Author Archives: Sriya Sunil

Pacing Yourself

Posted on by

I’ve had a reserved, slightly fraught, relationship with yoga. My first brush with this activity was at the age of 11. My school had implemented a year of yoga, so I spent about 2 hours every week stretching, bending and balancing. Although I enjoyed outdoor activities, yoga was different. It required flexibility, something I severely lacked. Despite this, I used to have fun. The environment was relaxing and most of the class whispered/spoke to each other throughout the activity.

Since then, I’ve been practicing yoga extremely sporadically. Needless to say, I haven’t gotten much better: During the yoga session, there were many moments where I felt like I had gotten a pose, only to realise that I had not. For example, a fair number of the poses required straight legs, but my knees were almost perpetually bent. The most enjoyable was shavasana, the one where we  focus on our breathing while lying down (Only because it did not test my flexibility or balance).

However, Megan, our instructor, told us to go at our own pace. It was a reminder that everyone has different abilities, and you shouldn’t force yourself to do something that could potentially injure you. Which was an important point for me, considering my prior experiences with yoga. Overall, it was a relaxing event that was a good way to take a break from work.

GMO Soybeans and Salmon

Posted on by

The world’s population is expected to grow to 9 billion by 2050. A significant challenge in sustaining this population would be ensuring a steady, secure supply of food. Genetically modified organisms have already been proven to be a useful tool in reaching higher levels of agricultural efficiency. Although I am in favour of the use of genetically modified crops, I believe that the management of this technology could be more efficient.

A really popular example would be Roundup Ready soybeans, developed by Monsanto. Farmers originally used herbicides other than glyphosate to manage weeds on their farms, since glyphosate also affected the crops that were grown. However, with roundup ready soybeans, the genome had been modified to include a gene that encoded for a glyphosate-tolerance enzyme. This allowed farmers to use glyphosate, without worrying about the negative consequences it may have on yield. Additionally, glyphosate is considered relatively safer than other herbicides. It also reduced the effort required to manage weeds or prepare fields for crops.

However, the introduction of this technology also had consequences. Naturally, more farmers chose to buy Roundup Ready soybeans, as it was a safer, more efficient alternative. Since Monsanto had patented Roundup Ready soybeans, it was the only supplier of these seeds. This led to a single company having a monopoly of the seed market, for soybeans. The company was able to inflate the prices. Additionally, farmers were not allowed to save seeds for the next growing season, forcing them to buy new ones next year. Another issue would be that since glyphosate would not affect the crops, there might be excessive use of the herbicide to ensure that that there is no growth of weeds.

The issues surrounding transgenic salmon are pretty similar. It would have the benefits of increasing the amount of salmon production, which would meet the current demands more effectively than fishing. There are issues that would have to be resolved/thought about: management of the waste produced by the fish, the ethics of aquaculture and the monopolisation of the salmon industry (Which would affect relatively small-scale businesses).

Overall, genetically modified organisms have the potential to increase the efficiency of food production. However, the management of these crops or animals could be improved or regulated to prevent damage to the environment or the formation of monopolies.

Conforming Nonconformists?

Posted on by

Dead Poets Society was everything I expected it to be: a generally upbeat film, with a few of tragic occasions, that ends on a vaguely pleasant note. The movie focuses on individualism, finding your voice and not conforming to the majority. However, the movie had a few issues, one of which was that not every aspect of the movie encapsulated this idea effectively.

The most memorable scenes in the movie were of the teacher, John Keating. The scene that stuck with me in particular was when he encouraged the students to stand on his table, to view the world differently. During this scene, the camera is focused on Keating from a high angle. He is centered in the frame, delivering a monologue about finding your identity and voice, while the students move past at the edges, forming the backdrop. The dialogue and direction indicate that this is a significant point in the movie.

However, the message of this scene and the events leading up to it are somewhat contradictory. At the beginning of this event, Keating stands on his desk and tells the class about how he sees the world differently from up here. To convey his point, he asks the class to do the exact same thing. The form a line, and one by one, walk up onto the desk and walk right off. It was odd to watch characters mechanically perform this task while Keating spoke about individualism.

During the scene, he asked the students not to be walk off the edge like lemmings. When discussing this scene, I later found out that the idea that lemmings ‘mindlessly’ jump off cliffs was a myth (Propagated by a Disney documentary called ‘True-Life Adventure’). The use of a phrase of a popular, yet incorrect, phrase added to the irony of the situation.

Overall, it was a feel-good movie because of the relatable nature of the themes. However, the presence of contradictory instances throughout the movie made it appear like Keating was almost imposing his idea of individualism upon the class.

Eco-Anxiety and Food

Posted on by

Last Monday, I attended the table talk about eco-anxiety. The discussion was based on an article in The Atlantic, about the effect of dietary choices on the environment. The article suggested that if everyone, hypothetically, substituted beans for beef, the U.S would come close to meeting its 2020 greenhouse-gas emission goals. It’s astounding that such a drastic change can be achieved by a single dietary ‘swap’, without any other variations in diet (The consumption of other meats and animal products can stay constant), energy infrastructure or transportation. More than anything, this statement reveals problems with meat production.

Usually, cattle in industrial systems are fed a mix of corn, soy and other grains or beans. Historically, they used to graze on pastures and were fed a mix of hay and other grasses. Among with a few other discoveries, it was found that animals that were fed caloric-dense foods, as opposed to grass, tended to gain mass at a quicker pace. Since farmers that adopted this new feed were able to produce meat at a faster rate, the industry quickly shifted to caloric dense feeds. A significant amount of fertilisers are required to produce these new feeds in the required quantities. Although cows are notorious for being generators of methane, the use of fertilisers to produce their feed also adds significantly to both the total carbon footprint and to environmental pollution.

Even though meat production has issues of sustainability, it is not reasonable to advocate a complete stop in the consumption of beef or any other meat/animal product. Statements like the one made in the article are important as they indicate inefficiencies in the current food production system. However, they may not be the most effective guideline for personal action. Diets are varied, with every individual having different needs or inclinations towards different foods. Another method of dealing with eco-anxiety related food and food production would be structural and education changes to encourage a balanced diet, as opposed to over-consumption of certain foods (Specifically those with a high carbon footprint).

Decoding Your Genome

Posted on by

Last Friday, I watched a documentary about whole genome sequencing; it’s benefits and consequences. A good portion of the film was focused on the use of medically driven whole genome sequencing for diagnosing and treating conditions. This involved background information about illnesses, case studies and potential future applications of genotyping.

While most of this may seem like the stuff of research labs and investigators, genotyping is fairly accessible to the general population. There are a large number of companies that provide genetic information based on samples that have been submitted to them. They usually focus on specific genes and traits, as opposed to providing a whole ‘map’ of an individual’s genome.

Initially, these tests were considered ‘fun’ activities. They provided information about ancestry, or certain quirky facts. However, companies like 23andMe have focused on also presenting customers with information about genetic predispositions to illnesses and conditions.

With a $99 fee for a test, shipping and ~8 week wait, 23andMe is arguably the most convenient method of finding out more about genetic predispositions. It may be beneficial, as 23andMe is now offering to detect genetic predispositions for late-onset Alzheimer’s by analyzing the APOE gene.  This is useful since research has indicated that specific mutations in this gene may in an increased likelihood of developing late onset Alzheimer’s. It would difficult information to learn of but it would provide individuals knowledge that they may find useful/want in planning for their future.

However, these results may not always be helpful or accurate. Even though 23andMe states that they do not provide diagnostic testing, customers may often view their results as a diagnosis. They may take measures into their own hands, without consulting a professional about further testing or medical options. This is unsafe since a significant number of conditions are not caused only by genetics, but also by the environment and other factors.

Keeping that in mind, tests like these have both benefits and consequences on an individual’s level. There are more issues when looking at the broader picture: like the aggregation of genetic information and the potential benefits and risks associated with such databases.

No ‘Right Answer’

Posted on by

Last Saturday, I attended the talk about love, relationships and dating. Like any other event of this type, there were initially waves of silence that soon went away as time passed by. The talk was interesting and I found myself thinking about it for a while.

Later that day, I found an article on The Atlantic about ‘Love in the Time of Individualism’ and thought it was very relevant to the talk. A large portion of the article was focused on the shifts in the rates of marriage and divorce. It provided a variety of explanations ranging from: shifts in dating culture to an increased sense of individualism. The more I read the article, the more I felt that there isn’t a ‘correct’ opinion about broad issues like those discussed during the talk.

Taking the issue of using dating apps, it is easy to see how one could either be comfortable or uneasy with them. Dating apps provide a great avenue of interaction for individuals who may not feel comfortable meeting other people in-person. However, the opposite is also true in that some people can find it tedious to use a dating app because of the effort required to create, curate and manage a profile.

Another issue is that of the dating culture at Cornell. Students often prioritise work over social life. In a rigorous academic environment, sometimes it can be difficult to compartmentalise work and find time for relationships. However, it is also true that in a stressful environment like Cornell, having a relationship would be a great way to manage stress.

For topics like this, there are often merits for both sides of a discussion. Everyone has different expectations, experiences and beliefs. The talk was a great way to highlight how there is really no ‘right’ answer and no ‘correct’ way to manage relationships and work. Rather, it is always important to reflect, discuss and reconsider one’s options and aspirations when dealing with dating and relationships.

Herb Garden

Posted on by

The visit to the Botanic Gardens was on a surprisingly warm day. Nevetheless, it didn’t matter, as this was my first time visiting in the two years that I had been at Cornell. The tour started off as expected, with our guide Betty showing us certain plants, flowers and aspects of the Botanic Gardens. Although we saw a lot of interesting features, I found the Robison York State Herb Garden to be the most unique. The air in that area was suffused with smells of different leaves and flowers.

For me, the word ‘herb’ usually brings food and cooking to mind. I expected to see a lot of thyme, rosemary and other common aromatic herbs but the garden was so much more diverse. It had 17 beds, each with a specific theme. The most interesting ones were the medicinal herbs and the herbs of the ancients.

The medicinal bed had a lot of unfamiliar herbs. Most are still very widely used as ingredients in the manufacture of medicines. Arnica was one such example, used to treat bruising and as pain relief.The herb I remember from the ‘herbs of the ancients’ bed was wormwood. It had a strong, pungent smell, which makes sense since it was used to protect wooden furniture against insects like ants.

The garden was a curiosity. I was only able to see a fraction of the plants there, which was unfortunate. I’ll probably visit the Botanic Gardens again in the near future, to explore the herb garden in its entirety.