Monk Parakeets of New York City

In New York one would expect to see heaps of pigeons mindlessly wandering. But in the middle of Queens another unexpected bird is very common to see, the Monk parakeet. It is characterized by their bright green body and rosy-orange beak. These birds are native to South America, specifically central Bolivia to south Brazil, Uruguay and southern and central Argentina. The reasons for their presents in the middle of New York City is highly debated. Some claim that there was an incident involving a crate of Monk parakeets at the JFK airport resulting in many of them escaping into the city. Other people claim that they are from people releasing captive pet parakeets into the city after not being able to take care of them properly. 

Regardless of why or where they came from, they have obviously adapted extremely well to their new home in the city. A report by Columbia University explains that these birds have thrived for a number of reasons. Monk parakeets are plant generalists, so they eat almost any kind of plant, including weeds and flowering plants. In the winter they eat seeds from bird feeders and have been known to fly long distances in search of food if they have to.

Introduced species of Monk parakeets are most common in Florida, due to the abundance of flowering plants year round. New York is a lot colder than Florida, so how do these birds survive in the winter? The answer is found in the places where they are natively found. They naturally thrive in the mountains of South America, which reach temperatures very similar to the temperature of New York in the winter. Monk parakeets also thrive in city and urbanized environments as told by this website dedicated to the Monk parakeets of New York City. They are naturally very smart and gregarious, because of this New Yorkers have taken a keen interest in them and their well-being.

Because these parakeets are an introduced species that are not native to New York City it is important to look at the impact of these birds on native wildlife. This report claims that the control level diagnosis of the Monk parakeet in New York is classified as a medium priority. If they continue to reproduce they have a real potential of becoming a pest. They have been known to damage power lines and have also been seen fighting with native birds like Blue Jays over territory. Their populations are relatively small currently, so they are not a serious threat. But if they continue to reproduce and exhibit aggressive behavior their impact will need to be reevaluated.

Liz Clark Week 1

Vaccines Bring Death not Cure Death

This article claims to have proof that vaccines spread disease as illustrated by a doctor with a skull mask holding a blue syringe, and confirmed by vaccine "truth advocates,” an intangible source, happy to confirm any "truths." There are statistics that show vaccines largely eliminate diseases where they are used. Severe side effects to vaccines are very rare, much less so than the fatalities caused by the prevented disease. The net impact on the world is by far a positive one. This is not mentioned of course. The side effects are of course mentioned. The Kaiser Health News report is cited as proof of the claim that vaccines spread disease. This report which is given by a reputable .org website is an instance where a disease outbreak spread among a largely vaccinated populace. However, when drawing a conclusion about truth, many samples are necessary. There are vastly more instances outbreaks in unvaccinated populations. And just because there was an outbreak of disease where there were vaccinations, doesn’t mean there is a connection between those two things. As I get older, so do you, therefore you get older because I am getting older. That doesn’t make any sense and neither does this lie. By ignoring the other side of the data, that allowed them to more sneakily assume a false conclusion. They end the article, not stating that vaccines make people carriers of the disease, a claim made near the beginning, but just saying that vaccines don’t work because some guy who got the vaccine and got mumps later. Also, to be a carrier of a disease means that it is heritable and is present in a mutated allele. Vaccines do not change our DNA in any way so a basic understanding of biology shuts this down as well. They’re trying to hit two birds with one stone here. Too bad their rocks are imaginary. All you have to do is look and you won't see them.

Posted by “Takoda Nordoff” (3)

https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-11-14-proof-vaccinated-people-are-spreading-communicable-disease.html

How Fast Do You Want to Lose Weight?

Walking around anywhere, browsing on the internet, celebrities in movies and on the red carpet - anywhere you go, there will be something that reminds you of the perfect body, whether it be a male figure or a female figure. There will always be these standards that people set. No one is born with the perfect body, most people have to work hard to achieve this healthy, nicely toned figure that they wish to have, and of course, they have to continue working hard to maintain that because once they let themselves go, it is much harder to get back to where they left off.

For some people, it's much harder to head to the gym and do the exercises they'd need to achieve this nice body they hope to have and that's when advertisers for diet pills come in and take their attention. These advertisements are everywhere, and yes, there are some pills out that that can help someone on their path to losing weight, but that also requires them to put in the work which is to have a consistent healthy diet along with some type of exercise at least, but some of these pills are said to "help lose weight without any exercises or anything else at all". As if someone can just take a pill a day and magically lose weight if they continue to live the lifestyle that they were already living.

This article on a site titled Health and Beauty Life reviews three diet pills that can help someone lose weight without having to exercise at all. They explain the benefits of each of the pills by describing the different types of chemicals and how each of those chemicals help with fat loss. They've included before and after photos of just one person who has tried these pills and seen "results" and even writes about whether or not the pills are safe along with the costs of them. What makes it seem even worst is that they have the websites of where to buy these pills and how to get discounts in bolded print, these colorful letters are even larger than the text of the rest of the article.

On livestrong.com, an article also titled Diet Pills Without Exercise speaks about how these diet pills can only help someone temporarily, and that sooner than later they will gain their weight back and usually prescribed diet pills are used to help those who suffer from obesity because it can help them with short term weight loss so they can begin their journey to losing weight the right way.

Everybody wants to sell products and make money, but to deceive those who are already battling with themselves and their body image is another story and this happens very often. People would falsely advertise products and win people over by simply using larger words to seem scientific and justifiable, but at the end of the day, they're the only winners because they're taking money from these people who just want to change their image.

Posted by "Han Nguyen" (3)

The Big Bang

            The beginning of the universe and the beginning of all life is unknown to us, there is no real proof as to what occurred that could cause the birth of our universe. The big bang is a theory that is thought to be very probable to kick start our universe yet however some stay closed minded toward it. People are allowed to have their own beliefs but in an article from Answer in Genesis they purposely and ignorantly ignore any possible theories on why the big bang may have occurred and only state that the bible has all the answers. They purposely bash and look down on the possibility that the big bang took place at all.

            In the article, the author claims to have debated Bill Nye the science guy, telling him the same information as in the article, that the beginning of the universe is not unknown and that the answer is in the bible. He proceeds to say that the big bang is not even a theory in its own right as there is no proof that it could have happened in the first place and that its origins was only thought of to please man’s aesthetic belief that the universe was made without a god.  The author does throw in there that some Christians believe that god had a part in the big bang but then proceeds to bash them as well stating that those who believe that are only supporting a pagan belief and are going against the bible.  The author is clearly biased and does not believe in any science and only wishes to keep a closed mind about the possibilities, instead only thinking that the bible has all the answers.

            In a separate article it explains the big bang theory more in depth stating that it is the leading explanation on how the universe started. The universe started with a small singularity and it continued to inflate over the next 13.8 billion years into the universe we know of today. The author states that this theory was found using mathematical models and formulas in order to get what is known about the big bang today. Even though these scientist believe in the big bang they don’t out right say that this is the only possibility and this is exactly how the universe started. Instead the author keeps an open mind unlike the previous article and states that this theory may not be true and other explanations can arise. Everyone is allowed to believe in what they choose to regardless if there is evidence or not at the moment. However it is not right to bash another belief because it does not match up with your own belief whether it is religion or science, they wish for the same thing, to know how the universe started.

Posted by "Edwin Montecinos"

3 Simple and Easy Treatments for Depression

            A recent article published in Natural News explores what they believe to be possible alternative treatments for depression, claiming that “artificial junk”, or antidepressant medications, are more harmful and far less effective than natural remedies. They write that in addition to only a 50% chance of working, antidepressants, “according to numerous reviews” which were not cited, can lead to increased risk of suicide and have awful side-effects such as muscle paralysis. With this, the article jumps into introducing three effective, natural ways to combat depression.

            One suggestion includes partaking in partial or full sleep deprivation to reduce symptoms of depression. This means to either deprive oneself of sleep for approximately 21 hours (partial) or 36+ hours (full). However, looking more into the article that they cite, there seems to be no actual study done to prove the effectiveness of this method. The paper claims that clinical improvements were seen 24 hours after sleep deprivation, but does not explain what benefits they saw, how they were measured, and if this is even effective beyond 24 hours or as a long-term treatment. Looking further into this theory, I stumbled upon an article from Harvard Health discussing the effects of sleep on depression. The article directly contrasts to the statements put forward by Natural News. It writes that sleep problems that cause sleep deprivation such as insomnia actually increase the risk of depression as a lack of sleep can lead to impaired thinking and emotional regulation. It even goes on further to write that good sleeping habits can alleviate such impairments, citing statistical information and actual studies performed.

            The writer further goes on to say that talking to your mother more is also an effective method to combat depression, citing a study that merely shows a correlation to depression and relationship tension in one’s life. Again, this study does not offer this as a treatment for depression, but rather just notices a correlation based on survey questions administered and suggests that discussion of these relationships be considered by therapists when working with those with depression. Although it is certainly possible that improving relationships in your life can help improve one’s mental state, for Nature News to say that talking to your mom provides a “far better chance of recovery than synthetic drugs” without any actual evidence is completely illogical. Finally, this article throws in the “best” natural treatment to alleviate depression symptoms – magnesium supplements. They of course provide a link directing you to their website to purchase such supplements, but do not include any link to research to back up its effectiveness.

            The dangerous ideas put forward by this Nature News article are not only completely baseless, but may actually cause more harm to those who unknowingly follow these tips in order to treat their depression. Furthermore, using fear as a tactic to push their beliefs and to sell their products by claiming antidepressants are mostly ineffective and can even worsen your symptoms, again without citing any evidence, proves that this source as incredibly biased and unreliable.

Posted by "Alexandra Rios" (3)

"Progressives mandating Vaccines = the New Nazis"

Vaccinations have always been a topic of debate from the moment of their creation and implementation. Vaccinations were created with the goal of stopping and preventing the spread of numerous deadly diseases that had caused numerous epidemics around the world before a vaccination was implemented and thus caused the disease rate to decline drastically. The debate of whether to vaccinate or not has lead to an article on naturalnews.com to compare California legislatures to that of highly, experimental Nazi doctors. This article, published in 2018 cites SB277 law passed in California as a violation of the Nuremberg Codes, which were set after the discovery of what Nazi doctors were experimenting on Jewish prisoners.

The mandation of vaccination (SB277) removed personal belief exemptions and required vaccination for entry into private or public primary schools. It was passed in June 2015, yet, this anti-vaccination article was published in November 2018. The author starts the article, “As California’s forests are going up in flames, you might wonder whether the bureaucrats of California actually care about children at all.” A fire in which some 20+ people have lost their lives in. He then quickly switches to the idea that if legislatures did care about children that  they wouldn’t be forcing these “dangerous, deadly” vaccinations. The author continues that by mandating these vaccines legislatures are violating the Nuremberg codes that were associated with Nazi era Germany. The codes are strictly related to the ethics of experimenting on humans that were specifically associated with Nazi doctors during the second world war and their racial hygiene experiments conducted within concentration camps.

Vaccinations have had vigorous testing done before they are released to the public. They are designed with the goal of preventing the spread of dangerous and deadly diseases. Yes, vaccinations do come with an array of various levels of side-effects but the most severe side-effects occur at a miniscule rate. The specific mandate in California was implemented after an outbreak of measles at Disneyland and due to low vaccination rates in some towns throughout the state. These vaccinations though are not comparable to the Nuremberg Codes and what they specifically related to. Vaccines have been experimented and highly tested for many years and have known side-effects and bring about an overall positive result of prevention of the spread of deadly disease; while, the Codes related to unethical treatment upon humans where doctors and scientists had one goal in mind of creating an Aryan race among other disastrous experiments. Also, this law is mandated for entry into primary and secondary schools where children interact and spread sickness to each other at a high rate; the Codes, however, are related to people who were restrained and had no consent on what was done. California, a highly populated and attractive destination for tourists around the world had the goal of mandating vaccination to prevent the epidemic of a deadly disease. Vaccinations have been highly tested and are still being tested. The side-effects and risks are always told to the patient prior to receiving the vaccine. Having a say in vaccination is something that people should be free to express but to compare a law that mandates vaccine to codes related to racial medicine that was experimented on unwilling subjects during a time of war is not an appropriate link.

-Maddie Powers

https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-11-13-california-forced-vaccinations-a-blatant-violation-of-the-nuremberg-code.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Senate_Bill_277

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/vaccines-diseases.html

Mental Illness and Violence

       I'm sure you are all aware of the tragic shooting that occurred in a California bar last Thursday night which took the lives of 12 innocent people. If you saw any news articles, you've most likely read headlines and stories mentioning that the shooter was a veteran who might have suffered from PTSD. There is no current information on whether he was formally diagnosed with PTSD, but articles such as this label him as a “PTSD shooter”. Other articles such as this put PTSD in the headline, but then don't mention anything regarding what is known about PTSD and violent behavior. Unfortunately, this type of reporting is a recurring theme after every mass shooting, in which the media will use mental illness as the scapegoat. Based off current research, the idea that mental illness leads to violent behavior is nothing more than fake news. Not only is this faulty reporting, but it’s led a large portion of the public to believe that mentally ill individuals are more likely to act out in violent ways. This is detrimental to the rest of the population who suffer from these conditions, most commonly PTSD, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia, because it impacts how they’re treated.

       So, lets get some things straight, individuals with a serious mental illness are not any more likely to act out violently than the average person. Of course there are many other variables at play that do increase violence when combined with a mental illness, such as substance abuse, comorbidity, personal stress, etc., but when just looking at an individual with some mental illness, this relationship holds true. In fact, studies have shown evidence of the opposite, in that mentally ill individuals are at least three times more likely to a be victim of violence rather than the perpetrator. This number is already high due to the frequent discrimination and difficulties of life that come with having a mental disorder, so being linked with people who commit mass shootings only increases the amount of stigma against them. Another study found that patients with a serious mental illness only accounted for 5% of all violent crimes in the US, much lower than the 18% of the population who suffer from these illnesses. In other words, even if every person with a serious mental illness was removed from society, violent crime rates would only fall by 5%. When compared to other developed countries, further data shows that the proportion of Americans with a severe mental illness is about the same even though the US has had many more mass shootings and violent crimes in general.

       All these studies, and many more, provide a lot of evidence that go against this belief still widely held by many people. Don’t get me wrong here, I’m not saying that the people who commit these awful acts of violence have nothing wrong with them, but rather you shouldn’t think any differently about someone who has one of these mental illnesses.

Posted by: Matt Murdoch (3)