The good and bad effects tv on your kids

It is hard to avoid television if you are a kid. People in the house are usually tuned in to TV -
siblings as well as parents. In some homes, the television is perpetually "on" even without
anyone watching. It is common for parents and caregivers to use TV as a substitute
babysitter. Also, many parents buy videos that they think can make their kids smart. But
how does watching TV really affect children?
The bad news is, the majority of experts think that a TV/video-driven culture has bad effects
on kids - and may prevent kids from being smart. They cite the following:
TV provides no educational benefits for a child under age 2. Worse, it steals time for
activities that actually develop her brain, like interacting with other people and
playing. A child learns a lot more efficiently from real interaction - with people and
things, rather than things she sees on a video screen.
TV viewing takes away the time that your child needs to develop important skills
like language, creativity, motor, and social skills. These skills are developed in the
kids first two years (a critical time for brain development) through play, exploration,
and conversation. Your kids language skills, for example, do not improve by
passively listening to the TV. It is developed by interacting with people, when talking
and listening is used in the context of real life.
TV viewing numbs your kid's mind as it prevents your child from exercising
initiative, being intellectually challenged, thinking analytically, and using his
imagination.
TV viewing takes away time from reading and improving reading skills through
practice (Comstock, 1991). Kids watching cartoons and entertainment television
during pre-school years have poorer pre-reading skills at age 5 (Macbeth,
1996). Also, kids who watch entertainment TV are also less likely to read books and
other print media (Wright & Huston, 1995).
According to Speech and language expert Dr. Sally Ward, 20 years of research show
that kids who are bombarded by background TV noise in their homes have trouble
paying attention to voices when there is also background noise.
Kids who watch a lot of TV have trouble paying attention to teachers because they
are accustomed to the fast-paced visual stimulation on TV. Kids who watch TV more
than they talk to their family have a difficult time adjusting from being visual learners
to aural learners (learning by listening). They also have shorter attention spans.
School kids who watch too much TV also tend to work less on their
homework. When doing homework with TV on the background, kids tend to retain
less skill and information. When they lose sleep because of TV, they become less alert
during the day, and this results in poor school performance.
TV exposes your kid to negative influences, and promotes negative behavior. TV
shows and commercials usually show violence, alcohol, drug use and sex in a positive
light. The mind of your kid is like clay. It forms early impressions on what it sees,
and these early impressions determine how he sees the world and affect his grown-up
behavior. For instance, twenty years of research has shown that children who are
more exposed to media violence behave more aggressively as kids and when they are
older. They are taught by TV that violence is the way to resolve conflict as when a
TV hero beats up a bad guy to subdue him.
Kids who watch too much TV are usually overweight, according to the American
Medical Association. Kids often snack on junk food while watching TV. They are
also influenced by commercials to consume unhealthy food. Also, they are not
running, jumping, or doing activities that burn calories and increase
metabolism. Obese kids, unless they change their habits, tend to be obese when they
become adults.
Researchers from the University of Sydney report a link between total screen time and
retinal artery width in children. Kids with lots of screen time were found to have
narrow artery in their eyes, which may indicate heart risk.
Some experts, however, believe that TV is not all that bad. They qualify though that viewing
TV can be good if it is done in moderation, and if the program being watched is selected:
Some TV shows can educate, inform and inspire. It can be more effective than books
or audiotapes in teaching your kid about processes like how a plant grows or how to
bake a cake.
Studies show that kids who watch educational and non-violent childrens shows do
better on reading and math tests than those who do not watch these programs.
Kids who watch informative and educational shows as preschoolers tend to watch
more informative and educational shows when they get older. They use TV
effectively as a complement to school learning. On the other hand, kids who watch
more entertainment program watch fewer informative programs as they get
older (Macbeth, 1996).
Preschoolers who viewed educational programs tend to have higher grades, are less
aggressive and value their studies more when they reach high school, according to a
long-term study (Anderson, et. al, 2001).
Finally, scientists from the University of Siena found that children experience a
soothing, painkilling effect by watching cartoons. So perhaps, a little entertainment
TV can be a source of relief to kids who are stressed or are in pain.
Positive Effects of Television on Kids
Although many parents may disagree, there are several positive effects of television
on children. Most of us with young children grew up watching television. Sesame
Street is a PBS classic over 35 years old, with positive ratings for developing literacy,
cultural awareness, diversity, imaginative play and ways to deal with feelings. So the
American Association of Pediatrics' recommendation that children under the age of
two years watch no television at all can be confusing. They further recommend that
children between the ages of two and six watch less than two hours of carefully
selected programming per day. How do parents reconcile the idea that educational
programming has positive attributes and these recommendations? Here are some
ways for television to be a positive part of children's lives.
Choose Wisely
The most important thing for parents to do is to choose their children's television
viewing wisely. Think of television like food (but less essential to living). Not all food
is good for you. For children especially, parents need to choose food with the best
nutritional content and avoid too much sugar, or junk food. Television programming
needs to be carefully selected as well. This means the content of the show as well as
the way the show is presented.
For children under the age of six years, choose commercial-free programming.
Commercials break up shows into short segments, which teaches children to have a
limited attention span. Public television is usually commercial free, and has some
worthwhile children's programming. Additionally, there are many DVDs for children
which have content that reinforces literacy skills and other life skills for children.
Content is Important
Some shows for toddlers and young children are cartoons or have no educational
value beyond entertainment. Since young children have developing minds, if they will
watch television, select content-rich programming. Shows or DVD programs that
teach about letters, shapes, imaginative play and use catchy music to teach subjects
like manners, sharing, dealing with feelings, and other quality subjects, are ideal
choices. Avoid shows that move quickly from scene to scene or include violence of
any kind.
Make the Most of TV Time
Watch with your child if you can. Talk to your child about what he is watching.
Engage him in follow-up activities to reinforce the skills taught in the show. Sing
songs, play literacy games, read with your child. There are also websites that add
enriching material to the content of the TV show, so consider playing them together
for a short while. Personal interaction time is extremely important for children so if
you can reinforce TV time with quality time together, you'll make the most of the
experience.
Limit Time Spent Watching
This is important. Parents can follow the AAP suggestion by providing a rich and
diverse selection of opportunities for creative play so television is not the featured
source of entertainment. This means having plenty of books, manipulative toys such
as Lego blocks and clay, art supplies, puzzles and opportunities to be active on hand
for kids to make good choices and develop their learning in active ways for the mind
and body.

A good thing about organ donation
I think organ donation is a great thing. People after they're dead aren't really going
to need their organs and someone living could get a second chance because of a
good decision like this one. Only thing is ,it is a little difficult to come to terms with
your loved one being cut open and stuff before their burial. But still, the cause is
much More important
Organ donation saves lives. Almost every tissue and organ system can now be
harvested and used for direct or indirect transplantation.
Now in the US because we have gotten so good as this, we are savings peoples lives
that would have died in the past and still do die in Europe and Asia, and so organ
donation both directly and indirectly contributes to increased medical costs.
Also China has been accused of involuntarily harvesting tissues from political
prisoners. This is due to the high demand for donors and the very profitable black
market in Donor tissues.
good, its not like you will need them once you are dead. You still get to be buried or
cremated and no one can tell the difference. One person can help save many people
very good because it can save a life, and imagine your life being saved becuase of
someone donating their organ to you.
QUESTION ABOUT NUKLIR
How is nuclear science and engineering different from all other fields of engineering?
Nuclear Science and Engineering (NSE) is based on a fundamental discipline which is easily
distinguishable from other forms of engineering. Namely we deal with nuclear reactions, i.e.
originating with the nucleus of protons and neutrons, not from molecules/atoms. In NSE we produce,
manipulate and exploit the resulting radiation to provide useful applications for mankind. An analogy
would be that a chemical engineer does the same thing by exploiting electron reactions in
atoms/molecules. But because the energy density and radiation energy of nuclear reactions are
million times larger than those of electrical/chemical reactions, it makes the discipline and applications
very different. This enormous "quantum" difference between the disciplines simply arises from the
enormous jump in size between a nucleus and the atom, which contains the electrons.
Of course it is exactly this factor of millions which makes nuclear power so attractive. Nuclear energy
requires millions of times less fuel per mass to extract the same energy as any chemical reaction,
such as burning coal. This makes nuclear energy and science a very potent tool in fighting the
environmental impact of burning fossil fuels.
Can nuclear engineering help other fields in a positive way, for example in medicine?
Absolutely. Nuclear Science and Engineering (NSE) has had an enormous positive impact on
medicine and other fields. A perfect example is Nuclear Medicine: the special properties of nuclear
radiation, as opposed to just regular radiation like visible light, allow it be used extensively in both
diagnosing disease and treating disease. One of our faculty, Professor Yanch, is working on cutting-
edge methods to improve radiation therapy. Many of our undergraduates end up studying and
working in this field, and even use NSE as pre-med.
But the impact of NSE outside of energy production does not stop at medicine. NSE can be used for
the development of advanced detection systems for national security. Quantum information and
computing is another area of interest in NSE. Our faculty work in these areas too. Information on our
faculty research activities can be found on our department website.
Coal, gas and oil, all of which are used to generate electricity, are limited resources. Wind and solar
power, are good alternatives, but are not entirely dependable sources. Will nuclear energy be able
to provide all the energy we need?
Right now nuclear energy from fission provides about 20% of the US electricity supply. And it could
provide more. Approximately 80% of electricity in France, and 50% in Japan, is generated by nuclear
power (and by the way France has the cleanest air in the industrialized world since nuclear emits no
carbon or particulates from burning).
Wind and solar could and should increase, however, the wind and sun arent always there so
probably cannot be used for so-called base-load electricity, i.e. the steady source of electricity you
need to run an industrialized society. For non greenhouse emitting, base-load electricity, the present
viable options are nuclear and hydroelectric (dams). But hydroelectric is set by geography and rainfall,
and weve almost maxed out these sources. This is why nuclear power is SO important in our future
energy plans.
The energy future of our nation and the world is complex. There is probably no single answer or
"silver bullet." But the fundamental science, i.e. that nuclear energy is million times more potent,
always tells us that nuclear power will always be our most critical tool in decreasing the environmental
footprint of the energy production we need for our economy and society.
I have heard that nuclear waste could contaminate our soil and the water we drink, thus threatening
the health of human beings and other life forms. Are there scientists who are striving to solve these
problems? If so how?
Yes there are scientists working on this problem, and several of them are in our NSE faculty. However
it would not be fair to say that we are working on solutions: we have already technically solved the
nuclear waste issue. This is obvious from the fact that we safely deal with these wastes from our
present nuclear power plants. No people or other lifeforms are harmed by these wastes, and we know
this because we keep very careful track of the wastes (unlike in burning fossil fuel where they more or
less are just released into the atmosphere).
However there is ongoing research to improve the management of waste. There are many different
approaches:
change the type of reactor so it produces less waste;
do something to the wastelike bombard it with other kinds of radiationto transmutate it into
less dangerous forms (i.e. change its elements into other elements);
or come up with safer material forms and containers for the waste for long time storage.
In fact the word waste is not very accuratealmost all waste from a reactor is just unspent fuel.
The most efficient solution would be to re-purify the fuel and put it back in the reactor. Even though
this can be done there are other issues and implications to consider.
The most important thing to remember is that nuclear energy produces millions time less waste than
other energy production, again because of its much larger energy density. One must respect this
potency, but because the sheer volume of waste is so much smaller it makes handling the waste
much easier.
Could you give other examples of energy research within nuclear engineering?
Several faculty work on a future source of nuclear power called nuclear fusion. In this nuclear power
we fuse two hydrogen nuclei, rather than split apart large nuclei as in fission, which is what all
present nuclear power plants work on. Nuclear fusion is the process that powers our sun and all stars
in the universe. It has the advantage of producing non-radioactive helium as its waste product, further
reducing issues about nuclear waste disposal. Fusion is inherently safe since it does not run on a
chain reaction and its physically impossible to get a "meltdown" accident. And the fuel you use is
water from which you get the hydrogen!! Sounds great!
The problem is that it requires temperatures in excess of 100 Million Celsius, kind of like the interior of
stars. Amazingly weve achieved these temperatures in our laboratories. We have a small test fusion
reactor at MIT called Alcator C-Mod that achieves temperatures akin to this level, but there are
several hurdles to overcome to make this fusion a practical and economic supplier of electricity, such
as: confining and stabilizing these stars on earth and developing materials that can withstand the
fusion environment. Not surprisingly, the disciplines of NSE are perfectly aligned to take on these
multidisciplinary research areas and our faculty are heavily engaged in that research. This also
provides an opportunity for NSE students, as undergraduates and graduate students, to engage in
fusion energy research.
Can working with all these radioactive material be dangerous?
Radiation can be a hazard to human health; in fact one of the core subjects that we teach in NSE
deals with this subject. This issue has to do with the fact that nuclear reactions, and therefore
radiation, have very different properties than our everyday experience of radiation. However by using
NSE science, the hazards of radiation are well known and avoided.
First, if you know the proper science, radiation is super easy to measure compared to biological or
chemical hazards. Secondly radiation is easy to shield so your body doesnt get exposed. Third, it
turns out humans have quite a resilience to radiation since we evolved in an environment (the Earth)
that is literally filled with radiation. You may not be aware of this, but as you read this you are being
bombarded by natural sources of radiation. So radiation turns out to be a relatively mild and known
toxin for humans (but you should still respect it!).
What are some of the positive aspects of working in nuclear engineering?
One of the best things is that NSE is one of the most multi-disciplinary fields imaginable and you dont
get bored doing just one thing. Plus, youre doing something practical to help the world.
How do you think nuclear engineers will impact the future?
Provide safe, carbon-free energy that will save the world. And exploit the fascinating and fundamental
discipline of Nuclear Science and Engineering to produce amazing new products and inventions.
How long will it take before we have the first sustainable commercial fusion power
plant? And how much of the world's power will they be able to supply?
Perhaps fusion's greatest advantage is that even though it has very highpower density (unlike solar or
wind) there is essentially no limit to the fuel required...it is provided easily by seawater. So the answer
tothe second question is that fusion could eventually supply a largefraction of the world's power:
although the total number of fusion plantsmay be limited by other resource limitations, but that
depends on the technology used to make the power plant (for example what kind of material is used
in the superconducting magnets). This brings us to the first question: the answer should be turned
around...when do we want it and what price are we wiling to pay for safe, carbon-free energy? As far
as we know there is no fundamental physics gap stopping us from making a fusion reactor today. The
problem comes in the reliability and economics of the fusion device. For reliability our main concern is
24/7 sustainment of a rather complex integrated system. For economics we are striving to produce
more efficient, high power density compact fusion devices. Our state of knowledge in these two areas,
which encompasses a broad set of research issues in fusion nuclear science and technology, is at
least a decade behind our physics knowledge and our projection is that this would have fusion at a
competitive disadvantage with respect to fission power plants or fossil fuel.
What are the different specialties in nuclear science and engineering?
For students there are three specialties based on NSE applications: fission energy, fusion energy and
nuclear security and technology. However due to the multi-disciplinary nature of NSE applications
there are many fields of study pursued within each of these specialties such as material science,
thermal hydraulics, plasma physics, modeling and simulation, and radiation sources and control.
Do nuclear engineers deal mainly with people, data, or things?
We deal about equally with all three. Due the integrated nature of energy and nuclear security
applications, NSE encompasses an extraordinary range of disciplines. This calls for students and
professionals to develop a broad set of scientific and communication tools, as well as develop strong
inter-personal skills to tackle integrated solutions to NSE problems as a team.
Do nuclear engineers work on problems other than energy?
Absolutely. Applied nuclear science has a broad range of applications that can highly benefit society.
Some examples are:
Medical science: NSE is an integral part of both medical imaging and radiation therapy.
Nuclear security: Remote and efficient detection of clandestine nuclear materials is of ever-
growing importance for security. This area will push us to the frontiers of nuclear detection and
forensics.
Quantum information: At its core NSE exploits the manipulation of nuclear states. This information
is central to the development of very exciting advancements in the use of quantum computing,
which could possibly revolutionize available computing power. In addition, a new generation of
incredibly sensitive detectors is being developed based on quantum information
*end
The good news and the bad news about organ donation
The number of organ transplants in the United States increased 6% in 2004. That's
over 27,000 lives saved. Organs from deceased donors were up 11%, and organs
from live donors were up 2%. That's the good news.
Here's the bad news:
- Last year 43,128 people were added to the national transplant waiting list.
- Last year 6,228 people were removed from the waiting list because they had died.
Another 1,594 were removed from the list because they had become too sick to
undergo transplant surgery.
- At the end of 2004, over 87,300 people were on the national transplant waiting list.
That's up from about 83,900 at the end of 2003.
Here's more bad news. While 90% of Americans support organ and tissue donation:
- only 62% say they would be willing to donate some or all of their organs and
tissue when they die, and
- only 55% of Americans agree to donate the organs of a deceased relatives when
asked for their consent.
The organ shortage continues to get worse because Americans bury or cremate
about 20,000 transplantable organs every year. That means thousands of Americans
are buried every year next to the organs that could have saved their lives.
Most people don't have any good reason not to donate their organs when they die.
But they don't have any good reason to donate them either. LifeSharers gives
people a good reason - a better chance of getting a transplant if they ever need one.
KENAPA YAW HARUS PAKAI PRODUK DALAM NEGERI
Aku Cinta produk Indonesia!.. Waah, sobat Orbit sering sekali kan mendengar ungkapan itu.
Hayoo, siapa yang masih belum memakai produk buatan negeri sendiri? Hihihi.. Kalian tahu
nggak, kenapa sih banyak orang menyarankan kita untuk memakai produk buatan Indonesia?,
bahkan sampai bapak Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono menghimbau agar kita memakai
produk-produk lokal. Hhmm kenapa ya?.
Sebenarnya memakai produk negeri sendiri dampaknya sangat penting lho bagi Negara kita,
coba kalian bayangkan, jika kita membeli produk-produk bukan buatan negeri sendiri,
penjual (produsen) dari luar semakin senang menjual produknya di Indonesia. Lantas
bagaimana dengan produsen lokal kita ? Mereka akan mengalami kerugian, bahkan banyak
dari mereka yang akan gulung tikar. Coba kalian berpikir dengan jumlah yang besar.
Bayangkan jika ratusan bahkan ribuan pedagang di Indonesia mengalami kerugian. Tentunya
akan menyulitkan laju perekonomian di Indonesia.
Jika kita memakai produk dalam negeri, produsen di Indonesia akan semakin berkembang lho
sahabat Orbit, lapangan kerja juga akan semakin bertambah yang tentunya akan mengurangi
angka pengangguraan di Indonesia. Kalau pengangguran berkurang itu berarti kemiskinan
juga akan berkurang kan.
Nantinya, Negara kita tidak perlu lagi mengirim TKI (Tenaga Kerja Indonesia) lagi untuk
bekerja diluar negeri, karena mereka bisa bekerja di negeri sendiri. Kesejahteraan masyarakat
akan meningkat dengan sendirinya.
Lagi pula jika kita berbicara tentang kualitas. Kualitas produk buatan Indonesia tidak kalah
bagus lho dengan produk luar. Dari bahan dan desainnya, bisa dibilang produk Indonesia
sudah bisa bersaing dengan produk luar. Bahkan sebenarnya beberapa merk produk luar itu
banyak yang dibuat di Indonesia! Waah. Jadi kalian tidak perlu ragu dengan kualitasnya.
Hmm, ternyata membeli dan mencintai produk lokal dampaknya begitu besar dan nyata ya
bagi perekonomian kita. Karena itu sahabat Orbit, mari kita mulai mencintai dan
menggunakan produk-produk Indonesia
disingkat :
1. Biar usaha dalam negeri berkembang.
2. Kalau usahanya berkembang, maka lapangan kerja semakin banyak dan peningkatan
kesejahteraan karyawannya makin diperhatikan.
3. Kalau banyak lapangan kerja dan kesejahteraan terjamin, negara ini tidak perlu
mengirimkan TKI ke luar, tapi kita yang butuh tenaga dari luar.
4. Makin cepat itu terjadi, maka makin cepat membaiklah kondisi yang seperti sekarang
ini.
5. Dengan kita sering menggunakan produk lokal dengan segala "konsekuensi"nya,
percayalah hal-hal di atas akan cepat terjadi.
SHOULD SMOKING BE BANNED IN PUBLIC PLACE ????
1) I certainly like the fact that smoking is banned in pretty much all enclosed public
places. It is very nice not to have to endanger my health when I go into a public building. I
think that it is justifiable to do this because it is not simply a matter of preference, but one of
health. Since Person A's smoke can harm Person B's health, A should not have the right to
smoke in public.
I am less sure about banning smoking in open air settings, especially those where people are
moving (as opposed to at a sports event where people are sitting in one place and can't get
away from the smoke).
So, I approve of bans for the health of people who don't smoke. Public places where
nonsmokers would be exposed to smoke for significant amounts of time should be smoke
free.
2) Open spaces such as parks are fine and smoking shouldn't be banned in those places. But
in enclosed, smaller, indoor spaces smoking should be banned or either in its own separate
section. Second hand smoke is very dangerous. And now studies show that 3rd hand smoke
(residue left on the clothes of someone who was around smokers) is also dangerous especially
to babies.
3) It is a difficult thing to say that just because it is dangerous to others we should ban it. We
don't ban driving even though it is incredibly dangerous to other people.
But I agree with a lot of what has been voiced here, indoors it ought to be banned and even at
outdoor stadiums, etc. where people are packed in close together it should be banned. But in
a public park or something like that? I find it hard to say that we should go that far.
4) The negative effects of second-hand smoke are more than enough to ban smoking in
public. According to the National Cancer Institute, secondhand smoke carries at least 69
harmful chemicals related to cancer, and has been associated with various heart diseases,
sudden infant death syndrome, ear infections, and asthma attacks in children. Most
importantly, there is no such thing as a safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. But to
infringe upon an individuals right to choose what he or she wants to do? That could bring up
some serious issues. But overall, considering the fact that smoking rates are leveling off or
declining in most nations, (although rates continue to rise in developing nations) the
government should work to promote the banning of smoking in public.
5) The argument above about driving being dangerous is poor logic. Smoking affect not only
those who smoke, but it also affects those who have to deal with second hand smoke.
Smokers choose to harm their health with smoking, but they do not have a right to allow their
choice to harm my health. Yes! Public smoking should be banned.
6) I am in favor that smoking be banned in public places as well, due to the fact that smoker
stand right in front of the entrance of the location blocking the pass to those that going into
the building...
7) I believe that smoking should be banned in public places because why should non
smokers be harmed by the people who are SMOKING????????????
8) Yes, smoking should be banned in public places. It should also be banned in apartments
and rental homes. Some people, such as the elderly and children, can become very sick when
inhaling secondhand smoke. It seeps into carpeting, furniture and draperies. The smell and
residue is very difficult to remove.




NEGATIVE (DESTRUCTIVE) PUNISHMENT IN SCHOOLS
Negative discipline in schools can take the form of corporal (physical) or emotional punishment,
carried
out by teachers and other school staff, in the belief that these are the correct means of
disciplining,
correcting, controlling, educating, or modifying the behaviour of, a child.
It also includes acts carried out by another child who has been given (or assumed) authority or
responsibility to inflict punishment on other children.
Negative discipline causes physical and psychological pain to the child on the receiving end, as
well as
other children who witness it. They can be inflicted as:
Direct assaults (beating, hitting, slapping or whipping
any part of a childs body), with or without an implement
like a cane, stick or belt.
Indirect assaults (pinching, twisting ears and joints,
pulling hair, cutting and shaving hair, cutting or piercing
skin, or dragging a child against his or her will).
Forced acts that are physically painful or damaging
(holding a weight for a long time, kneeling on stones,
standing or sitting in a contorted position).
Deliberate neglect of a childs physical needs, such as
the need to use the bathroom.
External substances (burning or freezing materials,
water, smoke, excrement or urine) to inflict pain, fear,
harm, disgust or loss of dignity.
Hazardous tasks that are dangerous or beyond a childs
strength (sweeping or digging in the hot sun, using
bleach or insecticides, unprotected cleaning of toilets).
Confinement, being tied up or being forced to remain in
one place for an extended period of time.
Threats of physical punishment.
Verbal assaults, humiliation, ridicule and assaults on
dignity, intended to reduce a childs confidence, selfesteem
or dignity.
Negative discipline goes beyond just the actual forms of punishment it also describes a system
where
children are not allowed to participate in their own discipline. Children have to be able to
understand what
their mistakes are and how they can make amends.
However, few countries have provisions in schools where children can be involved in such
disciplinary
processes. Even in countries where these exist, children are seldom involved in procedures for
complaints and reform.