My "mythical" life!

People who live in the upper Midwest may relate more to this post than others.

I found a nice article on CNN on winter myths. A rare one because it did not try to convince me that I may have some dreadful disease that I have never heard of. :-)

Here are a few myths that bolster and shatter my winter self!


Myth: You lose most of your body heat through your head

Contrary to the findings from one 1950s Army study, most of your body heat doesn't escape through your noggin, according to Vreeman. "In the now-infamous study, volunteers visited the Arctic with their heads exposed. However, the rest of them was outfitted in gear designed to protect against the cold, so it's logical that they lost most of their body heat from their heads," she says.

If you go outside without gloves, you'll lose a disproportionate amount of heat through your hands.

So I wasn't "unnecessarily cheap" resisting buying an expensive winter hat all these years! On the other hand, my balding head is not why I feel colder :-(


Myth: Cold air can make you sick

Despite being called the common "cold," lower temperatures alone won't make you sick. In fact, the exact opposite is true. "Cells that fight infection in body actually increase if you go out into the cold," says Dr. Rachel C. Vreeman, MD, co-author of "Don't Swallow Your Gum! Myths, Half-Truths, and Outright Lies About Your Body and Health." It's your body's way of combating the stress of freezing temps.

Plus, according to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, cold viruses grow best at about 91 degrees; if you're outside in the cold, your nostrils are surely colder than that.
That is a myth alright--I almost never fell sick walking to college in the dead of Minnesotan winters. Illinois on the other hand is a completely different story. Maybe a combination of cold air, kids with runny noses and sneezing students conspire to make you sick...

Myth: You shouldn't exercise in the cold

Get ready to crawl out from under your comforter and run into the great (and yes, cold) outdoors. According to research published in Medicine & Science in Sports and Exercise, in cold temperatures, race times are actually faster -- and quicker paces burn more calories in less time. Plus, that harder, faster workout can spike your endorphin levels -- which, according to a review in Environmental Science and Technology, are already increased just by you being outside.
One would need those endorphins badly should one slip on ice though...


Myth: You don't need sunscreen in the winter

Forget bathing suits. Department stores should stock sunscreen with the toboggan hats. "Because the Earth's surface is closer to the sun during the winter months, we are actually exposed to more harmful rays without even realizing it," says Dr. Robert Guida, a board-certified plastic surgeon in New York City.

What's more, snow and ice can both reflect up to 80% of harmful UV rays so that they can hit the skin twice.
Like always I'm going to pretend there is an evolutionary existential reason for my natural fur :-) Although nature does seem to think my head is well insulated and protected already...


Myth: Cold temps cause hair loss

Chilly weather might actually help you hold onto your hair. In one University Hospital of Zurich study, researchers followed 823 women for six years and found that they lost the most hair in the summer and the least in the winter.

It might be evolutionary -- just think how thick your dog's fur gets in the winter. Still, dry scalps grow unhealthy, brittle, and breakable hair, so if your head gets itchy on cold, dry days, you might need to invest in a scalp-protecting shampoo for the season, Vreeman says.

So WHAT is the reason for the untimely demise of my previous and naturally reshaping coiffure???

Myth: Drinking alcohol warms you up

Alcohol makes you feel toasty on the inside, but that's because it causes your blood to rush toward your rosy-red skin and away from your internal organs. That means your core body temperature actually drops post-sip, Vreeman says.

What's more, alcohol actually impairs your body's ability to shiver and create extra heat.

Aha! To all those Indian parents who take/provide a sip of brandy as a cure for cold! And to most of the upper Midwestern "casual drinkers"!




In other words, your geographical location, your little ones and your idle behind is making you sick, and alcohol won't help! I'm waiting with bated breath for the next polar vortex.

Judging a book by its cover...

Much has been said on TV and in print about the Devyani Khobragade case (the Indian diplomat who allegedly employed an Indian maid and did not pay her according to US labor laws, and the maid allegedly stole and extorted Ms. Khobragade). As usual it has been dissected by every news outlet and blog imaginable, but there seems to be one type of argument that is pervasive. It goes something like this: "X did it, so what? Y did this and nobody said anything. And there are millions of X's that do the same thing, and nobody says anything. What about A,B,C,...". Replace the letters with the actors in this case (amazingly it fits no matter which side of the debate you are on!)

I'm sure that this line of argument is pandemic, but personally I have heard it when some ill in society has to be justified. Let's take a few examples: bribery, piracy, cheating on exams (everybody does it, why should I lose out/be punished? Please pay attention to the other much bigger social crimes), etc. So in this case fingers have been pointed at the injustices committed by the US justice system, the caste of Ms. Khobragade, the holier-than-thou attitude of diplomats, the audacity of the maid to complain when millions of maids in India accept the same living conditions, ...the list goes on.

Here is my one-sentence rebuttal: carefully read the law. Let me paraphrase in my own words how the law against stealing (just to pick a random offence) may sound:

"Any offence where goods of value are taken from the owner(s) without prior consent or official transaction is considered stealing, and the offender is liable ..."

It is NOT as below:

"Any offence where goods of value are taken from the owner(s) without prior consent or official transaction is considered stealing, its severity being inversely proportional to its frequency of occurrence and apparent social acceptance, and the offender is liable..."

I do not care how many other criminals have gone scot-free.   I do not care if the offender's offence is justifiable by prior wrongdoings against him/her. I do not care if this offender is somehow a  product created autonomously by other societal factors. Let us talk about this offence now. Judge a book by its cover, not by the covers of surrounding books and the reputation of the publication company.

For there is a very simple reason why: the same players/commentators would parrot the exactly opposite tune if they were the victim instead of the perpetrator. A cheater is seldom as good at justifying cheating when he/she is cheated. Bribing becomes instantaneously outrageous when you are on the losing end of the bribe-tainted transaction.

I do not know which side in this case is at fault. But judging from the debates and commentary, that never mattered...