of “cooperation” [8][9].

While the United States can’t solve the problem alone, its mere acknowledgement of the problem would set a global precedent to act. And unfortunately, we don’t even have that yet.

Needless to say, global warming is a really bad thing.

I use the word “needless” in the loosest possible meaning of the word because, according to the Pew Research Center, apparently 41 percent of the American public needs this explained to them [10].

...Whether you believe in it or not When people think of the effects of global warming, they often picture a very depressed polar bear on an even more depressing piece of ice [11].That’s all true and everything, but loss of polar bear real estate isn’t the only reason why we should care about climate change.

A UC Davis study found that, even when accounting for different soil varieties considering fertility, grazing, and fire history, climate change was solidly linked to a loss of wildflower biodiversity [12]. And while that only sounds like an excuse not to buy people flowers on Valentine’s Day, loss of biodiversity in any species could cripple entire ecosystems through the alteration of processes such as pollination and soil nutrient cycling.

But in case the utterly holistic and catastrophic collapse of ecosystems isn’t worth actually doing something about, nobody wants to be that one person who scrolls past a picture of a sad-looking child in poverty without at least “liking” it first.

However, despite the Asian Development Bank’s statements that climate change in the form of disasters such as Typhoon Haiyan eliminated six million jobs in the Philippines and raised the Indonesian poverty rate 7.7% [13], people are “scrolling” past actual suffering across the globe.

And if images of homeless polar bears, starving families, and the complete decimation of life on Earth as we know it doesn’t change anybody’s mind about the urgency of climate change, the Environmental Protection Agency argued that environmentally unfriendly policy would cost billions of dollars a year in damages from disasters such as rising sea levels and droughts [14]. So now, ignoring global warming is not only a terrible thing for any decent human being to do, it is also bad business sense.

The politicians are listening now.

And after all this, a report by The Lancelet’s 2015 Climate Health Commission stated that climate change would ultimately lead to the deaths of countless people all over the planet if left unchecked [15]. Co-author Anthony Costello cited that heat waves across India and Pakistan have, in June 2015 alone, killed thousands of people. All of this ignores “epidemics, food and water insecurity, storms, sea level rise and, perhaps most significant, population migration on a large scale from increasingly uninhabitable areas, and perhaps even conflict,” all of which the report argues would be major problems in a world that refused to do anything about climate change.

Costello also noted that “[g]etting people to walk, to cycle to work, to cut air pollution, to have cleaner air to breathe, and to eat healthier, sustainable, [and] locally-sourced diets” would all, in and of themselves, be important improvements in public health.

All of these points are true, although he makes the mistake of thinking that Americans will want to exercise.

All-in-all, we should not be letting our politicians get away with pedaling climateskepticism. In an increasingly globalized world where everybody is everybody else’s neighbor, we have an obligation to help each other create a better place for all of us to live.

Even if that means listening to the Pope once and a while.

By Nicholas Rui

7

Removing the Root For the first time, scientists eliminate HIV-1 from infected cells

by Ellen Shea

HIV, or Human Immunodeficiency Virus, has infected over 1.1 million US citizens and 35.3 million worldwide. This virus has lead to the deaths of 1.6 million people in 2012 alone [1]. Contracting HIV is a lifelong sentence, as it is currently incurable and will inevitably develop into AIDS. HIV destroys the body by attacking the immune system. Once HIV infiltrates the body (via the body fluids of an infected person), it seeks out CD4 cells. CD4 cells are named as such because they have the CD4 receptor, a protein receptor found on immune cells such as Helper T (Th) cells [2]. The CD4 receptor essentially acts as a back door entrance to the cell for HIV. Upon locating a CD4 cell, HIV will

8

attach to the CD4 receptor, fuse with the cell’s membrane, and dump its contents, including RNA and the reverse transcriptase enzyme, into the cell. HIV is a retrovirus, meaning instead of the usual double stranded DNA, it has single stranded RNA that it must convert into DNA [3]. From the RNA template, reverse transcriptase creates DNA that moves into the nucleus of the cell where it is then embedded into the host cell’s own DNA. This HIV DNA contains all the instructions necessary to create new proteins for new viruses using the host cell’s own machinery. Once the HIV DNA infiltrates the host cell’s nucleus, the host cell slaves away, building new viruses. The newly formed

viruses migrate to the membrane and exit the cell, all too ready to infect other cells. Through this process, HIV can replicate at enormous rates, eventually exhausting and killing the host cell.

HIV is particularly frightening because it decisively decimates the alarm system of the immune system. As mentioned previously, HIV targets CD4 cells, which unfortunately includes the vital Th cell.

The Th cell plays an imperative role in the immune system. When the cell encounters a pathogen, or a foreign and potentially damaging invader, the Th cell “sounds the alarm” for other immune cells to prepare for battle against these pathogens [3]. By attacking Th cells, the command centers of the immune system, HIV shuts down the immune system and eliminates pathogen defense mechanisms.

Once the Th cell count drops below 200 cells per cubic millimeter of blood, the condition is classified as AIDS [4]. HIV and AIDS do not kill people, but they allow illnesses that healthy immune systems would normally eliminate to enter and wreak havoc on the body. Those left untreated can even die of something as ostensibly harmless as a cold. There is no cure for HIV or AIDS, but current medicinal techniques are able to help suppress the virus and allow the infected person to live more comfortably.

Current antivirals work by inhibiting HIV from successfully converting RNA into DNA. RNA, however, lacks many proofreading systems that DNA has, so when reverse transcriptase converts RNA, the resulting DNA likely has mutations. These mutations often make some of the HIV immune to the antivirals. And since HIV proliferates rapidly, a great percentage of the infected cells likely has mutations; antivirals have a hard time keeping up. Moreover, antivirals do not address the problem of the DNA already embedded into CD4 cells.

Fortunately, Temple University researchers have made a recent discovery that could ameliorate some problems associated with traditional antivirals.

The researchers engineered a special kind of RNA called gRNA that works in conjunction with CAS9, a DNA snipping enzyme. The gRNA scans the infected cell’s DNA and locates the foreign HIV-1 DNA for the CAS9 enzyme to cut out. The researchers chose a very specific sequence unique to the virus to avoid damaging the cell’s original DNA. Once CAS9 cuts out the HIV-1 DNA, the cell’s own DNA then repairs itself and, when it divides, births a generation of HIV-free cells [5].

Thus, for the first time, scientists have completely eliminated HIV-1 in infected cells. However, this has only been accomplished in cultured cells and in laboratory settings. As the researchers note, this technology is only in its developmental stages and is far from ready for implementation. The first hurdle to overcome is its administration. How can these genetic tools be distributed to all cells in the body? Scientists must answer this question for the treatment to be feasible in medical settings. Secondly, this method is also subject to HIV’s pesky ability to quickly mutate.

Like current antivirals, this new method will have to be specifically engineered according to the distinct HIV sequences of the infected patient. Nevertheless, just as head researcher Dr. Kamil Kahlili points out, “it’s a proof of concept that we’re moving in the right direction” [5].

Although only in its beginning stages, this method has major implications. Should it be perfected, HIV, and other viral infections, could be completely eradicated. Undeniably, this leap of progress is something to appreciate and look forward to in the future.

9

The Radical Behaviorism of Burrhus Frederic Skinner: An Exploration of the “Black Box” of the Human Body

By Arman Arbab What is the nature of human behavior? To what extent are we freethinking actors? How much of our identity is determined by innate nature, as opposed to experience? For thousands of years, these questions have engendered much thought, and rightly so.

The answers to these questions have profound implications on the concept of morality. Although critics may regard these questions as fruitless pursuit, such sentiments overlook the sophisticated and developed nature of the answers to these questions. Today, due to a combination of empirical study and logic, humanity is more knowledgeable on these questions than it was in Plato’s day, when the hypothesis that the mind was shaped by the heavens was greatly debated. Great philosophers have used these questions as tools to battle entrenched dogma and as seeds for critical analysis of tangible human institutions. Far from being divorced from everyday existence, these questions were and are integral to shaping it. One influential psychologist who sought answers to these questions was Burrhus Frederic Skinner, a mid-20th century psychologist whose work is now known as Radical Behaviorism [1].

Skinner’s research led him to consider unrestrained will an illusion. He considered human behavior a reaction to independent variables present in the environment, such as external stimuli related to reward and punishment. Radical Behaviorism views the biological endowment of any organism as pivotal in its behavior, and therefore stands in contrast to the concept of the mind as a blank slate at birth. However, Skinner’s theory also bears slight resemblance to the blank slate ideology in that it considers environmental influences on the development of the mind. While biology creates certain dispositions, an individual’s response to outside reinforcement is what shapes his or her behavior.

Additionally, Radical Behaviorism accentuates the importance of empirical evidence. Utilizing observable behavior to develop theories is perhaps the most profound tenet of Radical Behaviorism: mental states, which are aspects of human action, are considered insufficient explanations of human behavior [2].

During the 1930's and 1940's, when Skinner developed his theories, the mind was incomprehensible due to absence of technology that could detect mental activity. Many thinkers before Skinner, such as Galen, likened the brain to a seat of thought. To be clear, Skinner did not dispute the relationship between mind and brain. However, in the era before P.E.T. scans, systematic study of specific mental actions impossible. Indeed, Skinner named the mind “a black box.” This led “Skinnerian behaviorists [to develop] theories by observing physical responses, like the movement of a pigeon, thus avoiding the ‘black box’” [2].

Newton’s 2nd Law serves as a simplistic metaphor for Radical

10

Behaviorism. Just as Newton’s 2nd Law describes the motion of solid bodies in terms of the sum of forces, Radical Behaviorism describes human behavior in terms of the sum of psychological forces acting on the subject, regardless of the subject’s internal workings.

The following interview took place in 1977 and is presented by Milwaukee Area Technical College [3]: Interviewer: “What is meant by the phrase ‘Our Behavior is determined’?”

Skinner: “… We are just organisms. And our behavior is chemically, physically, or otherwise completely determined by our genetic endowment, what has happened in the history of the species, and what has happened to us as individuals since birth and the present situation we find ourselves in. And our behavior t hen, I think, can be shown to be a product of that. … It doesn’t mean that we are unable to do things about our own behavior, because we are. We are able to change the world in which we live and thus change our own behavior. I believe in self-control, but only we have been taught how to control ourselves.”

Interviewer: “How do we control ourselves?”

Skinner: “Well, by doing what we would do to control someone else, which is to manipulate the environment.”

In recent decades, technology has begun to systematically link the brain with mental activity. In 1987, when asked if he would make use of the new technology to replicate his research, Dr. Skinner replied, “If I had to do it all again, I would still call the mind a black box. I would not use any of the new techniques for measuring information processing and the like. My point has always been that psychology should not look at the nervous system or socalled mind -- just at behavior” [2].

While Skinner focused on what he terms Respondent Behavior (which others dub “stimulus-response,”) he recognized that humans are much more than simple input-output machines. He said in the same interview, which took place a couple decades after his original ideas gained traction, “reinforcement is not the only thing in the world” [3]. Skinner acknowledged the importance of private events, thoughts, feelings and associative emotions in behavior, but his early research did not place a heavy emphasis on those functions.

Jack Michael, a noted psychologist in his own right, wrote about the beginnings of Skinner’s research:

Text

As a result of major contributions by Darwin, Thorndike, Pavlov, Watson, and important contributions by many others, B. F. Skinner in the mid-thirties developed the approach that has come to be known as the experimental analysis of behavior. At first this consisted largely of laboratory research with lower animals-mainly rats and pigeons-on the relations between behavior and its consequences. Rapid progress was made with these simpler species, whose behavior was found to be affected in lawful ways by reinforcement contingencies of considerable complexity.

11

Laboratory work with other species, especially monkeys and apes, revealed considerable generality of the basic relations.

Species differences had to be considered, of course, but turned out to be related chiefly to (1) sensory and motor capacities, (2) the specific events that function as effective consequences, and (3) unlearned behavior related to mating and care of the young [4].

A few of Skinner’s notable achievements are as follows: Cumulative Recorder: During his first years doing research Skinner invented a mechanical device that recorded every response as an upward movement of a horizontally moving line. An example of a response would be a mouse pressing a lever to obtain food. The slope of the line indicated the rate of response. Skinner discovered that the rate with which the mouse pressed the bar depended not on any preceding stimulus (as previous psychologists such as Watson and Pavlov had insisted), but on the consequence of pressing the bar. Unlike the reflexes that Pavlov had studied, this kind of behavior operated on the environment and was controlled by its effects. Skinner named this new behavior Operant Behavior. The process of arranging the reinforcement responsible for producing this new kind of behavior operant was known as conditioning [5]. The uses of Operant Conditioning may surprise some. For example, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and many application developers use Operant Conditioning to keep users engaged with their services [6].

The Skinner Box: This device was a box that was designed to measure and influence the behavior of animals such as mice and pigeons. In it were levers, food dispensaries, and various devices that produced stimuli, such as lights and sounds. The Cumulative Recorder measured the response of subjects in the Skinner Box [5][6].

Pigeon Guided Missiles: In WWII, the American Military attempted to develop a way to reliably guide missiles. Skinner had, by then, already used pigeons in his psychological research, training them to press levers for food. An article from the Smithsonian Magazine details a project he began to train pigeons as missile guides: An obsessive inventor, he had been pondering weapons targeting systems one day when he saw a flock of birds maneuvering in formation in the sky. “Suddenly I saw them as devices with excellent vision and extraordinary maneuverability,” he said, “Could they not guide a missile? Was the answer to the problem waiting for me in my own back yard?” Getting to work, Skinner decided on pigeons because of both their vision and unflappable behavior in chaotic conditions. He built a nose cone for a missile fitted with three small electronic screens and three tiny pigeon cockpits. Onto the screens was projected an image of the ground in front of the rocket. “He would train street pigeons to recognize the pattern of the target, and to peck when they saw this target,” says Kidwell. “And then when all three of them pecked, it was thought you could actually aim the missile in that direction.” As the pigeons pecked, er was indeed a pivotal scientist.cables harnessed to each one’s head would mechanically steer the missile until it finally reached its mark. Alas, without an escape hatch, the birds would perish along with their target, making it a kamikaze mission. Despite a successful demonstration of the trained pigeons, officials remained skeptical and eventually decided to terminate the project [7].

Teaching Machine: As part of his research, Skinner designed a number of devices that used feedback processing to encourage learning. In 1954,

12

he created a machine that taught arithmetic to young people, and in 1957 he designed a machine for teaching basic natural sciences to Harvard students [7]. Skinner felt that the classroom, which had 30-40 students, did not allow teachers to properly condition learning on a personal level [5]. This belief led him to develop a device that could function as an aid in classroom instruction. His instructional method was to break up a complicated topic into small segments which allowed for timely positive feedback. Instead of waiting several days for a test to be graded, students would be able to get feedback after every problem. To make sure students understood the material, they would not be allowed to move on to the next topic until they mastered the current one. While all of his machines were mechanical and suffered some functionality problems, the advent of the computer allowed for more efficient application of his ideas.

Much of today’s educational software draws on Skinner’s ideas [7].

Verbal Behavior: Skinner’s thoughts on how to design sequences of steps for his teaching machines came to him as he was finishing a book that he worked on on and off for twenty years. Verbal Behavior, published in 1957, is an analysis of why we say, write, and think the way we do [5].

This book attempted to apply the principles of human behavior to language development. It has generated much controversy, both around the application of Radical Behaviorism to human language and the theory itself. Critics say that Radical Behaviorism was based on a fundamentally flawed principle of extending animal research to higher level thinking. In the aforementioned 1977 interview, Skinner’s interviewer stated that “his findings have been applied to nearly every aspect of human behavior, though much of his research was carried out with laboratory animals” [3].

Skinner went on to acknowledge that some ways in which he applied his research was a big conceptual jump, but “[that the] basic principles are [probably there]” [3]. Jack Michael contends that “[radical behaviorism] developed without the benefit of any appreciable laboratory research with humans. … The relevance of these concepts to human behavior was taken for granted by the behavior modifiers…” [4]. Perhaps one of the most widely read pieces of criticism is Noam Chomsky’s On Verbal Behavior, which finds fault with theoretical models that exclude analysis of internal mental states [8]. One psychologist who has defended Skinner’s work is Kenneth MacCorquodale, who wrote, “The relevance of these [postulated] laws [governing verbal behavior] and their component variables for the verbal events is hypothesized only; it is not dogmatically claimed” [9]. Skinner’s defenders contend that his emphasis on observable behavior was more a methodological approach than a dismissal of the importance of the unobservable mind. Skinner has made similar statements of agreement [3].

For all the controversy that surrounded parts of his research, Skinner’s work was essential. A survey posted on the American Psychological Association’s (APA) website ranks Skinner as the most important psychologist of the 20th century [10]. Regardless of whether one agrees with his research or his conclusions, one must recognize the enormous amount of work he contributed to science.

The measure of a scientist is not whether he or she has stumbled upon the ultimate truth, but whether that scientist has rigorously and honestly attempted to develop understanding and improve society. By that standard, Burrhus Frederic Skinner was indeed a pivotal scientist.

13

From the Golden State

Water-you-doing California?

by Lynn Bi

With temperatures soaring to record highs and precipitation levels falling to record lows, California continues to face challenges in finding feasible long-term solutions to the drought that has paralyzed cities, rural communities, and much of the agricultural industry.

Whether defined in the hydrological, meteorological or agricultural sense, a drought is an effect of “the mismatch between the amounts of water nature provides and the amounts of water that humans and the environment demand,” resulting in shortages of water over a protracted period of time [1]. Since the beginning of the drought in 2012, California’s major water supplies -- the reservoirs, aquifers, and snowpacks -- have been in a steady state of rapid decline. According to the California Department of Water Resources, “the Sierra Nevada snowpack stood at 14 percent of normal for the date.

The state’s two biggest reservoirs held less than 40 percent of their capacity, and aquifer levels from Siskiyou County to San Diego County were in decline” [2]. The impact of the drought becomes immediately apparent when a comparison between the topography of California today with that of 2012 is made.

Various lakes and reservoirs have disappeared, rivers (i.e. the Colorado River) often no longer reach their deltas, and what at once had been represented as green vegetation on maps has now been replaced by brown, barren landscape. With the driest three consecutive years on record (2012-2014), researchers estimate that an approximate total of 6.6 million acre-feet of surface water had been lost by 2014 [3]. Although droughts are not rare occurrences in California’s climate

14

landscape (previous droughts occurred in years 1929-1934, 1976-1977 and 19871982), reports show that the current drought is “the most severe drought in the last 1200 years, with single year (2014) and accumulated moisture deficits worse than any previous continuous span of dry years” [4].

Although it remains difficult to pinpoint all of the factors leading to the drought, researchers have given an anomalous high-pressure “ridge” suspended above the Pacific Ocean a guilty verdict as one of the immediate causes of current conditions [5].

By disrupting the global flow of water vapor, the ridge redirects storms away from California, thus causing aberrantly low levels of precipitation in crucial winter months. California has also been experiencing unusually high temperatures -- exacerbating the effects of unusually low precipitation levels. In fact, a study states that “a plot of temperature and precipitation anomalies over the full instrumental record from 1895 through November 2014 shows that the three year period ending in 2014 was by far the hottest and driest on record” [1]. This particular combination of high temperatures and low precipitation has tenable links to an anthropogenic-caused climate change, as suggested by numerous studies. For example, researchers “concluded that global warming was increasing the likelihood of extreme high pressure over an index region of the North Pacific similar to that observed during the recent drought...” [6].

Stanford University associate professor and climate scientist Noah Diffenbaugh likewise states, “Our research finds that extreme atmospheric high pressure in this region –

which is strongly linked to unusually low precipitation in California – is much more likely to occur today than prior to the human emission of greenhouse gases that began during the Industrial Revolution in the 1800s” [7].

In January of 2014, California Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. proclaimed a drought State of Emergency with a call for a voluntary 20% cut in water usage, in response to the increasingly threatening water shortages.

In order to strengthen efforts to conserve water, Brown also issued multiple executive orders and proclamations that included further measures to give state water officials more latitude in enforcing water conservation strategies. However, most of these measures largely depended on the voluntary action on the part of citizens, industries, etc., and more drastic measures were still needed. Recently in April of 2015, Brown issued Executive Order B-29-15, which resulted in California’s first mandatory reduction (25% cut) of water usage carried out by the State Water Resources Control Board.

Despite these efforts, additional challenges still exist. For example, as available surface water levels creep toward depletion, the reliance on groundwater as a substitute has escalated, particularly in agricultural regions. This has resulted in the unsustainable and indiscriminate pumping of groundwater.

By 2014, more than 5 million acre-feet of groundwater have been extracted in order to counteract the loss of 6.6 million acre-feet of surface water [3]. With the groundwater-extraction rate exceeding the aquifer’s natural recharge rate in some regions, aquifer levels have declined, resulting in disastrous ramifi-

cations. For example, land subsidence - the sinking of the ground - has resulted in a permanently reduced capacity for future groundwater storage. Furthermore, saltwater intrusion has threatened groundwater quality, especially in certain coastal areas. Although groundwater pumping may have initially softened the blow from the severe drought conditions, the fact that it is being pumped unsustainably is a threat to California’s important natural resource.

Despite the heavier rainfall brought to California’s more parched regions by the El Nino conditions in 2015, authorities state that California’s water supplies continue to be highly vulnerable. Continual measures to conserve water and reduce water waste will be crucial to protect California’s water supplies.

to the Brown State

Hitting the Sweet Spot Artificial sweeteners have always had a sweet spot in our lives. Whether it be their role in sweetening our coffee or adding a pinch of flavor to our tea, sweeteners are a widely popular alternative to sugar. These substitutes are a welcome trend, given the health hazards of all the sugar in the average diet. However, while artificial sweeteners may satisfy our cravings, their effects on our bodies may not be as satiating.

According to a new study published in Nature on September 17, 2014, artificial sweeteners might lead to metabolic problems, like diabetes or obesity [1]. Though many people use them as substitutes for sugar, hoping to combat the aforementioned health issues, it is shown that they may be the cause for these very problems. Saccharin, a chemical that substitutes the sweetness of sugar without containing any food energy (calories), may cause these metabolic disorders by acting on human gut bacteria. The gut microbiome, as the study states, may suffer from the intake of artificial sweeteners, therefore more easily causing the body to become off-balance in its metabolism.

The gut microbiome is the variety of bacteria living in harmony with our intestines. The gut flora, as they are also called, helps in the digestion of food and are shown to change according to one’s diet [2]. These seemingly insignificant organisms are a surprisingly large part of your lifestyle. But are they so important that they can cause long-term diseases such as diabetes or obesity?

Eran Elinov from the Weizmann Institute of Science and his team of researchers explored this question using mice. Elinov fed mice different kinds of sweeteners such as saccharin, sucralose, and aspartame and recorded his results. Interestingly, he discovered that after 11 weeks, the mice displayed signs of glucose intolerance, a leading precursor to metabolic disorders [3].

Afterwards, to improve accuracy, the team used different groups of mice that were fed differently to represent people who have varying risks for metabolic diseases. Some were fed a normal diet, and others a high-fat diet. Some had their water concentrated with glucose, and others with

By Flora Park a mixture of glucose and saccharin. The mice that were fed saccharin displayed more obvious signs of glucose intolerance than the mice that were fed glucose alone. “But when the animals were given antibiotics to kill their gut bacteria, glucose intolerance was prevented. And when the researchers transplanted faeces from the glucose-intolerant saccharin-fed mice into the guts of mice bred to have sterile intestines, those mice also became glucose intolerant, indicating that saccharin was causing the microbiome to become unhealthy,” Alison Abbot from Nature.com states in her article, “Sugar Substitutes Linked to Obesity” [3]. As a result, it was concluded that artificial sweeteners alter gut microbiomes to an extent to cause a significant increase in glucose intolerance.

However, “this is a bit chicken-and-egg”, Elinav states. “If you are putting on weight, you are more likely to turn to diet food. It doesn’t necessarily mean the diet food caused you to put on weight” [3]. Because of this, Elinav performed another experiment, this time using seven healthy volunteers who were not used to using artificial sweeteners in their food. They were told to use the suggested maximum daily dose of artificial sweeteners in their food for a week. As a result, four of the seven became glucose intolerant, putting them at risk for metabolic diseases. The other three seemed to be resistant to saccharin and its effects. According to Elinav, not everyone has the same microbiome or nutritional needs, so some may be susceptible to saccharin’s effects and some may not [3]. Nonetheless, the effects of artificial sweeteners are clearly shown to be negative on the gut microbiomes of some.

The new information gathered could be a breakthrough for scientist and help to develop new ways of approaching metabolic disease.

These studies also provide deeper insight on the workings of gut microbiomes in digestion of ingested materials. It is vital for buyers and consumers to be aware of the risks that using artificial sweeteners as a substitute for sugar can pose. Knowledge of new studies and continuous discoveries like this one can help people make informed choices and enhance the quality of daily life.

TAKE A BYTE!

BY HANNAH ELARABAWY

Back

in ancient times—you know, before computers were idiot-proof enough to grace any living room—it was necessary to possess an elaborate understanding of how and why a personal computer worked in order to be able to use it for even the simplest functions. The arrival of graphical operating systems and prefabricated machines was a main proponent in the explosion of the industry in the past couple of decades. But that fascinating success came at the cost of the “pioneering spirit” that was the foundation of this industry. Thanks to a brilliant group of intellectuals in Cambridge University, there is still a nibble of hope to regain the spirit that our predecessors once enjoyed.

The Raspberry Pi is an inexpensive credit-card sized proto-computer that plugs into a computer monitor or TV and uses a standard keyboard and mouse. It has all the basic features that a computer must have to function such as an SD card slot, micro USB power, USB 2.0 ports, GPIO headers, an Ethernet port, two video outputs, 3.5 mm audio output. It is charged by a micro USB adapter which is likely the same as the charger to your current phone or tablet. The Pi is designed to be inexpensive and versatile enough to be a platform for education, expansion, and enlightenment. At a cost of only $35 dollars, people of all ages can explore computing, learn how to program, browse the internet, play high-definition video, play games and more!

The Pi’s capabilities extend past the basic desktop functions, you can use it for a farrago of diverse projects that could fit any purpose, really. A group once built a BeetBox--yes, the vegetable--which was a tuber-based electronic drum machine. Another team built a coffee machine called the Mocha Pi. The options are endless, you can build music machines, robots weather stations, cameras, machines that recognize certain peoples’ faces… For all you know, you could built a parentand-sibling-proof security system for your room!

The Raspberry Pi is also piquing the interest of numerous institutions and people in developing nations. It could be especially effective due to its low cost, minimal power requirements and powerful multimedia and computing performance. In such places, the supply of computer equipment is limited and electricity is expensive.

The Pi could not only involve more people in computer science worldwide, regardless of their economic status, but also result in practical innovations in poverty-stricken areas of the world.

What makes the Raspberry Pi so special is that it is a blank vessel with basic functionalities ready to contain any ideas that you concoct.

There are truly no limitations as to who can use it and what he or she can do with it; the only essential prerequisite is creativity. So next time you’re craving a dessert, remember, Raspberry Pi has no calories and it is just as delicious!

17

‘FEAR-BOLA’ A NEW EPIDEMIC

by Ahana Chakraborty

18

Ebola or, as society has rechristened it, “Fear-bo-

est antelope and porcupines found ill or dead.

la” seems to be the embodiment of everyone’s

Humans contract it through close contact with the

worst fear. The word itself causes hair to rise and

blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of

heart rates to spike. Everyone knows what it is...or

infected animals [2].

do they? Most people possess rudimentary knowl-

Ebola cannot be acquired through air, water,

edge about the characteristics of Ebola virus dis-

or food. However, those are only the few excep-

ease (EVD), previously known as Ebola haemor-

tions to transmission. The disease can spread in

rhagic fever [3], and only through oft-hyped media

various ways such as contact with deceased bod-

like television or newspapers. Many are unaware

ies, infected blood as well as other bodily fluids,

of its true effects, causes, and lengthy history.

contaminated medical equipment, unprotected

Ebola virus disease was discovered first in

intercourse with an infected individual, and bush

1976 in two places: Sudan and the Democrat-

meat (this refers to meat from non-domesticated

ic Republic of Congo. In the latter area, the dis-

mammals, reptiles, birds, etc. from tropical forests

ease took hold near the Ebola river, from which

and is considered a threat to biodiversity)[2].

its name is derived. Fruits bats are thought to be

Animal cells possess a semi-permeable cell

the original hosts for the virus, but it seems that

membrane and lack the cell wall that gives plant

humans provide similar comfort for Ebola. The

cells their rigid structure. Both plant and animal

disease generally originates in villages found near

cells are eukaryotes, which mandates that they

rainforests, or any other area with an abundance

possess a nucleus filled with deoxyribonucleic

of chimpanzees, gorillas, fruit bats, monkeys, for-

acid, or DNA. Ebola virus fuses with the cell lining

and attacks the nucleus, releasing its own genetic

rates vary from 25% to 90%[3], however in some

contents and thus allowing replication of the virus.

rare cases patients have recovered. The cause re-

Copies of the virus are then released back into

mains unknown.

the system, slowly infecting the entire body and

The biggest concern is not how to treat the

killing its immune system[3]. Blood vessels rupture

disease, but rather how to evade it. Prior to Sep-

on their own without any external catalyst. In such

tember 30th, the easiest solution for Americans

cases, the body should produce more platelets

would have been to steer clear of Liberia, where

to help with blood clotting. Platelets, also known

the current outbreak of Ebola originated. Howev-

as “thrombocytes�, possess no nucleus, derivate

er, after Liberian Thomas Eric Duncan travelled

from the bone marrow, and enter the circulatory

to Dallas, Texas to visit his family, Ebola had of-

system to repair vessels. However, Ebola lowers

ficially entered the US. Now, there remain only a

the platelet count and prevents the body from re-

few solutions to avoid contamination. Ebola pre-

versing damage. Soon, the body tires out from de-

vention follows a path distinct from any other dis-

hydration and blood loss, and victims eventually

ease control: practice careful hygiene (wash your

succumb to permanent sleep.

hands with soap and water or an alcohol-based

Perhaps the two most pressing matters of

hand sanitizer and avoid contact with blood and

Ebola are symptoms and effects. The disease is

body fluids), avoid infected people and their bodily

not contagious until after symptoms appear, but

fluids, refrain from attending funeral or burial ritu-

this news is of little consolation. Symptoms gen-

als concerning deceased victims of the disease,

erally surface anywhere between 2-21 days, but

and avoid contact with bats, non-human primates,

the average is 8-10 days. Infected people may ex-

and raw meat (bush meat)[5].

perience fevers, severe headaches, muscle pain,

Ebola virus disease is inevitably spreading.

weakness, diarrhea, vomiting, and unexplained

There is not much to do except wait in anticipation

bleeding or bruising (hemorrhage)[5]. Bleeding

and see where it strikes next. However, this is not

occurs in various sites, like the respiratory tract,

a call to panic. The best way to avoid contracting

lungs, and gums. Patients pass away within 7 to

the disease is to keep calm and maintain healthy

16 days[6]. Though there is no known cure for Eb-

habits. Just like any other illness or disease, Eb-

ola, doctors can manage the symptoms by pump-

ola will eventually be stopped. Until then, people

ing oxygen, transferring fluids and electrolytes,

should actively try to preserve their health and that

and performing blood transfusions[4]. Fatality

of those around them.

19

Citations Are We Wired To Get Wired? by Junyan Mak [1] Harvard School of Public Health. "Coffee in the Genes? New Genetic Variants Associated with Coffee Drinking." ScienceDaily. 07 Oct. 2015. Web. Can’t See It, Can’t Hear It by Shaan Trika [1] "The Science of Hearing." Hidden Hearing. N.p., 23 Feb. 2015. Web. [2] "Are you a victim of HIDDEN hearing loss?" Daily Mail.

N.p., 25 Apr. 2015. [3] Acoustical Society of America (ASA). "Noise-induced 'hidden hearing loss' mechanism discovered."

ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 7 May 2014. [4] Liberman, M. Charles. "Hidden Hearing Loss from Everyday Noise." Scientific American.

N.p., n.d. Web. Opinion: Global Warming is a Real Issue by Nicholas Rui [1] Mazza, Ed. "Rick Santorum Wants Pope Francis To Stop Talking About Climate Change." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 04 June 2015. Web. 31 July 2015. [2] "Jeb Bush Joins Republican Backlash against Pope on Climate Change." The Guardian.

TheGuardian.com, 17 June 2015. Web. [3] Kelly, Amita. "'Abide By The Law': Campaign Trail Responds To Same-Sex-Marriage Ruling." NPR. National Public Radio, 26 June 2015. Web. [4] Taylor, Jessica. "Huckabee: 'A Beheading Is a Far Greater Threat than a Sunburn'" The Hill. Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., 24 Jan. 2015. Web. [5] Holthaus, Eric. "Watch Inhofe Throw a Snowball on the Senate Floor to Disprove Global Warming." Slate. The Slate Group, 26 Feb. 2015. Web. [6] Thompson, Lonnie G. "Ice Core Evidence for Climate Change in the Tropics: Implications for Our Future." Quaternary Science Reviews 19.1-5 (2000): 19-35. Web. [7] Georg Kaser, Douglas R. Hardy, Thomas Molg, Raymond S. Bradley, and Tharsis M. Hyera. "Modern Glacier Retreat on Kilimanjaro as Evidence of Climate Change: Observations and Facts" International Journal of Climatology 24.3 (2004): 329-339. Web. [8] Stromberg, Stephen. "Why Is the World Even Bothering to Fight Climate Change?" Washington Post. The Washington Post, 24 June 2015. Web. [9] United Nations Department of Public Information. Climate Change: Can It Be Stopped? Rep. United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development, May 2006. Web. [10] Vaidyanathan, Gayathri. "Big Gap between What Scientists Say and Americans Think about Climate Change." Scientific American. Nature America, 30 Jan. 2015. Web. [11] Bronen, Robin. "The Arctic Is Speaking Truths About Climate Change. Is Anyone Listening?" The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 24 June 2015. Web. [12] Harris-Lovett, Sasha. "Scientists See Climate Change in Action in California Wildflower Fields." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 24 June 2015. Web. [13] "ADB: Climate Change Makes Poor Poorer in Asia-Pacific." Salon. Salon Media Group, 24 June 2015. Web. [14] Finley, Bruce. "EPA: Act Now on Climate Change or Pay Later in Money and Deaths." The Denver Post. The Denver Post, 23 June 2015. Web. [15] Jaafari, Shirin. "Climate Change Poses a Massive Health Risk, but Fighting It Will Be Good for Everyone." Public Radio International. Public Radio International, 24 June 2015. Web. 31 July 2015.

Removing the Root by Ellen Shea [1] WHO. "HIV/AIDS." WHO. World Health Organization, n.d. Web. [2] Derrer, David. "HIV, AIDS, and the CD4 Count." WebMD. WebMD, 17 Aug. 2014. Web. [3] Campbell, Neil A., and Jane B. Reece. Biology. San Francisco: Pearson Benjamin Cummings, 2009. Print. [4] "Stages of HIV Infection." Stages of HIV Infection. US Department of Health and Human Services, n.d. Web. [5] Harmon, Rebecca. "Temple University Researchers Successfully Eliminate the HIV Virus From Cultured Human Cells For The First Time." Temple University School of Medicine: Office of News Communications. Temple University, 21 July 2014. Web. [6] "Retroviruses (HIV/SIV)." Southern Research Institute. Southern Research Institute, n.d. Web. The Radical Behaviorism of Burrhus Frederic Skinner by Arman Arbab [1] Schneider, Susan M., and Edward K. Morris. "A History of the Term Radical Behaviorism: From Watson to Skinner." The Behavior Analyst 27-39 10.1 (1987): University of Kansas n.d. Web. [2] Goldman, Daniel. "Embattled Giant Of Psychology Speaks His Mind." New York Times. 25 Aug. 1987: n. pag. New York Times. Web. [3] Skinner, Burrhus F. "B.F. Skinner About Behaviorism." Interview.

Youtube.com. Google Incorporated, 27 Oct. 2014. Web. [4] Michael, Jack. "Verbal Behavior." Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 42.3 (1984): National Center for Biotechnology Information. Web. [5] "Biographical Information." Bfskinner.org. B.F. Skinner Foundation, n.d. Web. [6] Davidow, Bill. "Skinner Marketing: We're the Rats, and Facebook Likes Are the Reward." The Atlantic.

Haylery Romer, 10 June 2013. Web. [7] Stromberg, Joseph. "B.F. Skinner’s Pigeon-Guided Rocket." Smithsonian.com. Smithosonian Institution, 18 Aug. 2011. Web. [8] Chomsky, Noam. "A Review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior." Rev. of Verbal Behavior, by Burhuss F. Skinner. Readings in the Psychology of Language (1967): 142-43. Prentice Hall. The Noam Chomsky Website. Web. [9] Maccorquodale, Kenneth. "On Chomsky’s Review of Skinner's Verbal Behavior." Rev. of A Review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 13.1 (1970): 83-99. The National Center for Biotechnology Information. Web. [10] Haggbloom, Steven J.; Warnick, Jason E.; Jones, Vinessa K.; Yarbrough, Gary L.; Russell, Tenea M.; Borecky, Chris M.; McGahhey, Reagan et al. (2002).

"The 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th century". Review of General Psychology 6 (2): 139–152.

From Golden State to Brown State: The Loss of Water Security by Lynn Bi [1] Mann, Michael E., and Peter H. Gleick. "Climate Change and California Drought in the 21st Century: Fig. 1." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112.13 (2015): 3858-859. Web. [2] "Water Conditions: Storms, Drought and California's Water Situation." California Department of Water Resources. N.p., n.d. Web. [3] Howitt, R.E., Medellin-Azuara, J., MacEwan, D., Lund, J.R. and Sumner, D.A. (2014). Economic Analysis of the 2014 Drought for California Agriculture. Center for Watershed Sciences, University of California, Davis, California. Web. [4] Griffin, Daniel, and Kevin J. Anchukaitis. "How Unusual Is the 2012-2014 California Drought?" Geophys. Res. Lett. Geophysical Research Letters 41.24 (2014): 9017-023. Web. [5] Wang, S.-Y., Lawrence Hipps, Robert R. Gillies, and Jin-Ho Yoon. "Probable Causes of the Abnormal Ridge Accompanying the 2013-2014 California Drought: ENSO Precursor and Anthropogenic Warming Footprint." Geophys. Res. Lett. Geophysical Research Letters 41.9 (2014): 3220-226.

Web. [6] Seager, R., Hoerling, M., Schubert, S., Wnang, H., Lyon, B., Kumar, Henderson, N. Assessment report: Causes and predictability of the 2011-14 California drought. 1-36. Web. [7] Than, Ker. "Causes of California Drought Linked to Climate Change, Stanford Scientists Say." news.stanford.edu. N.p., 30 Sept. 2014. Web. Hitting the Sweet Spot by Flora Park [1] Segal, Eran, and Eran Elinav. "Artificial Sweeteners Induce Glucose Intolerance by Altering the Gut Microbiota." Nature.com.

N.p., 17 Sep. 2014. Web. [2] Feltman, Rachel. "The Gut's Microbiome Changes Rapidly with Diet."Scientific American Global RSS. N.p., 14 Dec. 2013. Web. [3] Abbott, Alison. "Sugar Substitutes Linked to Obesity." Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group, 17 Sept. 2014.

Web. Take a Byte! by Hannah Elarabawy [1] "What Is a Raspberry Pi?" What Is a Raspberry Pi. Raspberry Pi, n.d. Web. [2] "Raspberry Pi: What You Need to Know (Features, Details and More)." International Business Times. International Business Times, n.d. Web. Ebola Virus Disease: A New Epidemic by Ahana Chakraborty [1] "Ebola Virus Disease." WHO. N.p., n.d. Web. [2] "Ebola: Is It Contagious and How Does It Spread? Here Are the Facts."

TheJournal.ie. N.p.,n.d. Web. [3]"Questions and Answers on Ebola." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 15 Oct. 2014. Web. [4] "Senegal Is Now Free of Ebola Virus Transmission." WHO. N.p., n.d. Web. [5] "Ebola Virus: Symptoms, Treatment, and Prevention." WebMD. WebMD, n.d. Web.

15 Years of high-quality care Invisalign System Available Family friendly and trusted At Rite Family Dental San Diego, we use advanced technology to make sure that gentle care and high quality dentistry go hand in hand. Our caring staff and gentle techniques make your visit easy and comfortable.

We provide 24 hour emergency services. Walk-ins are always welcomed.

Dr. Ostad started his education in Southern California at Santa Monica City College, then went on to UCLA to attain a Bachelor degree in 1992.

Focused on continuing his education, he attended the University of California, San Francisco from 1992-1996 where he attained his D.D.S. We perform: - Exams and cleaning - Whitening - All restorations - Implants - One-day denture relines - And much more!

[scan me] 12330 Carmel Mountain Rd. #C4 San Diego, CA 92128 Phone: (858) 485-0555 Fax: (858) 451-8396 info@ritefamilydental.com www.RiteFamilyDental.com

DN’s Original Science Jour nal

With ar ticles from RB