Can sitting too close to the tv make you go blind?

I don't know if I've posted about this one before or not.  If I haven't, I've been meaning to, since this one is an oldie but goodie.  Anyway, the short answer is one we've all suspected since we were little kids, being chastised with this warning by our overprotective parents... sitting too close to the TV will NOT cause you to go blind.  Keeping your eyes too close to your tv screen, however (or your computer screen, or portable media players, video gaming devices, or even books, whatever those are), can cause you to become nearsighted (as the muscles that help your eyes to focus gradually lose their ability to adjust for things that are far away, see here if you don't believe me).  As a corollary to this, a new study shows that Americans are much more likely to be nearsighted today than 40 years ago (here for the journal's webpage).  I knew I should have gone to optometry school!  Maybe I will just buy some stock in Bausch and Lomb.

Are cats smarter than dogs?

So dogs tend to get the bum wrap when it comes to intelligence. Though many dog owners come to appreciate how smart their pets can actually be (our pups know several of their toys by name, and can retrieve them if you ask), most people would probably pick cats as the smarter household pet because they excel at being aloof and even manipulative.  The truth is that there probably is no reliable way to determine which is smarter (especially since there are so many different breeds of dog and cat) and because both are smart in different ways, as they have evolved to be.  Despite the difficulty of the comparison, the New Scientist has an article out now where they have attempted to compare cats and dogs on several different criteria (including brain size, "understanding", "problem solving", and "supersenses").  I don't know how valid the final outcome is (dogs win 6 to 5), but the article is certainly interesting and filled with some good information (like dogs tend to have larger brains, but cats tend to have more cortical neurons, or cats may actually have a better sense of smell than dogs).  The fun facts aside, I have to disagree with some of the categories used (like popularity or eco-friendliness) if the question really is just one of intelligence (rather than the more general question of which one makes the better pet).  Also, I am disappointed to see birds have been excluded from the comparison: despite my dislike for having them as pets, they are certainly smart (like gray parrots for example).  Anyway, the rundown of winners for each category looks like this:
Brain: cats
Shared history with humans: dogs
Bonding: dogs
Popularity: cats
Understanding: dogs
Problem solving: dogs
Vocalization: cats
Tractability (or "trainability"): dogs
Supersenses: cats
Eco-friendliness: cats
Utility: dogs
Totals: DOGS 6, CATS 5

Does giving your brain a "mental workout" really help ward off dementia?

Well, it is certainly possible, even likely, but not conclusive.  I will refer you to a couple of blogs that have done a much better job of explaining this than I plan to do here...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/08/opinion/08aamodt.html?_r=1
and/or
http://www.spring.org.uk/2008/06/which-cognitive-enhancers-really-work.php

If you were always the kind of person to read the Cliff's notes, or rent the movie instead of reading the book, the bottom line is that exercise, the real/physical kind, not the mental kind you can do sitting in front of a computer, appears to be the most effective way to improve your overall cognitive function and ward off dementia as you age.  Playing Sudoku or doing crosswords (or other brain games) may have some beneficial effects, particularly if you don't do anything at all to stimulate your brain, but it is more likely that these types of activities will primarily only help you to get better at similar types of puzzles and problems.  So, if you want to do what's best for your brain, you should try to get at least twenty minutes of exercise, several times a week...
you heard me, stop reading this blog and go outside (or, if you live in a frozen part of the country like I do, hit the gym).

2009 in Review...weirdness review

Discover magazine has a post about the 15 weirdest science stories of 2009, here
There are many of them I don't think I would characterize as science, but they are still worth checking out.
My favorites are the sea monster and the grad student who became an escort to pay her way through school, (and now has a tv and a book deal). I knew I should have looked at the fine print on those student loans!

It's not exactly brain surgery...

Why should I do all the heavy lifting?

So, I just finished reading the book "Welcome to your brain" by Sandra Aamodt and Sam Wang.  It is a very valiant attempt at covering a lot of different topics in neuroscience and presenting them in a way that is accessible to the general public.  Not only is the book a valiant attempt, but a largely successful one, though there were a couple places in the book where an advanced degree in neuroscience or psychology seemed to be necessary.  BUT, on the whole, most of the chapters are very accessible, and easy to understand, and all the while, the authors do a good job of keeping things interesting, particularly by pointing out popular neuroscience myths.  Anyway, check out the book if you get a chance, and, if not, add their blog (AND THIS ONE!) to your list of blogs you follow, or re-tweet, or whatever the kids are doing these days.  Also, since it will save me from having to write up several posts of my own, here is a link to their article "Six myths about the brain"
If you read this blog, you may find some of it repetitive, but then some of it is stuff I haven't covered (...yet).

Autism and vaccines...

I am sure you have heard at some point, probably from the mouth of some celebrity (Jim Carrey, Jenny McCarthy, Bill Maher, etc.) that they believe vaccines can cause autism.  I am not going to go on at length about this (I will provide links you can go to for that below).  I will just say a few things.  First, there is no evidence to suggest that vaccines cause autism.  The only reason anyone ever connected the two is because infants usually get vaccines around 10-12 months of age, whereas autism usually gets diagnosed between 12 and 24 months because this is when the child should start developing more social and communicative behaviors (like learning to talk).  Because the one so closely follows the other, people have assumed a connection that simply isn't there, just a coincidence of physical development (an immune system developed enough to get vaccines) and brain development (one developed well enough to start talking).  Second, the scapegoat here, or what tends to get blamed most often is the mercury found in a preservative called thimerosal which used to be used in vaccines.  Almost all vaccines are now thimerosal-free, or as close to it as possible (except for some of the influenza vaccines), yet people still claim that vaccines are causing autism (despite all the evidence that shows that vaccines with thimerosal never caused autism, see below).  Third, some people site the fact that the incidence of autism has increased over the past several decades as evidence of a link since this coincides with increases in both the numbers of children getting vaccines, and the use of thimerosal in those vaccines (since about the 1970s).  Without getting into the whole correlation is not cause argument again (especially since autism can even be correlated to how much it rains) studies have since come out that directly compared the incidence of autism before and after thimerosal was removed from vaccines and showed no differences in the amount of kids being diagnosed with autism (some of the reports are summarized here).  It is also important to note another correlation that coincides with the increased incidence and that is increased awareness and education about autism spectrum disorders (which as a group has grown to include many different disorders in addition to classically defined autism).  This increased awareness has led to many doctors being able to catch or diagnose the disease in more children early on, which in turn would lead to what looks like an increased incidence, but may just be the result of better diagnosticians. Finally, it is understandable that parents of autistic children would want to blame someone or something for their child's disorder.  The reasons for this are many (some even financial like in this case), but mostly because, as a parent of an autistic child, you can often feel helpless to do anything, and frustrated on many levels.  Latching on to a cause (political, if not medical) gives some sense of control and a feeling of being able to work to fix the problem, or prevent it in the future.  This is only natural, and understandable, and these parents do have my sympathy.  HOWEVER, vaccines are CRITICAL to public health, and to individual health.  Very few drugs, if any, have ever had the successes that we see with vaccines (like the almost complete eradication of polio and smallpox for example, which are not completely eradicated because there are still populations of people who do not get vaccinated).  Childhood vaccines are unbelievably important, and will, in many cases, prevent not only several diseases, but DEATH. For example measles kills hundreds of thousands of children in the rest of the world, but not in the US because most kids are vaccinated, and, thanks to a widespread vaccination program in Asia, the number of deaths resulting from measles outside of the US has dropped nearly 80% since 2000.  If you are a parent, don't let unreasoned and unsubstantiated fears prevent you from keeping your child ALIVE and healthy. 
That's pretty much all I have to say on the subject, but, like I said, here are some links for you to check out on your own from some pretty reputable sources, like the FDA, and the American Medical Association (with others in there for good measure).
http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/vaccines/QuestionsaboutVaccines/ucm070430.htm
http://discovermagazine.com/2009/jun/06-why-does-vaccine-autism-controversy-live-on
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/290/13/1763
http://www.iom.edu/en/Reports/2003/Immunization-Safety-Review-Thimerosal---Containing-Vaccines-and-Neurodevelopmental-Disorders.aspx
http://www.aap.org/advocacy/releases/autismparentfacts.htm
http://www.pn.psychiatryonline.org/content/44/14/4.1.full