• MSN
  • Hotmail
  • More
    • Autos
    • My MSN
    • Video
    • Careers & Jobs
    • Personals
    • Weather
    • Delish
    • Quotes
    • White Pages
    • Games
    • Real Estate
    • Wonderwall
    • Horoscopes
    • Shopping
    • Yellow Pages
    • Local Edition
    • Traffic
    • Feedback
    • Maps & Directions
    • Travel
    • Full MSN Index
  • Bing
  • NBCNews.com
  • TODAY
  • Nightly News
  • Rock Center
  • Meet the Press
  • Dateline
  • msnbc
  • Breaking News
  • Newsvine
  • Home
  • US
  • World
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Sports
  • Entertainment
  • Health
  • Tech
  • Science
  • Travel
  • Local
  • Weather
Advertise | AdChoices
  • Recommended: Gymnophobics are real-life 'never-nudes'
  • Recommended: Swiss woman's esophagus twisted itself into a corkscrew
  • Recommended: Gray hair cure? Scientists find root cause of discoloration
  • Recommended: Your skin microbes prove you're a 'dog person'

Incredible stories about how wonderfully weird it is to be human. Curious about the way your body or brain ticks? E-mail The Body Odd or check us out on Facebook and Twitter.

  • ↓ About this blog
  • ↓ Archives
    • Icons Email E-mail updates
    • Icons Twitter Follow on Twitter
    • Icons Feed Subscribe to RSS
  • 30
    Aug
    2012
    4:48pm, EDT

    Myth, busted: The blue moon doesn't really make you crazy

    By Stephanie Pappas, LiveScience 
    With two full moons in August, the month would seem ripe for lunacy. But the idea that the moon contributes to madness is, fortunately, a myth.

    Friday, Aug. 31 will feature a blue moon, the second full moon of the month, an event that happens every 2.7 years, on average. (The next blue moon won't occur until 2015.) This double full moon might seem like good reason to stay indoors, given that the full moon has been linked to odd behavior in legends both old (werewolves, anyone?) and new (cops and emergency room staff have been known to blame the full moon for wild nights). In fact, scientists have looked into the connection between lunacy and the moon, and they've found very little evidence to back it up.

    Take, for example, emergency room visits. In 1996, researchers examined the history of more than 150,000 emergency room visits to a suburban hospital. They found no difference between full-moon nights and every other night of the month, they reported in the American Journal of Emergency Medicine. Other studies have tried and failed to find a link between the full moon and psychiatric emergency visits, epilepsy seizures and surgery outcomes. [ Gallery: The Fantastic Full Moon ]

    Most likely, the urban legends that spring up about illness, madness and the moon are examples of what psychologists call confirmation bias — the very human tendency to remember information selectively. If you're an emergency room nurse having a busy night and you happen to notice that the moon is full, you're more likely to remember the link than on a busy night when the moon is waxing or waning.

    So if humans aren't affected, how about animals? A 2007 study in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association did find that more cats and dogs arrive at the veterinary emergency room at Colorado State University on full-moon nights. Cats had a 23 percent greater chance of requiring an emergency vet visit under a full moon than during other moon phases, while dogs had a 28 percent greater chance. The researchers couldn't say why the link existed, though it's possible that the full moon's brightness means more people are out and about with their pets on those evenings, increasing the risk of injury.

    Other animal studies have been similarly confounding. A study published in the British Medical Journal in December 2000 found that one emergency room in Great Britain saw more animal bites on or around full-moon nights, but a study in the same issue of the journal that focused on Australia found no such link. Perhaps the werewolves of London haven't made it to Sydney.

    More from LiveScience:

    • Stop the Lunacy! 5 Mad Myths About the Moon
    • Full Moon Rising: Glitzy Photos of a Supermoon
    • Moon Master: An Easy Quiz for Lunatics 

    Want more weird health news? Find The Body Odd on Facebook.

    1 comment

    Show more
    Explore related topics: featured, myth-busting, blue-moon
  • 5
    Jun
    2012
    2:59pm, EDT

    Let go of the water bottle. You're plenty hydrated, people

    Getty Images stock

    By Melissa Dahl, NBC News

    If you can't stomach the thought of guzzling down eight glasses of water every single day, here's some good news: You're off the hook, more health experts are saying. 

    A new editorial in an Australian public health journal is the latest to bust the widely-repeated health myth we need to guzzle 64 ounces, or eight 8-ounce glasses, of water each day just to stave off dehydration. Actually, we get enough fluids to keep our bodies adequately hydrated from the foods we eat and the beverages we drink -- even from caffeinated drinks like coffee and tea. 

    Turns out, the whole "eight glasses a day" thing "really is no longer the recommendation; the recommendation is drinking to thirst," explains Madelyn Fernstrom, a board-certified nutrition specialist and TODAY's diet and nutrition editor. Drink when you're thirsty! What a novel idea.

    It's not a bad idea to consume 64 ounces of fluid a day, but it's not a scientifically proven idea, either. It likely comes from a 1940s recommendation from the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Research Council, which said that adults should ingest about 2.5 liters of water a day. 

    "But the often ignored second half of that statement pointed out that most of the water you need is in the foods you eat," explains Dr. Aaron Carroll, associate professor of Pediatrics and the associate director of Children's Health Services Research at Indiana University School.

    "But that report wasn’t based on any solid evidence – it was just opinion," continues Carroll, who explored the waterlogged myth in the book "Don't Cross Your Eyes ... They'll Get Stuck That Way!", which he co-authored with Dr. Rachel Vreeman, assistant professor of pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine. "A number of years later, a famous nutritionist, Dr. Frederick Stare, said something similar about drinking eight glasses of water a day, but he, too, stated that it could be in the form of coffee, tea, milk, soft drinks, or even beer. He even said that fruits and vegetables are good sources of water."

    But doesn't gulping down water help with weight loss? Kind of: It's true that drinking a high volume of water has been shown to work as an appetite suppressant, but consuming foods with high water content -- like watermelon, lettuce or grapefruit -- results in more weight loss than eschewing more foods for more (and more and more) water, writes the author of the Australian editorial, Spero Tsindos, of the department of dietetics and human nutrition at La Trobe University in Victoria. We've also heard that drinking lots of water helps ward off kidney stones and UTIs, but studies have shown that's only true for those who are prone to recurring episodes of either condition. 

    Last summer, a paper published in the British Medical Journal grabbed headlines when it called the myth "nonsense" -- thoroughly debunked nonsense," for that matter, citing reports in 2002 and 2006 that couldn't find any "clear evidence from drinking increased amounts of water."

    Yet the myth sticks around, likely because people have made a lot of money off the idea that we're all on the precipice of dehydration. (And we're definitely not -- government research on more than 15,000 people in 50 states show that over three years, the average American ingested 75 ounces of water a day, Carroll points out.)

    "(B)ottled water and the entire health culture around drinking more water have been very lucrative," Vreeman explains. "Certainly, your body needs fluids and water is a healthy choice to meet those fluid needs, but many of us spend a lot of money, effort and guilt on forcing ourselves to drink more water than we really need."

    So how much water should we be drinking? Whatever your body tells you it needs. Listen to your body, drink when it tells you to, and there's no need to drink more than that. (The idea that "when you're thirsty, you're already dehydrated" is another myth.) 

    Fernstrom notes that it's of course better to choose water over sodas, sweetened juices or other sugary, high-calorie beverages. There may not be any evidence that excess water is doing you any good, but it's not likely doing any harm, either. 

    "The issue of too much water, that's only a problem for extreme athletes who are sweating profusely and drinking too much water without replacing their salt," Fernstrom explains. For us mere mortals, if you drink lots of water throughout the day, "you're just going to pee it out," she says. "The worst that'll happen is you'll learn where more bathrooms are in your community."

    Related: 

    • Ask Jenna Wolfe: What's the best way to lose belly fat?
    • Does organic food turn people into jerks?

    211 comments

    Show more
    Explore related topics: water, featured, myth-busting, diet-and-nutrition, madelyn-fernstrom
  • 21
    May
    2012
    6:08pm, EDT

    Can a solar eclipse really blind you?

    By Stephanie Pappas
    LiveScience

    People in the western United States, Pacific and parts of Asia will have the chance to see a partial solar eclipse on Sunday (May 20). While it may be tempting to brush off warnings against looking up at this eclipse bare-eyed, don't: The light of an eclipse really can damage your eyes — though warnings of total blindness are likely overstated.

    The condition is called solar retinopathy, and it occurs when bright light from the sun floods the retina on the back of the eyeball. The retina is home to the light-sensing cells that make vision possible. When they're over-stimulated by sunlight, they release a flood of communication chemicals that can damage the retina. This damage is often painless, so people don't realize what they're doing to their vision.

    Solar retinopathy can be caused by staring at the sun (regardless of its phase), but few people can stand to look directly at our nearest star for very long without pain. It does happen occasionally — medical journals record cases in which people high on drugs have stared at the sun for long periods of time, causing serious damage. Adherents of sun-worshipping religious sects are also victims. In 1988, for example, Italian ophthalmologists treated 66 people for solar retinopathy after a sun-staring ritual. [ Gallery: Our Amazing Sun ]

    But during a solar eclipse, more people are at risk. With the sun partially covered, it's comfortable to stare, and protective reflexes like blinking and pupil contraction are a lot less likely to kick in than on a normal day.

    Early observers of astronomy sometimes found out about solar retinopathy the hard way. Thomas Harriot, who observed sunspots in 1610 but did not publish his discovery, once wrote in 1612 that after viewing the sun his "sight was dim for an hour." Oxford astronomer John Greaves was once quoted as saying that after sun observations, he saw afterimages that looked like a flock of crows in his vision. In the most famous case of all, Isaac Newton tried looking at the sun in a mirror, essentially blinding himself for three days and experiencing afterimages for months.

    Scientists don't have a good bead on the prevalence of eye damage after a solar eclipse. In one study, conducted in 1999 after a solar eclipse visible in Europe, 45 patients with possible solar retinopathy showed up at an eye clinic in Leicester in the United Kingdom after viewing the eclipse. Forty were confirmed to have some sort of damage or symptoms; five of those had visible changes in their retina.

    Twenty of the patients reported eye pain, while another 20 reported problems with vision. Of the latter group, 12 reported that their sight had returned to normal seven months later, but four could still see the ghosts of the damage in their visual field, such as a crescent-shaped spot visible in dim light. [ Gallery of Visual Illusions ]

    "Our series demonstrates that, contrary to popular belief, the majority of people with eclipse retinopathy are not totally blinded," the researchers wrote in 2001 in the journal The Lancet. However, they warned, earlier post-eclipse studies had turned up more severe problems in patients, suggesting that widespread media warnings not to look at the eclipsing sun may have prevented more damage during recent eclipses.

    Research also suggests that while a lot of the damage may heal, some may be permanent. One 1995 study followed 58 patients who sustained eye damage after viewing a 1976 eclipse in Turkey. Healing occurred during the first month after the eclipse, the researchers reported in the journal Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, but by 18 months, whatever damage still remained was permanent up to 15 years later.

    So, while it might be tough to go totally blind by looking at an eclipse, doing so without proper protection could leave a long-lasting stain on your vision. The only safe way to view an eclipse, according to NASA, is to use specially designed sun filters, often available at telescope stores, or to wear No. 14 welder's glasses, available at welding specialty stores. Pinhole viewers — essentially a hole in a piece of cardboard or paper — can also be used to view the eclipse indirectly by casting a shadow of the sun on the ground or on a screen.

    Related:
    • Rainbow Album: The Many Colors of the Sun
    • Complete Coverage of the May 20 Solar Eclipse
    • You and the Sun: 10 Burning Questions 

    Related: 

    • Why does blindness heighten other senses?
    • Who hates cilantro? Study aims to find out
    • How do blind people dream?

    Want more weird health news? Find The Body Odd on Facebook.

    2 comments

    Show more
    Explore related topics: blindness, featured, myth-busting, senses
  • 14
    May
    2012
    5:22pm, EDT

    No, side bangs will not give you a lazy eye

    Christopher Polk / Getty Images

    By Brian Alexander, NBC News Contributor

    Call it the great one-day (we hope) lazy eye panic.

    It started, apparently, with a story in the Australian tabloid Daily Telegraph, which quoted an Aussie eye doctor as indicting the hair-over-one-eye hairstyles of Cameron Diaz and Nicole Richie (those of us into old movies prefer Veronica Lake), and countless emo boys and girls, as causing lazy eye, or amblyopia.   

    Then the story made its way to The Huffington Post. By the time msnbc.com contacted Dr. Leonard Press, the New Jersey eye specialist who co-authored the clinical practice guidelines on amblyopia for the American Optometric Association, the assistant who picked up the phone said “You mean the hair-over-the-eyes thing?”

    Press could barely suppress a chuckle.

    Amblyopia, a condition of reduced vision in which the brain does not recognize some or all of the information the eye sees, is indeed a serious eye problem, he said, and one of the reasons it’s serious is that, if left untreated in children younger than 7 years old, a very concerted, sometimes difficult, effort has to be made to correct the lazy eye. That’s because after about age 7, the neural and optical mechanisms involved have been well established, and changing them is tough going.

    That’s exactly the reason why Nicole Richie is safe.

    “The story would only be true,” he explained, “if you had somebody young enough, and if that person never looked out of that eye -- if it was blocked 24-7. The reason it’s false is that you don’t have that constant deprivation.”

    The visual system, Press said, “is so well-established” after childhood, that “combing your hair over your eye will not do anything to that system.”

    So don’t worry all you emo boys and girls. By the time mother and father give in to whatever hairstyle you want, any eye problems won’t be the result of your comb-over. Laser lights, well, that could be another story.

    Brian Alexander (www.BrianRAlexander.com) is co-author, with Larry Young, PhD., of "The Chemistry Between Us: Love Sex and the Science of Attraction," (www.TheChemistryBetweenUs.com)  to be published Sept. 13.

    Related: 

    • Can eating too much make your stomach burst?
    • Fact check: Do leggings really make you fat?
    • Myth, busted: You only use 10 percent of your brain

    Want more weird health news? Find The Body Odd on Facebook.

    34 comments

    Show more
    Explore related topics: vision, featured, eyes, optometry, myth-busting
  • 23
    Nov
    2011
    10:51am, EST

    Can eating too much make your stomach burst?

    Getty Images stock

    Can you actually eat yourself to death?

    By Melissa Dahl, NBC News

    "I ate so much I'm about to burst!"

    Someone at your Thanksgiving table will likely say some version of this tomorrow, after you've all stuffed your faces with turkey, mashed potatoes, sweet potatoes and the rest. But how much would you have to eat in order for your stomach to actually burst? Is that even possible?

    "Interestingly enough, you can rupture your stomach if you eat too much," says Dr. Rachel Vreeman, co-author of "Don't Cross Your Eyes ... They'll Get Stuck That Way!" and assistant professor of pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine. "It is possible, but it's very, very rare."

    A handful of reports over the years document the tales of people who literally ate themselves to death, or at least came dangerously close: Japanese doctors wrote in a 2003 case report that they believed it was a 49-year-old man's "excessive over-eating" that caused his stomach to rupture, killing him. And this 1991 case report describes a similar "spontaneous rupture" in an adult's stomach "after overindulgence in food and drink." 

    Normally, your stomach can hold about one or one-and-a-half liters, Vreeman says -- this is the point you may reach if you overdo it tomorrow, when you feel full to the point of nausea. Pathologists' reports seem to suggest the stomach is able to do OK handling up to about three liters, but most cases of rupture seem to occur when a person has attempted to stuff their stomach with about five liters of food or fluid. (One of the reports Vreeman came across described the sad case of a woman whose stomach contained 12 liters of stuff.)

    It takes a certain amount of misguided determination to manage to override your natural gag reflex and continue to eat (and eat and eat), which is why, not surprisingly, reports of ruptured stomachs caused by overeating are most common in people with some sort of disordered eating, or limited mental capacity, Vreeman says. 

    "They have unusual eating habits to an extent that their bodies’ reflexes no longer respond as they normally do," Vreeman explains. "Their bodies’ reflexes have been ignored or abused for so long that they no longer vomit at the appropriate time. And then once the stomach gets to this extremely distended point, the stomach muscles are too stretched out to be strong enough to vomit the food out."

    Send idea Send me your story ideas

    Facebook Follow us on Facebook

    Twitter Follow me on Twitter

    Speaking of strong stomachs, you'd best have one in order to read this next paragraph. If vomiting isn't happening, all that food and fluid still has to go somewhere. The increasing volume of stuff in the gut puts pressure on the stomach's walls, so much so that the tissue weakens and tears, sending the stomach contents into the body and causing infection and pain, Vreeman says. Surgical intervention is necessary to repair a ruptured stomach and save the patient's life. 

    In particular, she says, anorexics or bulimics may be at risk. In fact, Cedars-Sinai, the non-profit hospital in Los Angeles, actually lists this as a "symptom" of bulimia: "In rare cases, a person may eat so much during a binge that the stomach bursts or the esophagus tears. This can be life-threatening."

    Other reported cases of spontaneous stomach rupture happen in individuals with Prader-Willi syndrome, a congenital disease that is characterized by, among other things, a kind of disordered eating: an "intense craving for food," resulting in "uncontrollable weight gain and morbid obesity." according to the National Institutes of Health. In a 2007 study examining the deaths of 152 individuals with the condition, 3 percent of those deaths were the result of gastric rupture and necrosis. 

    The takeaway here: This really happens, sometimes! Also: This is probably not going to happen to you. 

    "Even if you're starting to feel a bit sick or tired and overwhelmed from eating so much at Thanksgiving, you're still far, far away from the scenario where you're going to make your stomach actually explode," Vreeman assures. 

    Related:

    • Are 'competitive eating' contests a terrible idea?
    • The strange eating habits of Steve Jobs
    • Can eating too much spicy food kill you?

    Want more weird health news? Find The Body Odd on Facebook.

    67 comments

    Show more
    Explore related topics: holidays, thanksgiving, behavior, featured, myth-busting, diet-and-nutrition

Browse

  • featured,
  • behavior,
  • psychology,
  • health,
  • melissa-dahl,
  • sleep,
  • diane-mapes,
  • neurology,
  • skin-and-beauty,
  • memory,
  • diet-and-nutrition,
  • curious-condition,
  • inquiring-minds,
  • mental-health,
  • brain,
  • mens-health,
  • alcohol,
  • music,
  • neuroscience,
  • allergies,
  • relationships,
  • smell,
  • senses,
  • science,
  • vision,
  • aging,
  • language,
  • diet,
  • brian-alexander,
  • speech,
  • dreams,
  • lying,
  • taste,
  • sex,
  • halloween,
  • fitness,
  • better-living-through-science,
  • singing,
  • phobias,
  • sexual-health,
  • jonel-aleccia,
  • skin,
  • laughter
Also
Advertise | AdChoices

Melissa Dahl, NBC News

Melissa Dahl is a health writer and editor at msnbc.com and TODAY.com.

Melissa Dahl, NBC News Blogroll

  • Boing Boing
  • FitSugar
  • The Beauty Brains
  • No More Dirty Looks
  • The Hairpin
  • Follow on Twitter

Brian Alexander

is an author and frequent contributor to NBC News. His most recent book, written with Larry Young, PhD, is "The Chemistry Between Us: Love, Sex, and the Science of Attraction." He’s also author of “America Unzipped: In Search of Sex and Satisfaction,” and “Rapture: How Biotech Became the New Religion.”

Brian Alexander Blogroll

  • Twitter

Archives

  • 2013
    • May (6)
    • April (22)
    • March (21)
    • February (18)
    • January (26)
  • 2012
    • December (17)
    • November (21)
    • October (26)
    • September (24)
    • August (33)
    • July (35)
    • June (25)
    • May (34)
    • April (24)
    • March (33)
    • February (29)
    • January (12)
  • 2011
    • December (18)
    • November (30)
    • October (29)
    • September (30)
    • August (33)
    • July (39)
    • June (46)
    • May (32)
    • April (28)
    • March (25)
    • February (19)
    • January (26)
  • 2010
    • December (23)
    • November (19)
    • October (20)
    • September (23)
    • August (24)
    • July (25)
    • June (22)
    • May (11)
    • April (2)
    • March (3)
    • February (2)
    • January (1)
  • 2009
    • November (1)
    • October (4)
    • September (5)
    • August (1)
    • June (2)
    • April (2)
    • March (3)
    • January (2)
  • 2008
    • December (3)
    • November (4)
    • October (4)
    • September (3)
    • August (4)
    • July (5)
    • June (3)
    • May (3)
    • April (4)
    • March (5)
    • February (5)
    • January (4)

Most Commented

  • Gymnophobics are real-life 'never-nudes' (188)
  • Missing parts? Salamander regeneration secret revealed (1)

Other blogs

  • Cosmic Log
  • Red Tape Chronicles
  • PhotoBlog
  • US News
  • Open Channel

NBCNews.com top stories

3147,10
© 2013 NBCNews.com
  • The Body Odd on NBCNews.com
  • About us
  • Contact
  • Help
  • Site map
  • Careers
  • Closed captioning
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Advertise