Six Degrees of Separation

In the early 2000’s Samy Kamkar wrote JS.Spacehero, a bit of computer code that displayed the words “Samy is my Hero” on your screen when you clicked on his MySpace page. The code did not stop there however; when you clicked on his profile, JS.Spacehero also copied onto your MySpace page, so anyone who clicked on your page also saw the words “Samy is my Hero” on their screen. The code would also copy onto their computer, and whoever clicked on their page would see the message, and so on and so forth. In just 20 hours, the virus hit over a million different accounts, making JS.Spacehero the fastest spreading virus ever. When Samy deleted his page in a panic, he took down the entirety of MySpace with him. Of course, the US government frowns upon this kind of technological chicanery, and Samy Kamkar was hit with a felony charge. The importance of this story is not about computer hacking or technological laws; it's about something much bigger. Just how connected is everybody on earth?

You may have heard of the idea of Six Degrees of Separation, the theory that everyone in the world is interconnected in a path of 6 or fewer intermediaries. Before we can explore this idea however, we must introduce the mathematical notion of a network, or more properly, a graph. A graph is a structure made of nodes and connections between nodes, called edges. 6 examples of graphs are shown below. The red dots are nodes and the black lines between nodes are edges.

Graphs can be used to represent many different things, but they are very helpful in modeling social networks. A graph can theoretically be used to model the connection between every person on earth, but for the sake of simplicity, we must first explore a small subset of the population: popular musicians. As we do this, let us also play a game. The object of the game is to link any artist to Kanye West in the shortest number of steps. Artists will be represented by nodes and the songs that the artists worked together on will be represented by edges. Let’s start with an easy example: We will link rapper Drake to Kanye. This is a simple path; they were both on the song “Forever.”

Simple enough, right? Now let us try someone potentially harder: Shakira.

It turns out we need to go only two steps to reach Kanye West from Shakira. Shakira sang “Can’t Remember to Forget You” with Rihanna, who featured on the Kanye West song “Famous.” As it turns out, Rihanna is a very important node in this graph, as she connects many disparate artists to Kanye West. In graph theory, nodes like Rihanna are known as hubs because their number of connections far exceeds the average.

One important feature we see in most graphs is clustering. The idea of clustering is that related nodes are highly interconnected with each other. In this case, musicians in Kanye West’s genre, rappers, have many connections to each other.

The final concept we need to explore is the strong law of weak ties. Simply stated, the path between completely unrelated nodes are made shorter by seemingly random or surprising connections between two nodes. In this case, let’s take the path between two very different musicians: Kanye West to the Turkish singer Tarkan. It turns out that Tarkan made a song with Wyclef Jean, called “Aman Aman.” Wyclef Jean made a song with Kanye West called “Sweetest Girl.” The importance of this connection in the structure of the graph cannot be understated, because it connects a whole new group of artists to Kanye West in a relatively short amount of steps!

Now let’s look at the big picture. Can any two random people in the world really be connected in 6 or fewer steps? The evidence suggests this is possible. Facebook data suggest that 92% of all Facebook users are connected in 5 steps. The connections on Twitter are even more close than that. Studies have shown that the average path length between two Twitter users is between 3 and 4 steps. Our friend groups can also give us insight into how interconnected we are. You can think of your tight knit group of friends like the rappers in our musician graph since most of them are friends with each other. If these were our only connections however, the world wouldn’t be very interconnected at all. Our more popular friends, the big names on campus that function much like Rihanna on our musicians graph, connect us to large amounts of people. Even more important are our random acquaintances. Our friends across campus, across towns, or across oceans are the people that really connect us to the rest of the world. So go out there and meet people! You never know who you might connect with.

Eating Healthy

In the past few years, I’ve developed an interest in cooking. I binge-watched the Great British Baking Show and practically worshipped Ina Garten. But after months of churning out pastas and pies, I began to miss the foods that were most familiar to me. I reminisced about my grandmother’s cheese filled paratha and fresh poori we had during our Indian Thanksgiving. So one day, I called my grandmother over and asked her to teach me how to make chana batura. She pulled out her infamous silver spices tin native to Indian cooking and threw the spices in without any measuring cups. After an indeterminable amount of time, the smell of turmeric and onions filled my home, and we dug into the fruits of our labor.

Although many Indians love the food of their homeland, many of them have also suffered the consequences of consuming large amounts of ghee and fried foods in the form of cardiac disease and diabetes, two of the biggest killers in the United States. Many of the diets focused on mitigating these diseases are based on Western foods. If you look through the recommended recipes on the American Diabetes Association website, the closest they get to a culturally diverse recipe is a burrito bowl, which isn’t even an authentic Hispanic dish.¹ On the American Heart Association website, none of the foods labeled “Asian” are at best Americanized imitations of Asian dishes.² Although there are some less well-known websites that list out diabetes-friendly recipes based on culture, the majority of health diets do not take into account the cultural diversity of hospital populations in this country.³

I called my grandmother a few weeks later to ask her whether there were dishes in Indian cuisine that were considered healthy. She said that most Indian dishes were highly caloric because people there were more concerned with having enough to eat rather than eating too much. This could explain why in times of excess, people who are eating large amounts of fattening foods are suffering the consequences. Still, there were some dishes she knew about that seemed promising. She mentioned that when there was someone sick in the household, they were fed a mixture of yogurt, rice, and lentils, a high protein dish that used minimal butter.

Could it be possible to balance our food culture with maintaining a healthy diet? Can we make changes that preserve flavor while sacrificing the less savory, fatty ingredients? Throughout this blog series, I will interview people from various cultural backgrounds to determine their “health foods’ and analyze the historical background and nutritional value behind popular recipes. At the end of this, I hope to better understand what it means to “eat healthy” from both a cultural and nutritional perspective.

References:

1. American Diabetes Association. www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/cookbook-recipes. (accessed Nov. 20, 2017)
2. American Heart Association. www.recipes.heart.org. (accessed Nov. 28, 2017)
3. Eating Right Ontario. www.eatrightontario.ca (accessed Nov. 23, 2017)
4. Image: https://petitworldcitizen.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/img_1678.jpg

How to Stop Unwanted Thoughts

We’ve all had our share of unpleasant experiences -- flunking a test, going through a breakup, failing an interview. Most of the time, memories of these experiences linger for a few days or weeks but eventually fade away, and we can continue with our lives stress and worry free.

However, sometimes, these unwanted thoughts constantly come back to haunt us no matter how much we try to distract ourselves or make ourselves forget them. Recently, a group of researchers at the University of Cambridge have discovered the mechanism behind why this phenomenon occurs.¹

Participants of the study memorized pairs of words containing a cue and a memory. If the cue was shown in green, the participants were told to recall the memory. If the cue was shown in red, the participants were told to block all thoughts of the memory or try to “push it out of mind.” For example, if the pair was BEACH-AFRICA and BEACH was shown in red, the participant would try to suppress thoughts about AFRICA.

During the trials, researchers imaged the participants’ brains using functional magnetic resonance imagining (fMRI) and 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS). These techniques allowed researchers to track the concentration of the GABA neurotransmitter in the hippocampus, a region of the brain responsible for memory.

GABA, or gamma-aminobutyric acid, is a chemical that relays signals between nerve cells in the brain by acting as an inhibitory transmitter, meaning that it suppresses the activity of cells receiving the signal. The researchers found that higher concentrations of GABA in the hippocampus were associated with a better ability to suppress thoughts, both positive and negative. They hypothesize that GABA prevents retrieval of memories, which in turn suppresses unwanted thoughts.

According to the researchers, the ability to control unwanted thoughts is essential for mental health.² Most of us aren’t affected too severely by negative thoughts. However, having constant intrusive memories, thoughts, or hallucinations is a symptom characteristic of mental illnesses like anxiety, major depression, PTSD, and schizophrenia. For people struggling with mental health issues, this research presents a new approach to develop treatments that could improve their wellbeing and happiness.

References:

1. Schmitz, T. W.; Correia, M. M.; Ferreira, C. S.; Prescot, A. P.; Anderson, M. C. Nature Communications 2017, 8 (1).
2. http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/scientists-identify-mechanism-that-helps-us-inhibit-unwanted-thoughts
3. Image: https://ww2.kqed.org/mindshift/2016/03/04/how-to-turn-on-the-part-of-your-brain-that-controls-motivation/

The Science of Beauty

Henry David Thoreau, in his book Walden, details his almost two-year excursion of simple living in the woods of Massachusetts. He viewed nature as a way to achieve a higher understanding of the universe, and enjoyed being one with the solitude and beauty it has to offer. Nature, thus, has a way of connecting humans to our emotions and eliciting positive thoughts and feelings. For example, it is a universal truth that a rainbow after a rainy day brings a smile to anyone’s face. The aurora borealis, or Northern Lights, are regarded by many as breathtaking, a must-see on planet Earth. But how does nature capture our attention and scintillate our senses? What are the long-term effects of spending time in the outdoors?

Beauty in the natural world affects humans subconsciously: spending time in the outdoors is connected to overall mental well-being. A simple stroll through a forest, for example, can allow us to distance ourselves from our otherwise chaotic thoughts. We are forced to regard every stimuli around us, from the sun shining down upon us to the tall trees shrouding us to the the small squirrels and insects we are careful not to harm. Compared to the contemporary world, which forces humans to live life in the fast lane through the influence of technology and commerce, nature is Earth at its most basic level. It allows humans to take a step back and a breath in, and entices us with its many facets of simplicity and serenity. Thus, the environment melts stress and releases endorphins that can decrease feelings of depression and fatigue.

Nature’s ability to distract us from the present also increases creativity and intelligence. David Strayer of the University of Utah showed that hikers were able to solve more complex puzzles after a four-day backpacking trip compared to a control group. The prefrontal cortex, which controls decision-making and social behavior, undergoes much strain from daily usage of technology and multi-tasking. This area of the brain can take a break when we respond to purely nature-driven stimulus. Nature allows the brain to reset so that it can perform tasks with renewed energy.

A change of environment can also makes humans kinder and more generous. There is an out-of-body feeling associated with viewing an awe-inspiring landscape that makes one feel that one is part of something bigger than the present. It can make day-to-day inconveniences seem inconsequential and remind us that there is more to the world than what goes on in our lives. Humans are also more likely to be more ethical when faced with moral dilemmas after spending time in nature. Experiments conducted at the University of California, Berkeley, found that participants playing the Dictator Game (which measures the degree to which individuals will act out of self-interest) were more likely to be generous to their peers after being exposed to alluring nature scenes.

Planet Earth’s most primitive offerings actually present us with complex and diverse benefits. A quick breath of fresh air can melt away feelings of stress and anxiety, while increasing cognitive focus and creativity. Perhaps we can create our own “Walden” and take a break from studying or working to simply enjoy the outdoors and spend time appreciating the many sides of our ever-changing world.

References:

1. “How Nature Can Make You Kinder, Happier, and More Creative.” Greater Good, greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/how_nature_makes_you_kinder_happier_more_creative.

2. Louv, Richard. “Ten Reasons Why We Need More Contact with Nature | Richard Louv.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 12 Feb. 2014, www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/13/10-reasons-why-we-need-more-contact-with-nature.

3. “Henry David Thoreau.” Henry David Thoreau, transcendentalism-legacy.tamu.edu/authors/thoreau/.

The Ticking Time Bomb: Hereditary Cancer Syndromes

“Life comes with many challenges. The ones that should not scare us are the ones we can take on and take control of.” As hard as it is to believe, this is a quote from Angelina Jolie’s book about hereditary breast cancers where she encourages a more thorough integration of genomics into the field of oncology. Recently, celebrities such as Angeline Jolie have spoken out about the BRCA genes and their personal experiences with hereditary cancer syndromes. Jolie’s double-mastectomy and the media’s portrayal of her treatment have helped to drastically increase the awareness of genetic testing among the general population.

Hereditary cancer syndromes, and particularly hereditary breast cancers, are primarily associated with the genetic mutations BRCA1 and BRCA2. An individual with the BRCA genes can have over a 70% chance of developing cancer with the right combination of genetic and environmental factors. With the odds of developing cancer so high, it seems obvious that any measure we can take to lower this penetrance should be fervently supported by all medical professionals. Right?

There’s an important ethical dilemma that arises whenever we think about using these new technologies. On the one hand, genomics, the technological aspect of genetics concerned with sequencing and analyzing an organism’s genome, has greatly improved the prognosis for cancer patients. Genetic profiling can help individuals with hereditary breast cancers through every stage of their disease, from diagnosis to treatment. An interesting use of genetic profiling is using the BRCA genes to help classify tumors. Because patients with the same BRCA mutation most likely have the same type of tumor, classifying one individual’s tumor means you have classified the other’s! More importantly, by providing a means of pre-symptomatic testing, patients are able to utilize precautionary measures such as estrogen-regulating drugs and preventative surgeries like mastectomies (removal of breast tissue).

On the other hand, it is simply not possible to test every individual for the BRCA genes. For one, they are extremely costly.  There is no way that a geneticist can indiscriminately recommend genetic testing to every patient as DNA sequencing tests have yet to be covered by every health insurance plan. Without insurance, the cost of one of these tests can range from $475 to over $4000. Furthermore, the results of such a test can put an individual at risk for genetic discrimination. Although GINA, or the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, protects from genetic discrimination, or having to pay an inflated premium due to genetic test results that reveal a predisposition for a severe genetic disease, it only applies to health insurance and not life insurance. Having young individuals get tested for the BRCA genes comes with the possibility of hiking up their life insurance premiums later in life. Finally, an individual’s mental wellbeing is at risk because the fear of one’s diagnosis can understandably cause anxiety and/or depression.

So the question remains. Do we encourage the general public to get tested for the BRCA genes if they believe that they have a strong family history of hereditary cancers? Although there is no answer to this question that pleases all medical professionals, one thing is certain: An ordinary individual can possibly prevent cancer in his or her family with the help of genetic testing. When used cautiously, genetic testing is an invaluable tool in all stages of cancer treatment and prevention. It seems clear to me that advocating for widespread awareness of the advantages of genetic testing in reducing cancer penetrance is one of the most beneficial ways to prevent the growth of tumors in an individual and to control inheritance through generations.

Why are we waiting, then? Let’s take control and not let cancer scare us anymore.

References:

1. "GINA & Your Health Insurance." GINAhelp.org - Your GINA Resource. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Nov. 2016.
2. Moyer, Virginia A. "Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement." Annals of internal medicine 160.4 (2014): 271-281.
3. Chen, Sining, and Giovanni Parmigiani. "Meta-analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 penetrance." Journal of Clinical Oncology 25.11 (2007): 1329-1333.