High heels and your health

In today’s society it is common for women to wear high heels for a number of reasons to include fashion, leg shaping, creating the illusion of longer legs and looking sexy.

Over the years women have noticed the negative effects that translate into problems with posture. Nonetheless, high heel shoes are still very much in fashion and worn regularly by women.

Peter Lavelle’s intention is for women to rethink their choice in shoes, and to put health before that of fashion. He uses an American study looking at the effects of comfortable shoes on both men and women. Throughout the article the author sites a research published by the Journal Arthritis Care and Research. In this the author gives a summary of the most pertinent methods for obtaining research that were applied.

The author uses the imagery of heels as being an offender to women’s feet. Nonetheless, these offenders are far more attractive to women than good shoes. Most people associate non-flexible sole and support shoe as an unattractive chunky shoe. Not exactly the shoes that young women want anyone to catch them in.

To make women reconsider this view, the author goes into health problems that occur due to wearing high heels. Not only do high heels affect the shape and structure of the foot, they impact posture significantly as well. Mr. Brendon Brown (President of the Australian Podiatry Association) supports this claim. He gives readers this tip to keep in mind for their next shoe-shopping trip.

In this article not only are women reminded of the impact of high heels on their health, it also opens the door for women to make comments and discuss their experiences. Hopefully this article will place awareness in the readers mind for their next shopping engagement. However, I personally do not believe that this article will have much of an impact; as long as high heels are in fashion and women wearing them are perceived as sophisticated, sexy and classy.

High oestrogen levels may impact brain

On average women are more concerned with their health and how their body functions than men. With great reason this article mostly concerns itself with oestrogen, which is foremost correlated to women.

This news story is written at a scientific level and published in the ABC Science news section. Females would be the target audience knowing that they have the highest level of oestrogen.

A number of studies’ have reported that high oestrogen levels may have a direct impact on the brain. The study published by the journal of Brain and Cognition having been the first to have found a direct correlation between an effect of this specific hormone and ‘mature brain structures.’

As to the answer of how they found this information the author explains that the researchers previously done on female rates with high and low oestrogen levels. In doing so it becomes easier to follow where the line of thought is leading to. The author is trying to grab the readers’ attention and show that there is enough evidence for further exploration in this area of research.

By making the audience aware, the author engages them in his cause. The author’s primary goal is to incite awareness which will translate into funding to further the exploration of this particular medical revelation The article seems to have science as the primary argument and secondary is its affects on women. The researchers need to appeal to women in some manner to have them push for further research.

Nonetheless, women may feel that researchers are trying to undermine them by saying that their hormones are allowing them to pay attention and learn.

Cosmetic surgery industry in the UK ‘has key weakness’

Cosmetic surgery has become an immense industry across the world over the last century. People are more self conscious about what they look like. They are more driven to look like the images they are presented within magazines and on television. Some of the most common surgeries happen to Japanese women who have eyelid surgery to look more European. While in America, the number one surgery is breast augmentation.

It is suggested that the United Kingdom is 10 years behind their American counterpart. This has been especially true within the field of cosmetic surgery, as a larger number of the British population are more inclined to elect cosmetic surgery.

The unnecessary loss of life due to elected procedures is the message the author is conveying. The author, Nick Triggle, specifically targets the fundamental weaknesses of cosmetic surgery in the United Kingdom. The author uses official governmental sources and most importantly including an official review and study from the Department of Health. This establishment of government studies being reviewed for the public invokes a non-biased standpoint and a decently less possibility of skewed data. His target audience are the citizens most susceptible to elected cosmetic procedures; either individuals who have had one already performed or an individual debating such a procedure currently.

The author uses a straightforward approach to illustrate the gravity of this issue, including unskilled professionals, a lack of: up to scratch facilities and governmental regulations and psychological evaluations.

With these issues that lead to potential life-threatening situations, the government has taken notice and is in the process of creating legislation to protect the citizens from an experience. This gives the reader at least some hope that there may be future protection from such an experiences.

To add to the stigma of untrustworthiness a quote by Dr. Alex Goodwin sums up the cowboy image of Plastic Surgeon’s in the United Kingdom, “...Too many teams are prepared to ‘have a go’ ”. Indeed, we mustn’t forget amazing success stories that plastic surgery has carved up. With victims of crimes or accidents, there are many with terrible wounds that affect them both on the outer and inner self. These individuals have plastic surgery and it has helped them heal from such egregious events. Isn’t that something worth furthering the field for?

It’s good to think- but not too much, scientists say

The author, Kate Alcock, opens with a general statement trying to engage the reader in a more philosophical article. The article suggests that the functions of the brain and how much we think have a direct correlation on the impact of the brain.

The article begins with an introduction into the biology and the effects of too much thinking. There are also negative association in doing too much thinking as it can cause poor memory and a higher susceptibility to depression. This author is explicitly suggesting that ill health is affected by too much or to little thinking. The sub-heading ‘illness link’, which allows an easy flows into the next part of the article and reinforces this point of view.

Kate Alcock backs her claim by referring to the biological effects and uses the scientific language regarding these issues. In her use of professional language the reader has a sense of complete understanding on the part of the author as well as creating and image that she posses in depth knowledge.

After referring to a number of studies and quotes, the author suggests a connection between the impacts on the brain and mental disorders which seaways into the summary. Here the author explains that all individuals are affected differently. It is especially important for individuals with mental illnesses to be able to recognize disorders within themselves. Hopefully, this would encourage people to get help, since mental health professional may improve many lives. It is interesting to ponder the effects this article may have on the readers, readers who were blissfully unaware of their disorders and were content until this article showed them otherwise. The question is now of what these people may have to live with, in regards to their awakening condition. Even though the article mainly contends with minor mental disorders, the question is if these people will need to seek help now, if this article is helpful if it brings to light something of liveable ignorance.

I feel that this article lacks a lot of substance. There isn’t much of a position that the author conveys. In my personal opinion it raises interesting questions for debate without any real solution for rectification.

Supplements for osteoarthritis ‘do not work’

Today’s society is not only obsessed with being thin and being externally beautiful, but also with lasting internal youth. However, how do you maintain internal youthfulness?

For the majority of people the answer to this question equals supplements. Popular belief is that supplementing your body with every possible vitamin and mineral will make you stay young for longer. People taking these supplements are educated in health issues and part of a higher social class. The same audience are able to maintain a balanced diet and are able to get all the nutrients they need. As a result, they actually do not need supplements as their bodies are getting all they need. All they are paying for is expensive pee.

In this article the author wants to prevent people from making the common mistake of wasting their money on supplements that they do not need. Furthermore, the author is trying to increase readers’ awareness of the daily brainwashing through advertising and magazines.

The arguments given are supported by the National Health Services (NHS), supports current research in there being no proof that glucosamine and chondroitin as supplements have any effects. There is no harmful effect in taking the supplements. Therefore, people can still take them, but they just have to finance them themselves.

So why do people still want to take them?

The author goes on to explain the supplements’ role in the body, providing quotes by doctors. However, these doctors reinforce the point made previously that a person with a balanced diet does not need supplements.

This article is easy to comprehend, enabling the author to reach a larger number of readers. The readers’ background knowledge on supplements can vary, but they can still understand the gist of the article.

New birth control pill adds folate

Generally people taking contraceptive pills do not want to get pregnant. In this news story the author, Saundra Young, informs and promotes a new birth control pill containing extra benefits to the reader The style of writing is quite scientific but it is easy to follow her line of thoughts.

Saundra Young explains briefly the new attribute, ‘folic acid’, that is added to a previously safe contraceptive pill. She goes into some of its benefits in preventing health defects while being pregnant.

From this, the reader can pick up conflicting issues. Why would a person taking the pill be interested in preventing birth defects while being pregnant? And is the pill not supposed to prevent people from becoming pregnant? The reader may get the wrong impression and loose trust in the product.

People reading this article will probable be taking some sort of birth control pills. By chance I’m actually taking the original pill that the author is talking about, as a result, I found myself more involved in the article once I recognised the brand. This has probably occurred to other women who are in the same position as me.

The writer goes on to explain that there are other benefits concerning peoples’ own health. The area of research into peoples’ general health is more relevant to readers that are not interested in having children in the near future.

Straight after mentioning general health, the author switches to a different audience, which are more worried about having healthy children after years of using the pill. They are given further insights into the dosage and the effects of folic acid.

As a conclusion, the author uses a quote from Dr. Sharon Mass, to reassure the reader that the pill is 99 percent effective and of its added benefits.

Depending on the readers and their mindsets on pregnancy, the news story can come across in two different manners.

Low carb diets like Atkins 'better for blood pressure'

There is a healthier way to go about tackling obesity. In this hard news story the author presents the reader with a more natural alternative to weight loss. A benefit of a low-carb diet is its considerable effect on lowering blood pressure. The key standpoint the author is presenting is to use diet instead of medication. In using diet the individual will experience fewer costs and negative side effects. This proposal is supported by reliable scientific sources including the Archives of Internal Medicine, the Veterans Affairs Medical Centre and Duke University Medical Centre and the British Heart Foundation.

The author leads the reader into the article by using a statement confirmed by US doctors. On a low-carb diet twice as many people have lower blood pressure than people using orlistat (diet drugs). The author tries not to be biased in confirming that both approaches to dieting have achieved equal weight loss. Overweight people are often advised to loose weight to lower their blood pressure this gives the reader an underlying direction towards using a low-carb diet.

The article uses common terms that are easy to understand and a number of sub-headings are used to guide the reader. Each of the two sections ‘medication’ and ‘counselling’ are both supported by research statistics. The author enhanced this with quotes by reputable sources.

It is most important for the author to make it very clear that this diet can be a more effective and well-rounded alternative to weight loss. A further aspect influencing the weight loss is counselling. Only minimal information is provided on the effects counselling the rest of the paragraph is dedicated to describing diet drugs. This may suggest that the author is trying to balance out the argument, giving the reader further information.

In conclusion a general health statement is made by the well-recognised source the British Health Foundation. The author gives the reader the choice suggesting that they themselves need to find something to suite their own needs.