Tag Archives: EnterpriseOrganization

The “Turing” of Tables

Back in September of 2015, the pharmaceutical industry was in complete uproar over the 5,000% price increase of a life saving drug. And just a month ago, the infamous “pharma bro,” Martin Shkreli, who was responsible for this price hike, was arrested. Ironically, his arrest was not on the basis of the unfair price increase; rather, Shkreli was arrested on fraud charges on his previous companies.

Taking a step back, Martin Shkreli, dubbed the “morally bankrupt sociopath,” “a scumbag,” “a garbage monster,” and “everything that is wrong with capitalism,” once was a rap music-loving and hedge fund manager; with one move overnight, he became the ridicule and criticism of people across the Internet and country.

Under Turing Pharmaceuticals, one of the many companies he founded, Shkreli acquired the rights to the drug, Daraprim. Previously only costing $13.50 a dose, this drug is a treatment for the relatively rare parasitic infection toxoplasmosis, and a drug that patients of weakened immune systems, such as AIDS, have come to depend on. What came to be the most controversial move in pharmaceutical history, Shkreli raised the price of this drug to $750 a dose, a 5,000% increase from its original price. Although such actions of raising drug prices for profit are commonplace in the pharmaceutical industry, seldom has any individual company dared to do so so publicly and unapologetically.

Following the public’s response, he later conceded that his only mistake, unapologetically, was not raising the price more. For a person to make a tremendous profit off a critical and devastating life situation evoked backlash from people, both morally and economically. And just overnight, Shkreli was propelled into the criticism and disdain of the public (although not as much as Trump, who knows?) and became the symbol of greed in the industry.

However, despite all this controversy, Martin Shkreli was not arrested on charges of this scandal that had made headlines. He was instead arrested for using money from a biopharmaceutical company, Retrophin, which he started as a hedge fund manager, as his own personal source of funds to pay off investors who lost money at his previous hedge fund. Shkreli’s previous business expenditures were not all that clean, and he had experienced many bankruptcies and failures. With every failure, debt accumulated and his liabilities to the investors of his hedge funds grew significantly.

And his way of paying off this debt? Even more startups.

Shkreli began a vicious cycle of creating new startups to pay off previous debt, but then having that startup fail and add to his existing debt. Using his startups to pay his private debts, his practices were soon found out and he was consequently arrested.

In the end, Shkreli was not caught legally for the crimes we know him best for, but for something we probably would never have known about had we not paid so much attention to his conducts. Martin Shkreli’s decision to drastically raise the price of the drug garnered him lots of attention, and because his action was not legally wrong, there was no way the public could throw him in jail. It’s ironic how Shkreli’s plans for profit only led him to his downfall. It was revealed that previous companies had flagged Shkreli on fraudulent charges, but had no results and conclusive findings. Yet after people paid more attention to him, were prosecutors able to find these fraudulent practices. We can only say, how the tables have turned.

 

THE WAY IN WHICH CHEMISTRY PLAYS A MAJOR ROLE IN MOVIES

After reading the title “The Way in which Chemistry Plays a Major Role in Movies”, you all may be contemplating the multifarious relationships evident among characters in movies or perhaps the complex interactions between two people, which can occasionally be referred to as chemistry. However, the term “chemistry” in this particular scenario embodies absolutely no affiliations with any attributes that may be intimating a relationship. Rather, it inhabits its orthodox definition as a branch of science and the study of the composition, structure, and properties of matter as well as the changes matter undergoes. Although it may not appear patent at first, chemistry has numerous, profound roles in the making of all movies. To begin with, simply think about how a movie is made. By a director, right? WRONG! I mean yes, but think deeper! What does a director use to make a movie? A camera. How exactly does a camera capture the moments of life, and later display the moments onto the big screens? The correct answer is that a camera utilizes a vital component that is known as the film. The film, a major constituent of a camera, is a pliable and attenuated strip of plastic with light-sensitive emulsion for exposure in a camera, fundamentally used to produce motion pictures. The primary chemicals (substances that have a definite composition) and compounds, which are made from the atoms of at least two chemically-bonded elements, become involved when actually developing the film. The first layer of a film is a protective coating which protects the emulsion layer that has the gelatin and the silver halide crystals in it. (Higher speeds of film have multiple layers of emulsion.) The next layer is the film base, which is a polymer that is chemically stable and flexible. The last layer is the anti-halation backing, which precludes reflections off the back of the film

Moreover, the origins of photographic processes date back to the 1800s and yet were still astonishingly dependent on chemistry. The beginnings of photographic processes were devised by William Talbot during the 1830s. Talbot’s procedure consisted of continuously rinsing paper in baths of saltwater and silver nitrate (AgNO3) solution, hence depositing silver chloride (AgCl) in the fibers of the paper. Afterwards, this wet piece of paper was exposed in a camera till a dark, silvery image appeared in the light-struck regions, and the remaining silver chloride (AgCl) was removed by washing it with a concentrated salt solution. By waxing or oiling the negative sheet, Talbot made the paper translucent, and then by making an exposure of diffuse light through the negative onto another sensitized sheet, he produced a positive image. Therefore, an interminable number of copies of a photograph could have been generated from any one negative. In other words, behind the multiplex concept of filmmaking and photography lies a simple (or not so simple) answer: science, and specifically, chemicals and compounds, which are all ultimately a part of chemistry. In the following centuries, as photographic processes advanced, mechanisms of processing undeniably altered to later on, produce color and digital photography.

All in all, behind a movie is a director, behind a director is a camera, behind a camera is a film, and behind a film is the work of chemistry. As technology continues to expeditiously evolve, along will come the emergence of further advanced photography, and along, in the years to follow, will come the institution of an augmented role played by chemistry throughout the film industry via the concept of photography.

A Slow Clap for Equality

A quick scroll through CNN’s homepage or a flip through the morning’s New York Times is almost guaranteed to communicate some type of headline on the issue of equality—whether it be of the minority, women, or LGBT. The fact is, conversation in America, ever since its breakaway from Great Britain, has been constantly involving the issue of equality. Even the sheer mention of this country is able to evoke images of fairness and freedom for all.

Yet, in this highly modern and growing society of today, meanings have changed and views have shifted. What equality and the push for this concept once were no longer hold constant. The oversensitivity and impulse to grab onto any type of advancement, and to be satisfied with a superficial legislation has taken over our reason.

For the first time ever, Saudi Arabian women were granted the right to vote. Headlines on multiple major news sources donned prosperous and feel-good stories of this progress. However, they fail to account for the entire picture and the restraints the nature of Saudi Arabian government place on this achievement. In this notoriously misogynist country, this reform appears as an obvious milestone. Still, this milestone falls short.

The catch is that Saudi Arabia is not a democracy. Unlike America, Saudi Arabia provides no meaningful medium of expression: no free press, no personal authority, and no legal authority. Politics revolve around the King, rather than the voices of the population. If any change is to be made, it is more likely to be accomplished through connections with the prince than running for office with an egalitarian driven candidacy. Amid this patronage network for the royals, the ability and value of voting are crowded out and have little to no influence at all.

Despite being able to vote, the women of Saudi Arabia are still discriminated against, and laws that exclude women are still in relevance. Women, without the accompaniment of their male relative or spouse, can neither drive nor travel. Even with the power to vote, what can Saudi Arabian women do? In respect to Saudi Arabia’s highly oppressive political system, we can only see this as an advance on paper only.

All in all, we should still commend the women of Saudi Arabia, and other minorities alike who are discriminated against, for making it so far, and accomplishing such feats. Although we cannot respond to this event with celebration and applause, a slow clap will do.

HOLLY HOLM DETHRONES ROWDY RONDA ROuSEY

In the past 25 minutes, the world may have witnessed one of the biggest upsets in UFC history, as the famous Rowdy Ronda Rousey, the previously undefeated 12-0 bantamweight champion was dominated in a fight that went to the second round.

I watched this fight myself, and on a personal review of the fight, Rousey relied too much on her grappling experience as a Judo master, and left herself completely vulnerable to Holm’s wrath of punches and kicks. It was as if Ronda forgot how to block.

Rousey-Holm

This teaches a valuable lesson about life: don’t refuse the glove touch in the beginning of the fight. If anyone asks you to touch gloves, touch them.

maxresdefault

Suggestions? Requests? Feedback? Comment Below and let us know!

That’s What It Takes

The book Outliers by Malcolm is a real treasure. This book just takes your past knowledge of the world and just warps it, flips it upside-down, and cuts it in half. It’s amazing how many misconceptions we can have of the world. Yet we lived in it for thousands of years, I feel like we are understanding it less and less… However, just in case some people want to be informed, I’ve read the book, processed the information, and am now regurgitating it for your reading pleasure or for your intellectual curiosity.

Once again, success is not all about individual traits! We all wonder, ‘Is there such thing as innate talent?’ Of course there is! But it’s not about how ‘smart’ you are or how ‘talented’ you are! I know it’s hard to understand, but it’s true! Your environment and all the factors around you decide first. In Outliers, it is mentioned that birth dates are much more important to success than many would think. Now I’m going to debunk the myth of the ‘natural’, a person who breezes the top without working hard.

In Malcolm Gladwell’s chapter ‘The 10,000-hour rule’, he provides an example of a study. The study featured students at Berlin’s elite Academy of Music. There were three groups of violinists: the first were the stars, the second were the “okay” ones, and the third were the “not so good” ones. You might be thinking, ‘The first group must be the one with talent!’. Really? It turns out, by the age of twenty, the elite performers totaled ten thousand hours of practice. The “okay” students totaled eight thousand hours, and the “not so good” students totaled four thousand hours. In fact, there were no “naturals”, people who succeeded without working, nor were there “grinds”, people who work hard, but fall short. It seems that practice really does make perfect. A LOT of practice, that is. The results were then compared to that of pianists. The same pattern emerged. The number 10,000 kept popping up. What’s so special about this number? Why is it that true mastery always seems to be linked with this number?

You all know Mozart, right? Child prodigy, he wrote his own music at the age of six! Many use him as an example to argue against the idea of hard work- that talent reigns supreme. However, it turns out that the earliest pieces by Mozart were mostly written by his father, and his childhood works were not all that original. Mozart’s greatest, finest work came when he wrote pieces for ten years! After his ten thousand hours! In fact, it might be possible that Mozart actually developed late! What?

Two examples of the ten-thousand hour rule: The Beatles and Bill Gates. The Beatles are the unanimous choice for the greatest band in the history of music. They were simply spectacular (I listen to some of their songs today!). Starting from February 1964 to 1970, Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, and Starr just TOOK OVER America! But do you want to know how long Lennon and McCartney had been playing together beforehand? Seven years! Even more, their past has some even more secrets. While the Beatles were still in Europe, and not that famous, they performed in Hamburg, Germany. They mostly played in strip clubs, so they got a lot of alcohol and sex, which is probably why they kept going there. The real kicker is this: They played eight hours a day, seven days a week. Holy smokes! That’s essentially performing twelve hundred times in a period of four years. They definitely hit ten-thousand hours by the time they came to America in 1964! 

Bill Gates used to be the President of Microsoft, and is currently the richest man in the world. Everybody knows that he was a good, if not great, programmer, but do they know how long he worked on his craft? Back in the 1960s, it was very difficult to find a computer that wasn’t larger than a full-sized room, but Gates did. In fact, when most people had to use these clunky, slow computers that required cards to execute commands, Bill Gates was about to do real-time programming at THIRTEEN! Over his school career, Gates just kept getting lucky, by getting opportunities to program ALL DAY LONG. He would sneak out of his house at night and just program away, and everybody around him probably wondered how he could have gotten so addicted. By the time he dropped out of Harvard and started Microsoft, he had been programming continuously for seven consecutive years. That’s MUCH more than ten-thousand hours! You know what they say, “You get out what you put in”. And Bill Gates got a lot! Therefore, it was his determination and grit and passion for computers which created his endless wealth.

Sometimes success is not what we always believe it to be.

Recap of ‘The Exodus’

Disintegrated clothing, trails of tears, turbulent childhoods- this is an everyday reality for the multiple Syrian refugees witnessing a war fought in front of their humble homes. The solution is escape. According to United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), over 3 million Syrians have fled to Syria’s neighbors Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq. However, the continent of Europe did not fully respond to this ‘exodus’ until the end of September, and many are beginning to question why.

Europe has closed its eyes far too long to the bloody civil war, and tried to keep the suffering of millions of Syrians outside of its iron doors. However, the forces of political and moral conscience suddenly knocked on these doors seeking for a response- a response to the 3-year old Kurd, whose life was claimed by the plight of this crisis. The image of this toddler reached the trenches of our hearts as it acted as a wake-up call to those who take freedom for granted. Nevertheless, Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, displayed her political role during this movement by setting aside a common fear of these migrants and replacing it with compassion and empathy. This was fulfilled when German crowds welcomed the resilient migrants with effervescent cheering and chanting. Hence, Germany, during this moment in history, remains an exemplar of hope and courage.

Although this triumphant moment is heart-warming, it raises serious economic and social problems within Europe. For example, Germans and other European nations will have their culture and traditions violently shaken by these ‘aliens’, and  have burdening economic outcomes, as well as sparks of dissonance within the populaces. However, there is heated debate on whether or not Europe should continue to build more barriers, or manage the pressure and risk of handling these migrants with hope for peace in society.The answer comes with a sense of a new perspective towards the migrants and their hosts.

Throughout history we can see that Syrians have “a well -founded fear of persecution”, and to help them is an evident moral duty Europe and the world must fulfill. Although Europe is enveloped by poverty and chaos across its borders, they must acknowledge the need for workers to pay and provide for the retirement of its citizens. The fundamental solution is the influx of migrants. However, to reach this grandiose goal of economic stability in a socialist society, Europeans need to start with the creation of a safe environment for the migrants. This means protected havens, funded UN agencies, and properly functioning education systems- not just roofs in the desert.

Regardless of the blurring social boundaries, the new dimension of morality Europe is witnessing everyday calls for significant changes in the world as a whole. However, this global reality cannot be achieved without adversity. Although many will say it has been more than a month since this crisis broke out, and the refugees are retreating back, we must not forget their profound suffering, their undeniable spirit, and their unconditional sadness leaving home. Along with the pain that is crushing, exquisite, and infinite, the pain causes them to tremble with fear. I deeply hope that when you look at another post of a Syrian refugee on “Humans of New York”, you will have the temerity to understand how it feels to be born in a different way than you are. One individual, European, African, or American can alter or even save a Syrian refugee’s life. Hence, we must acknowledge that human empathy fused with action can change lives in ways you can never imagine.

Is America in Danger?

There is a lot of talk about terrorism. After 2001, when the war on terrorism was declared, security in the U.S. had dramatically increased, and continues to do so.
But now it is reaching new extents. The U.S. has to be on the lookout for ISIS. Although this is well-known, recently, it is said that this aggressive group has been trying to breach through American cyber defense and attack the energy grid. There had been hack attempts at a conference of American energy firms on Wednesday. Although the exact details are not known, it is said that ISIS is behind it.
But looking at the positive side, the attempted break-ins have been completely unsuccessful. As of now, the ISIS group lacks the capabilities to do this kind of job. They hardly have the necessary sophisticated technology.
But what they lack in tools, they could very well make up in intent.
There is undoubtedly an option that they could simply buy the abilities.  The FBI is anxious over this idea. This terrorist organization, or its allies, could buy detrimental software to execute the plan. And of course this attack could range from minor to pretty severe. An attack on a power grid could very well shut down progress and businesses. This “mess-up” could interfere the flow of energy to our homes as well.
Unfortunately, this situation is not restricted to such radicals. Domestic groups could very well do the same. At the same time, it is important to remember the low probability of such events. It is difficult to go through with such a plan. It would take a very large group of advanced, knowledgeable, and highly qualified technicians as well as finesse in such matters to hack  the energy grid. And even if this does happen, it would most likely be in a small section of the area.
 Source:

Broken Windows

What we think we understand about how people and their behavior operate is actually the opposite from the truth. Seems like a rather powerful statement right off the gate, right? Well, it’s important realize that the way people behave/act is less dependent on their “personality” or their “disposition”, but rather on the environment and context in which they are place in.

Let me explain.

Criminologists James Q. Wilson and George Kelling created a theory called the Broken Windows theory. They “argued that crime is the inevitable result of disorder. If a window is broken and left unrepaired, people walking by will conclude that no one cares and no one is in charge. Soon, more windows will be broken, and the sense of anarchy will spread from the building to the street on which it faces, sending a signal that anything goes. In a city, relatively minor problems like graffiti, public disorder, and aggressive panhandling, they write, are all the equivalent of broken windows, invitations to more serious crimes.” This excerpt is of course from Page 141 of The Tipping Point (The Power of Context (Part One)). This groundbreaking theory perfectly explains why crime could sometimes be “contagious”; it is a series of behaviors and poor decisions that can somehow be passed on through the minds of people and encourage others to partake in illegal activities. The chapter also talks about how the 1980s New York City crime epidemic was solved through a rather counter-intuitive plan. First, a man named David Gunn decided to stop one seemingly unimportant problem: graffiti. He thought that graffiti was an incentive for bad behavior, just like how a broken window can send a message of anarchy to an entire neighborhood. Gunn proceeded to set up a system which ensured that all trains in the New York Transit were completely “reclaimed”. He made sure that if any delinquents sprayed graffiti on the trains, “we’d walk over with rollers and paint it over. The kids would be in tears, but we’d just be going up and down, up and down. It was a message to them. If you want to spend three nights of your time vandalizing a train, fine. But it’s never going to see the light of day.” Why did Gunn do this? ‘Shouldn’t he be focusing on more serious crimes like murder or rape?’ you ask. But the truth is, graffiti basically sends as signal, a small expression of disorder that “allows” others to do even more serious crimes. The next step was to crack down on fare-beating, which means to not pay for using the subway system. Just like graffiti, fare-beating sends a signal to everyone else that “everything goes, no one will stop you”. Another man named William Bratton, who headed the transit police, “put as many as ten policemen in plainclothes at the turnstiles…The idea was to signal, as publicly as possible, that the transit police were now serious about cracking down on fare-beaters.” Cracking down on these small problems ended up turning around everything; the crime rate for New York City dropped tremendously. Thanks to the Broken Window Theory and the Power of Context, we can all feel safe in the New York subway knowing that someone won’t try to mug us.

But how does this apply to us? What does this tell us about how we can live our lives?  According to the Power of Context, our behavior is not affected by “who we are”, but rather “where we are”. For example, anyone, even a murderer, can be kind when everyone is treating him/her in a genial way, but anyone, even a saint, can get pissed off in a long line or in a traffic jam. So why do we characterize people despite the obvious conditions that they are put through? “In one experiment, for instance, a group of people are told to watch two sets of similarly talented basketball players, the first of whom are shooting baskets in a well-lighted gym and the second of whom are shooting baskets in a badly lighted gym (and obviously missing a lot of shots). Then they are asked to judge how good the players were. The players in the well-lighted gym were considered superior…There is something in all of us that makes us instinctively want to explain the world around us in terms of people’s essential attributes: he’s a better basketball player, that person is smarter than I am…The mistake we make in thinking of character as something unified and all-encompassing is very similar to a kind of blind spot in the way we process information. Psychologists call this tendency the Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE)…human beings invariably make the mistake of overestimating the importance of the situation and context. We will always reach for a “dispositional” explanation for events, as opposed to a contextual explanation.” Malcolm Gladwell states that character “…isn’t a stable, easily identifiable set of closely related traits, and it only seems that way because of a glitch in the way our brains are organized. Character is more like a bundle of habits and tendencies and interests, loosely bound together and dependent, at certain times, on circumstance and context.” He also talks about himself, saying that “I have a lot of fun at dinner parties. As a result, I throw a lot of dinner parties and my friends see me there and think that I’m fun. But I couldn’t have lots of dinner parties, if my friends instead tended to see me in lots of different situations over which I had little or no control – like, say, faced with four hostile youths in a filthy, broken-down subway – they probably wouldn’t think of me as fun anymore.”

What do I want us all to take away from all this? My main point is that character is not some “essential” trait that we’re all born with and can never change, rather, it is developed through habits and tendencies and can be easily manipulated through the context and situation you are in. So next time you want to judge someone as “mean”, “stupid”, or “weird”, try to imagine yourself in their situation, and you’ll learn to understand.

I want to leave you with one lasting impression which is almost guaranteed to convince you of the Power of Context. “In the early 1970s, a group of social scientists at Stanford University, led by Philip Zimbardo, decided to create a mock prison in the basement of the university’s psychology building…Seventy-five applied, and from those Zimbardo and his colleagues picked the 21 who appeared the most normal and healthy on psychological tests. Half of the group were chosen, at random, to be guards…the other half were told that they were to be prisoners…The purpose of the experiment was to try to find out why prisons are such nasty places. Was it because prisons are full of nasty people, or was it because prisons are such nasty environments that they make people nasty?…The guards, some of whom had previously identified themselves as pacifists, fell quickly into the role of hard-bitten disciplinarians…The guards…stripping them, spraying them with fire extinguishers…’There were times when we were pretty abusive, getting in their faces and yelling at them…It was part of the whole atmosphere of terror.’ …’It was completely the opposite from the way I conduct myself now…I think I was positively creative in terms of my mental cruelty.’ After 36 hours, one prisoner began to get hysterical, and had to be released. Four more then had to be released because of ‘extreme emotional depression, crying, rage, and acute anxiety.’ Zimbardo had originally intended to have the experiment run for two weeks. He called it off after six days….’I began to feel that I was losing my identity…I was 416. I was really my number and 416 was really going to have to decide what to do.’…Zimbardo’s conclusion was that there are specific situations so powerful that they can overwhelm our inherent predispositions. The key word here is situation. Zimbardo isn’t talking about environment, about the major external influences on all of our lives. He’s not denying that how we are raised by our parents affects who we are, or that the kind of schools we went to, the friends we have, or the neighborhoods we live in affect our behavior. All of these things are undoubtedly important…His point is simply that there are certain times and places and conditions when much of that can be swept away, that there are instances where you can take normal people from good schools and happy families and good neighborhoods and powerfully affect their behavior merely by changing the immediate details of their situation.”

Is this what society has come to? Or does economics prevail?

So the Dartmoor Hill Pony Association (DHPA) claims that by opening up a market for pony meat, we save them from the “tragedy of the commons.” According to DHPA, pony populations have declined from 25000 in the 1930s to less than 800 today. Ponies have been seen as common pool resource goods, meaning they have low excludability and high rivalry among consumers. As a result, no one values them as much as they should be valued. By opening up the pony market, DHPA claims, that consumers will value them more and thereby setting a price on ponies. And assuming a perfectly competitive market, it could help allocate the pony market more efficiently.

However, this is now a question, and one that many animal welfare groups like the ASPCA and other animal-lovers like some of you may be asking. Do ponies hold sentimental value? Is this an ethical market? What is the true cost that man is paying for ponies? Well, put it simply, all these questions simply fall under the same umbrella of Economics. The study of choices, the study of scarcity–limited resources but unlimited wants. That just by considering the true cost of paying for ponies, trying to efficiently allocate the pony market from its current situation as a common pool resource good, is no more different than, say, deciding when and how much to produce and when to stop.

Economics is ubiquitous. We are simply driven by our own self-interests, and that in the long run, markets tend toward equilibrium. So, when the market is allocated inefficiently, it is our responsibilities to bring it back to the efficient allocation.

Sources:

  1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/11119194/Eat-ponies-to-save-them-says-charity.html

How Much Do We Know About Coffee?

Coffee; Some people hate it whereas others cannot bear to live without it. Starbucks has made about $16 billion this past year and it has America’s addiction to coffee to thank. However, how much do we really know about coffee? We know that it gives us a boost of energy in the morning with all of that caffeine stored but apart from that, does it truly help us or is it actually harming our bodies?

As you probably expected by my previous sentence, coffee does not only provide benefits. Instant coffee and coffee passed through a paper filter have no bad effect on us but let’s face it, most of us love the sugary flavors added to our favorite drink. It is the added ingredients that are high in cafestol, which in turn raises cholesterol levels.

For pregnant women, coffee cannot be their best friend. This drink can cause miscarriages and low birth weight. Fetuses cannot metabolize caffeine in their stage of development, so it is encouraged for women to limit their caffeine intake while pregnant.

Thankfully, we can easily say that coffee provides us with some health benefits that most people would have never thought of. For older adults, coffee can help keep off Alzheimer’s disease for a longer period of time. It prolongs the cognitive impairment that leads to Alzheimer’s, therefore beneficial to the body.

Another disease, Parkinson’s disease, can be of lower risk to those who drink coffee. Men who drink coffee have a lower risk since the caffeinated drink prevents the nerve cells that produce dopamine from dying, which is the cause of Parkinson’s. Among women, it is slightly more complicated. Women that do not take any additional hormones are also of lower risk to Parkinson’s disease, but the women that take hormones do not receive the same benefit.

It also may lower the risk of most non-melanoma skin cancers, especially the most serious type, malignant melanoma. That is definitely something to celebrate about. There were studies that proved that coffee drinkers who had about four cups of coffee a day had a twenty percent lower risk of getting skin cancer than those who did not drink coffee whatsoever. However, there was another study that proved that decaffeinated coffee did not provide the same protection to people compared to caffeinated coffee.

Coffee can lower the risk of people getting one of the top ten health diseases: Type 2 Diabetes. Here is the surprise: it has nothing to do with the caffeine. Both decaf and caffeinated coffee help lower the risk, which means that there is something else that helps prevent Type 2 Diabetes. Scientists predict that the helping agent is chlorogenic acid, which is an antioxidant.  

For those who have low blood pressure, coffee can help. It increases blood pressure, but fortunately it has no link to hypertension. However, it is still advised that those with high blood pressure switch to decaf to be sure.

Mentally, coffee benefits us tremendously. Apart from giving us a boost of energy, studies show that, among women, regular coffee drinkers have a lower risk for depression.

So obviously, we can say that the benefits of coffee outweigh the harmful effects. Starbucks may resume their daily sales of the addictive drink with its various complicated names.

Bibliography:

“Health Perks of Coffee.” CBSNews. CBS Interactive, n.d. Web. 16 Sept. 2015.

“10 Most Common Health Diseases.” LIVESTRONG.COM. LIVESTRONG.COM, 26 June 2010. Web. 16 Sept. 2015.

ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, n.d. Web. 16 Sept. 2015.