Blog Feed

According to a research published in the Journal of the American Osteopathic Association, if you have a kidney stone, riding a roller coaster can help dislodge it. Originally, not much thought had been put into this relationship until researchers at Michigan State University noticed a pattern. The majority of their kidney stone patients were riding roller coasters, and passing their stones soon after. This became particularly prevalent when one patient with 3 stones went on 3 different roller coasters, and after each ride the patient had passed a stone.

Researchers David Wartinger and Marc Mitchell conducted an experiment to test the theory that roller coasters can dislodge kidney stones, as this information was too much to ignore. Because neither of them actually had kidney stones, they were able to 3D print a life size replica of a kidney, and place 3 stones as well as human urine inside of it. Then they put the replica in a backpack at kidney height on a human, and brought it on Big Thunder Mountain Railroad roller coaster at Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida. It was here they found that after one ride, 17% of stones were passed in the front of the coaster, compared to 64% being passed in the back. Wartinger contributes these results to the vibration of roller coasters saying,

“This is just a very mechanical phenomenon. Basically, a kidney stone is a rock. And it is lodged in the physical passageways inside the kidney. It's simply about finding the right amount of shaking and rattling to get it through."

Unfortunately, this technique can only impact people with smaller kidney stones. Larger kidney stones that are bigger than 4 millimeters in size, are pretty painful to pass on their own and usually require surgery to remove. However, this approach mainly affects society in a positive manner as it is a way for some people to prevent kidney stones from getting larger and causing greater health problems. Some health professionals such as Dr. Elizabeth Kavaler, a urology specialist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, see the theoretical appeal, but not the idea of this being a realistic treatment. David Wartinger and Marc Mitchell on the other hand are comfortable enough to recommend “roller coaster therapy” to their patients.

Self

My thoughts on this issue are very much like Wartinger and Mitchell’s. I love roller coasters and would happily go on one if I had a kidney stone I needed to pass, but I don’t think this should happen unless I consulted with my urologist first. It is so important to always ask a doctor if a treatment method is a possibility before trying it, as there could be some serious side effects that come with it. For example, if people with stones larger than 4 millimeters go on a roller coaster, they could end up with severe pain and kidney irritability from moving them around. So my suggestion on this issue is for people to consult with a doctor and see what removal method is right for them. If a roller coaster ride is one of them, by all means go have fun and pass a kidney stone. One might even say, kill two birds with one stone.

Sources

Willingham, A. (2016, September 28). Little kidney stone? Ride a roller coaster, says study. Retrieved November 01, 2016, from http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/28/health/kidney-stone-roller-coaster-study-trnd/index.html

Biel, L. (2016, October 31). Riding roller coasters might help dislodge kidney stones. Retrieved November 01, 2016, from https://www.sciencenews.org/article/riding-roller-coasters-might-help-dislodge-kidney-stones?tgt=nr

Yin, S. (2016, October 03). A Roller Coaster Remedy for Kidney Stones? Retrieved November 01, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/04/science/roller-coaster-kidney-stones.html

Seyni Ndaw

Air Stream

The Appeal of the Enlightenment

The speculation behind human nature has been a discussion for centuries before us. Why do humans commit crimes? Why do we create power structures for ourselves? Why do we suppress our instincts rather than embrace them? Philosophers across the eras have written a plethora of think pieces on these questions and more. Movements such as the scientific revolution and the Enlightenment are a few examples of the most influential philosophical movements of our time. These movements encouraged people to remove themselves from common thought and critique societal norms. Due to this, religions such as Christianity, Islam, Judaism and many others began to lose the grip they had on society’s mindset as time passed, being replaced by new and even scandalous theories. It is believed that the Enlightenment had a large influence on modern society's' understanding of the world because of the flood of new ideologies and beliefs that have never before been presented- which is true- but really it was the challenging of the religious and societal guidelines and expectations put unto humans that made the Enlightenment so influential and appealing.  

Friedrich Nietzsche, a 19th century German philosopher, believed that humans made decisions based on a will to survive and accommodate to one's surroundings and environment. In his works, he argued against Utilitarianism, A system of belief founded by French philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832). In, “An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation”, Bentham writes, “By ‘utility’ is meant the property of something whereby it tends to: produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness (all equivalent in the present case) or (this being the same thing); to prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappiness to the party whose interest is considered.” In other words, happiness or pleasure-over-pain is the priority in the eyes of a Utilitarian. Nietzsche believed that this drive was foolish, saying that if all humans were happy then there would be nothing for us to work towards. In Nietzsche's, "Beyond Good and Evil", he writes, "You want, if possible - and there is no more insane "if possible" - to abolish suffering. The discipline of suffering, of great suffering - do you not know that only this discipline has created all enhancements of man so far? That tension of the soul in unhappiness which cultivates its strength, its shudders face to face with great ruin. In man creature and creator are united: in man there is material, fragment, excess, clay, dirt, nonsense, chaos; but in man there is also creator, form giver, hammer, hardness, spectator divinity, and seventh day: do you understand this contrast? And that your pity is for the "creature in man". In other words, Nietzsche feels that by desiring to replace suffering with pleasure and happiness, we would essentially desire erasing a major component of ourselves as humans. In order to aspire to greater things and have ambition, Nietzsche believes suffering is a crucial component in this process. Without suffering, there is no reason to look towards the next creation. With happiness also comes contentedness which Nietzsche believes would only set us back as a species. He calls out Utilitarians for making a pity of the "creature" in man and argues that instead of wanting to get rid of the creature inside, we should want to embrace it as a part of us.

Although Nietzsche and Bentham were both atheists, Nietzsche was also very popular for being critical of those belonging to the European high class who identified as Utilitarian because he believed they were looking at the world through a bourgeois perspective. Those of European high class were very prideful of the clean, civilized lifestyle they lead and believed themselves to be higher than those of lower class or living in less fortunate places. Nietzsche believed this directly correlated to their desire to want to rid of or ignore the "creature" in man. Nietzsche’s belief would also be contradictory to the bible- when Eve ate the apple, this was the first recorded sin in human history. When Jesus sacrificed himself so that humankind’s sins could be forgiven, it was presented as a priority to remove oneself from sin as best they could so they could be admitted into Heaven after death. Nietzsche’s ideas of the “creature of man” basically say that those erasure of sins either never happened or never made a difference, and that we should accept that rather than try and avoid it. Nietzsche's philosophy somewhat coincides with Rousseau's. Rousseau received much controversy for presenting the idea that humans were once animalistic creatures- "noble savages" as he called them- that lived lives closer to happiness then we could ever achieve. For the European high class, this was a very difficult concept to digest. For a people who lived in such lavish conditions and who prided themselves in being above the “savage”, to hear that they, as a people, once lived and behaved like the suggested savages was scandalous and unpleasant. Although Rousseau used “savage” to describe the state of humans in their past, this term used by other European philosophers triggered conflict with non-European philosophers.

While philosophers removed themselves from common societal thought, many of them felt it important to analyze why it was necessary to do so. In reference to human development, some philosophers believed that living in the society humans had created for ourselves impaired or stunted human development. In Immanuel Kant’s, What is Enlightenment? (1784), Kant talks about how the need for a government and power structure- in this case, capitalism- is ingrained in us to such a degree where people wouldn’t know how to act without one. Kant writes, “Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one’s own understanding without another’s guidance… Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a large part of mankind gladly remain minors all their lives, long after nature has freed them from external guidance.” In other words, by growing up with authority figures and power structures, humans find ourselves not needing to think for ourselves which only disadvantages us. Having other people make rules and regulations for us means it is not necessary for us to analyze or think deeper about the conditions in which we live or how said conditions are designed. Rather, we can go our entire lives simply following directions and only having to make small, trivial decisions for ourselves- and even those have probably been influenced one way or another by a societal mindset. Kwame Nkrumah, the first president of Ghana after the fight for independence from Britain, makes a similar point in his work Consciencism (1964). Nkrumah writes, “Practice without thought is blind; thought without practice is empty. The three segments of African society… the traditional, the Western, and the Islamic, co-exist uneasily; the principles animating them are often in conflict with one another… The principles which inform capitalism are in conflict with the socialist egalitarianism of the traditional African society.” Seeing as Nkrumah’s works centered more around political philosophy, this quote is swayed more towards an analysis of how different societies and power structures in Africa interact with one another rather than trying to remove himself from one in general. However, the root meaning is still very similar to that of Kant’s. “Practice without thought is blind; thought without practice is empty,” speaks back to the point of humans following commands and the norm without giving it much thought because we are conditioned to behave and think in certain ways. Not because it is our design as humans, but because the systems we build for ourselves shape us this way. The rest of his quote speaks to this flawed development coming in between tradition- Nkrumah says that Africa is a traditionally egalitarian society. However, because of division in mindset due to religion and power structures, this egalitarian mindset has become divided as well. This emphasizes that not only can the systems we build for ourselves stunt our growth and development, but can also push us away from our values and morals. In some instances this can be a good thing, but in this case Nkrumah is clearly speaking against it.

If modern philosophers stopped to think about it, they would realize that the Enlightenment is not just about the presentation of new ideas, but the fact that these new ideas were so influential because they appealed to a larger audience due to the lack of pressure to accommodate or conform to societal norms and expectations. The systems in which we built for ourselves over time causes us to neglect different perspectives, conform to beliefs that we wouldn’t conform to otherwise or that we know remotely nothing about, and makes it so we allow ourselves to be ruled by others even if we don’t realize it. Due to this, we historically have lacked the skills to analyze and question these systems, which prevent us from seeing the flaws and problematic tendencies that follow. Through the Enlightenment, humans learned the importance of being aware that the society we live in is not necessarily built for us, but rather for the people who built it. By removing itself from societal norms in terms of religion, government, and other factors, the Enlightenment appealed to a larger audience which in turn made it one of the most influential philosophical movements in our history

Works CIted

"An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation." Jeremy Bentham,. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Sept. 2016.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. "Beyond Good and Evil — Ch 1." Beyond Good and Evil — Ch 1. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Sept. 2016.

By. "Kant. What Is Enlightenment." Kant. What Is Enlightenment. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Sept. 2016.

By the Time, However, That They Come to Be Accepted in the Universities for Exposition, They Have Lost the Vital Power Which They Had at Their First Statement ' They Have Shed Their Dynamism and Polemic Reference. This Is a Result of the Academic Treatment Which They Are Given. The Academic Treatment Is the Result of an Attitude to Philosophical Systems as Though There Was Nothing to Them but Statements Standing in Logical Relation to One Another. "KWAME NKRUMAH: CONSCIENCISM – PHILOSOPHY AND IDEOLOGY FOR DECOLONISATION." THE MARXISTNKRUMAIST FORUM. N.p., 2013. Web. 26 Sept. 2016.