Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/jujaitaly/public/index.php on line 447.

Take Photos of Stove Dials Before You Leave for Vacation. If you’re the kind of person who spends the first ten minutes of the Lyft ride to the airport worrying that you accidentally left the oven on—even if you didn’t even use the oven that day—you can quell your anxious brain with a quick smartphone precaution. Leaving for a vacation is always a bit of a stressful time as you run around the house and get. If your brain starts to play the “Did I really turn it off” game, you can simply tap your photo app and see for yourself. We Worry for Good Reason. I started taking pre- vacation photos after my landlord upgraded the heating system in my apartment building and gave us all new thermostats.

This was in winter, right before I left on my holiday travels, and since the thermostats were so new that I hadn’t yet become accustomed to them I spent the whole first day of the trip worrying that I had forgotten to turn the thermostat down. Not all of us are the types of people who worry about things like that, of course.

Statistical Techniques On top of that, the story doesn’t link to any scientific research. That’s another immediate red flag, since a testimony is rarely as solid as actual reported data.

But those of us who do generally worry for good reason—my current oven, for example, turns its indicator light off when it reaches its preheated temperature. This means I left the oven on more than once, assuming it was off because the none of the lights were on. Now I know to check the dials, not the lights. We also worry about forgetting to turn things off, especially when we go on vacations, because the process of leaving for vacation is so different from our usual habits. When we leave our homes to go to work, for example, we usually follow a specific routine.

We wear the same types of clothes and carry the same bags. Then we leave our homes and lock our doors. OS: It’s admittedly a little silly to need an app to remind you to grab your key or wallet before. The funny thing is that I’ve never once wanted to look at this proof after I’ve photographed it; it also turns off the part of my brain that gets anxious about accidentally leaving something on. There are all sorts of variations on Raspberry Pi- powered home automation systems, but ARM. Or it could be that the process of taking the photo is complex enough to stick in my memory—instead of giving my thermostats a quick glance, I’m pausing to frame the shot.

The important thing is that it works. I can think about how fun the vacation’s going to be, instead of mentally retracing my steps and hoping they paused in front of the stove. Plus—as a bonus—if something happens to my apartment while I was away, I have photo proof that it wasn’t because I accidentally left the oven on or the window open.'Tis the season to load up your outlets with lights and decorations, and even if you.

A Guide to the Worst Seltzer Take Ever Written. There are so few things to enjoy in this life.

We can imbibe in booze but only occasionally. In many states, we can’t (legally) indulge in The Devil’s Lettuce or even get health care. That’s why so many of us cherish the wholesome party water known as seltzer. Its playful bubbles are a reminder of how carefree life could be if we all stopped yelling at each other online or tweeting tentacle porn.

Recently, however, The Sun decided to deliver its piping hot take about seltzer which is—we kid you not—“Sparkling water is really, really not good for you.”Everybody’s got A Take these days. Inside each and every one of us is a piping hot Take, waiting to burst out of our innards like a baby xenomorph. Still, sometimes the Take is Bad, and the feeler of the Take should feel Bad, too—especially when it’s a horribly reported story about something as beloved as seltzer. So, we’re going to help you figure out for yourself when you’ve got a bad take. Also, we’re going to use “seltzer,” “sparkling water” and “club soda” interchangeably, sorry.

Let’s just start with the headline. If you ever see a definitive statement in a science story’s headline (or anywhere in the story for that matter) instead of “might” or “could,” you should immediately be a little skeptical.

There are few definites in science. It’s an incremental process that involves experiments—you compare some experimental change with the way things normally go, the control. The results might contain bias based on the design of the experiment and who performed it. Only after repeated, independent experimental results can you say that something is true.

And even then, further research might add more complexity or nuance, or even disprove it. The first few paragraphs are just a grabby lead and summary paragraph. But then, the story cites a source: “Adam Thorne, a dentist in London’s Harley Street.” “Most people have no idea that fizzy water is extremely acidic, it’s p.

H3 on the acidity scale. The bubbles erode your tooth enamel—and over time this causes painful, yellow cracked teeth,” Thorne told the Daily Mail. But you should immediately note that it doesn’t say his qualifications for stating that soda water erodes tooth enamel. Sure, he’s a dentist.

But has he actually studied the effect of seltzer on teeth? Luckily for you, there’s the Pub. Med, the National Institutes of Health’s database of science studies. Pop into the advanced search and see if there’s an entry with “Thorne A” in the author field and “enamel” or “tooth” in all fields. Nothing shows up, so you might be skeptical as to just how much Thorne knows about the effects of acid on your teeth.

On top of that, the story doesn’t link to any scientific research. That’s another immediate red flag, since a testimony is rarely as solid as actual reported data.

So, do another Pubmed search and you’ll find a number of studies on soft drinks, but few on carbonated water itself. You might poke around to other news sites and see what they say. We found this Atlantic story, and if you don’t like the Atlantic, you can at least just skip to the scientific study. Scythe Ninja Copper Anniversary Edition there. One study shows soda water can be potentially bad for your enamel.

But even this is just a lab study, meaning it’s not representative of what really happens in the human body—you aren’t soaking your teeth in seltzer. But, Adam is pretty sure that seltzer has a p. H of 3, so we’re good, right? It’s extremely acidic, and that’s a bad thing? The Sun’s intrepid reporter clearly didn’t think to explain anything about p. H or what it means.

But just because added flavors and carbonation make the drink slightly more acidic than boring water doesn’t mean seltzer is turning your entire body into an acid soup. This is just a classic scare tactic used in bad reporting—none of the studies say anything about seltzer “rotting your teeth.” Sure, bacteria might cause tooth decay, but none of these studies (nor the new story) mention tooth bacteria. Also, the assertion that seltzer has a p. H of 3 is dubious. Perrier, for example, has a p. H of 5. 5, and San Pellegrino has a p. H of 5. 3. A toddler with access to Google could regurgitate this information.

The Sun completely owns itself so hard in the next part it reads like a Kurt Eichenwald tweet. The writer includes a quote from Edmond R.

Hewlett, a spokesperson for the American Dental Association, who says that “it is the flavoring and not the carbonation that lowers the p. H (increases the acidity) to a level that can potentially erode tooth enamel with frequent consumption.” So, not the carbonation that causes the potential problem. Check. In the second half of the story, you’ll notice the writer still doesn’t link to scientific research, but to more news stories, and that they make the assertion that carbonated water will “make you fatter.” Terms like “fatter” should raise a red flag—generally, this kind of language indicates an oversimplification of what the team really did, used to scare readers. In this case, a few Google searches took us to the paper that the fat claim is based on, linked here.

You’ll notice that in this study, carbonated water only made rats gain weight, not humans, and plenty of things don’t work when repeated in humans. On top of that, the story talks about a “hunger hormone” called ghrelin and references a study that tests seltzer’s effects on ghrelin levels in humans.

But it only has 2. When reading a suspicious science story, try to see whether word choice is consistent throughout the story, and whether the statements made actually support the claim. In this case, you’ll notice in the last sentence that the author starts referring to a “zero calorie diet drink,” rather than seltzer. The evidence that the news story presents only deals with diet drinks, not the claim in the headline, which refers only to sparkling water. Hating on seltzer is a spicy take for sure, but this take is also a bad one. Live fast, die young, and drink your bubble water with abandon. Symantec Norton Ghost 15 0 Serials Unlock more.