Rabu, 25 Maret 2009 | By: XAVIER

Cell Phone Radiations


Introduction

Cell phones and cancer are in the news all the time now it seems. But almost everyone uses cell phones. All over the world, tens of millions of people are pressing them against their heads for hours every day. In the U.S. it is estimated that there were at least 100 million cell phone users, as of early 2002, and that number has continued to climb.

So what's the fuss? Is cancer caused by cell phones a serious concern, or the media's panic-du-jour?

A cell phone, and a household cordless phone, use a low level form of microwave radiation to send and receive their signals. (see "How do cell phones work" here.) Microwaves, as you know, are used to cook food. As the radiation penetrates tissue it causes it to heat.

Is this a problem for us with cell phones? That is the current debate. Let's examine the positions and the known evidence, without hype or prejudice. As always, EHSO will provide citations and links to the sources of any evidence provided, so you can verify it for yourself.


Positions, pro and con:

Cell phones are dangerous:

  • They emit microwaves.
  • You hold the source of the emission against your brain
  • There are claims that people have had brain tumors in the exact size, shape and position as the antenna on their cell phone.

Cell phones are safe:

  • Cell phones use a very, very low level of radio frequency (rf) energy - too low to cause damage.
  • The type of energy emitted is non-ionizing - meaning it doesn't cause damage to chemical bonds or dna.
  • Hundreds of millions of people have been using cell phones and cordless phones for years. If there were a problem, we would have seen it by now.

Latest News:

  • February 2008: Tokyo Women's Medical University compared phone use in 322 brain cancer patients with 683 healthy people and found that regularly using a mobile did not significantly affect the likelihood of getting brain cancer. "Using our newly developed and more accurate techniques, we found no association between mobile phone use and cancer, providing more evidence to suggest they don't cause brain cancer," Naohito Yamaguchi, who led the research, said. His team's findings were published in the British Journal of Cancer.
  • December 5, 2006 - Scientists in Denmark tracked over 420,000 cell phone users over the course of 21 years in an attempt to determine if if cell phone use causes cancer. As reported in ABC News, they found the RF energy produced by the phones did not correlate to an increased incidence of the disease. From the article: 'This so-called Danish cohort "is probably the strongest study out there because of the outstanding registries they keep,' said Joshua Muscat of Pennsylvania State University, who also has studied cell phones and cancer. 'As the body of evidence accumulates, people can become more reassured that these devices are safe, but the final word is not there yet,' Muscat added."
  • April 2006 - the Swedish National Institute for Working Life issued a report this week, published in the International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, disputing two earlier studies that claimed cell phone use has no correlation to increased brain tumor risk. The researchers examined the cell phone usage of 905 adults who developed malignant brain tumors. They found that people with more than 2,000 hours of total talk time had 3.7 times the risk of developing brain cancer when compared with nonusers. 2,000 hours is about an hour of talk time every Monday through Friday for 10 years. The study, also found a 2 times increase for tumors specifically on the side of the head where the cell phone was generally used. But it should be noted that the study relied on the memory of the subjects for how long they used their phones, for as much as a decade ago, according to a Daily News interview with Dr. Lydia Zablotska, an epidemiologist at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. "You're interviewing subjects in an era when everyone has a suspicion that cell phones may be harmful," Zablotska said of the study's shortcomings.
  • January 2006 - A four-year long British study performed by the London-based Institute of Cancer Research and three British universities found that talking on a cell phone had no effect on tumor rates. The researchers included 966 people with glioma brain tumors and 1,716 healthy respondents. Individuals were questioned on first use, lifetime years of use, cumulative hours of use, and number of calls they made.
  • March 21, 2005 - Fox news and CNN News both report that on March 16, 2005, a federal appeals court in Maryland reinstated five class-action lawsuits that allege that the cell phone industry has failed to protect consumers from unsafe levels of radiation. Fox quotes a Dr. Henry Lai, a bioengineering professor at the University of Washington, as saying that electromagnetic radiation emitted from cell phones may damage DNA and cause benign brain tumors. Dr. Lai also agrees with EHSO's recommendation to use a headset to minimize potential exposure.

Studies, Facts and Evidence

What is the radiation produced by a cell phone?

Like televisions, alarm systems, computers, and all other electrical devices, Cell phones (also called mobile phones) are radio devices that use Radiofrequency (Rf) energy emit electromagnetic radiation. They operate at low power (less than 1 watt) by transmitting and receiving electromagnetic radiation in the radiofrequency (RF) end of the spectrum. Radiation which is called "ionizing" can be absorbed by tissue and break molecules apart, such as gamma rays and x-rays, are known to cause cancer. The concern is that the cell phone and it's antenna (the source of the radiation) are held close against the head)

The damage to the dna molecules is thought to be the cause. The radiation that a cell phone uses is also part of the same electromagnetic spectrum, but is not ionizing. For this reason, the US FDA can regulate these devices to ensure that the radiation doesn't pose a health hazard to users, but only once the existence of a public health hazard has been established. (See "It's Not a Food or Medical Product, So Why FDA?") , RF energy was mistakenly thought to similarly cause cancer.

radiation in perspective

Power

Newer phones are digital. The older analog phones are expected to be phased out by 2006. The major difference is that analog phones use much more power than digital. Analog use about 1.3 Watts, while a digital mobile phone is designed to operate at a maximum power level of 0.6 watts (see http://www.telecom.globalsources.com/MAGAZINE/TS/0209/PANALOG.HTM By comparison, a household microwave oven uses between 600 and 1,100 watts.

Frequency

In the United States, mobile phones operate in a frequency ranging from about 850 to 1900 megahertz (MHz). In that range, the radiation produced is in the form of non-ionizing radiofrequency (RF) energy. This RF energy is different than the ionizing radiation like that from a medical x-ray, which can present a health risk at certain doses.

Ionizing gamma rays and x-rays can cause cancer when their energy is absorbed by the tissue and chemical bonds are broken, damaging DNA. RF energy, on the other hand, produces heating of tissue. Although there is a small amount of experimental evidence that suggests RF energy can impact DNA in rats, this data has been contradicted by several other animal studies and is not well substantiated. Even if true, the doses administered in these animal studies were much larger than the exposure in humans and may have no relevance to cell phone use at all. So although the RF energy emitted by cell phones is in the electromagnetic spectrum, and other forms of electromagnetic radiation can cause cancer, RF energy is very different and has not been shown to cause cancer.

At high enough levels, RF energy, too, can be harmful, because of its ability to heat living tissue to the point of causing biological damage. In a microwave oven, it's RF energy that cooks the food, but the heat generated by cell phones is small in comparison.

A mobile phone's main source of RF energy is its antenna, so the closer the antenna is to a phone user's head, the greater the person's expected exposure to RF energy.

Because RF energy from a cell phone falls off quickly as distance increases between a person and the radiation source (actually, by the distance squared), the safety of mobile phones with an antenna mounted away from the user, like on the outside of a car, has been presumed to be safe. The distance and the effect of the car acting as a Gaussian cage would virtually eliminate the radiation inside the car. Also not presently in doubt is the safety of those so-called cordless phones that have a base unit attached to a home's telephone wiring and operate at much lower power levels than cell phones.

Many experts say that no matter how near the cell phone's antenna--even if it's right up against the skull--the six-tenths of a watt (typically) of power emitted couldn't possibly affect human health.

Scientific Studies to Date

Some mobile phone users have been diagnosed with brain cancer, and many others who have not used mobile phones have gotten the disease, too. Each year in the United States, brain cancer occurs at a rate of about six new cases per 100,000 people. Among the 100 million Americans who own mobile phones, then, about 6,000 cases of brain cancer would be expected among them in a year, even if they had not used mobile phones.

Scientific studies have focused on the question of whether the statistical risk of getting brain cancer is increased in those who use mobile phones compared to non-users, leaving to the courts the judgment of whether Chris Newman or other individuals would have gotten the disease had they not used a cell phone.

Two types of studies are generally used to investigate suspected cancer causes: epidemiological studies, which look at the incidence of a disease in certain groups of people, and animal studies.

Epidemiological studies are sometimes difficult to carry out in a way that can determine whether a cause-and-effect relationship exists between a single variable in a person's life (in this case, cell phone use) and the person's disease (brain cancer). Some factors that complicate research into the asserted link between cell phones and brain cancer: Brain cancer can take years or even decades to develop, making possible long-term effects of mobile phone use difficult to study; mobile phone technology is ever-evolving; and so many lifestyle factors--even down to the precise position in which a person holds the phone, as well as his or her own anatomy--can affect the extent of radiation exposure.

Studies in animals are easier to control, but entail complications of their own. For example, how should results obtained in rats and mice be interpreted in terms of human health risks? And how can scientists account for the fact that these studies sometimes expose animals to RF almost continuously--up to 22 hours a day--and to whole-body radiation, unlike people's head-only exposure?

While studies generally have shown no link between cell phones and brain cancer, there is some conflicting scientific evidence that may be worth additional study, according to FDA. (See "Studies"). The FDA says on their website that they are closely following ongoing research into whether there might be any association between cell phones and cancer.

A long-term study begun in 1994 by the government's National Cancer Institute is already under way to examine possible risk factors for brain cancer. It compares past usage of mobile phones (as well as other environmental, lifestyle, and genetic factors) by 800 people with brain tumors compared with 800 others who don't have tumors.

The study, the first part of which is expected to be published early next year, will provide a "snapshot" of what the risks from cell phones could be, says Peter Inskip, Sc.D., one of the study's principal investigators. But this research, he cautions, has its own limitations. For one thing, the study was started in 1994 and it considers radiation exposures from cell phones that occurred between the mid-1980s and 1998. That time frame in large part predates the explosion in the popularity of cell phones, as well as the introduction of digital phones that work on a fraction of the energy compared with older analog varieties.

Recently, FDA announced that it will collaborate with the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) on additional laboratory and human studies of mobile phone safety. A "Cooperative Research and Development Agreement" signed in June provides for research to be conducted by third parties, with industry funding and FDA oversight to help ensure the studies' quality.

Specifically, FDA will identify the scientific questions that merit attention, propose research to address those questions, review study proposals from those interested in doing the research, make recommendations on the selection of researchers, and oversee the development of study design. Once research is begun, FDA will review the progress of ongoing studies, review the results of completed studies, and issue a report to the CTIA.

Beyond this planned research, according to the industry association, there are hundreds of scientific studies completed or in progress around the world to investigate RF's possible health effects, with half of them specifically addressing the frequencies used by wireless phones. FDA is a leading participant in the World Health Organization's International EMF (electric and magnetic fields) project to coordinate research and the harmonization of international radiation standards.

Ziff-Davis reports that researchers in Australia have reported their hypothesis that normal mobile phone use can lead to cancer. The research group, lead by radiation expert Dr Peter French, principal scientific officer at the Centre for Immunology Research at St Vincent's Hospital in Sydney, said that mobile phone frequencies well below current safety levels could stress cells in a way that has been shown to increased susceptibility to cancer.

The paper, published in the June 2001 issue of the science journal, "Differentiation", says that repeated exposure to mobile phone radiation acts as a repetitive stress, leading to continuous manufacture of heat shock proteins within cells.

Their theory is that these proteins, which are sensitive to heat, are always present in cells at a low level, but are manufactured in larger amounts when the cell is stressed by heat or other environmental factors. These proteins repair other proteins that are adversely affected by the conditions, and are part of the cell's normal reaction to stress. However, if they are produced too often or for too long, they are known to initiate cancer and increase resistance to anti-cancer drugs.

However, this group has reported absolutely evidence nor studies to substantiate this - it is only a theory.

More recently, a Finnish survey of some of the world's most popular mobile phones found the amount of radiation they emit is well below agreed limits and largely in line with data published by manufacturers. The survey conducted by Finland's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) covered 16 new models made by top handset makers including Finland's own Nokia, Motorola of the United States and South Korea's Samsung Electronics. At this level, the study found that head tissue does not warm significantly and no other harmful effects have been proved scientifically. STUK said the SAR levels in all the 28 models tested so far ranged from 0.45 to 1.12 watts per kilogram.

"It is important that also in the future the limits set for radiation from mobile phones and base stations are based on current and confirmed scientific proof of the effects of radiation on health," Kari Jokela, a researcher at STUK, said in a statement. STUK also said that some of its studies have indicated that microwave radiation from mobile phones may cause small changes in how cells operate, but the findings were insufficient for concluding what effects of this radiation had on health. STUK will start testing third-generation UMTS-standard mobile phones during 2005, focusing on the most popular models. Other phones in the current study were made by Sony Ericsson and Siemens.

Finally, as the non-ionizing radiation does have a small heating effect, it is postulated that the effect would be greatest on the eyes and testes, due to the lower amount of blood vessels to help cool these areas.

Perceptions and Concerns

The latest studies may support the generally held position that cell phone radiation is not a substantial hazard, but they will never be able to prove cell phones to be absolutely safe. It is logically impossible to prove a negative, that cell phones can not cause cancer.


Conclusions

EHSO has seen no credible evidence to date that cell phones cause cancer or brain tumors. It is illogical to believe that evidence of unusual brain tumors is covered up when there are hundred's of millions of people using cell phones worldwide. There is a TREMENDOUS amount of junk science and thoroughly ignorant (as in untrained, uneducated) people running around naming themselves as experts and publishing their opinions on the internet. This hype and fear-mongering has only one goal: to puff up the egos and wallets of those propagating nonsense.

However, cell phones are still relatively new, and while science does not support that the radiation may not be likely to cause cancer, time may prove differently! And in any case, it may cause some other type of damage (certainly accidents in cars from being distracted while fumbling with the phone!)

So common sense suggests that we each take some prudent precautions.


Precautionary Steps To Take

There are some simple steps that cell phone users can take to reduce any remaining risk:

  • First, use a headset or speakerphone mode. That moves the phone (and it's antenna) away from your head.
  • Second, consider reserving the use of mobile phones for shorter conversations or when a conventional phone is not available.
  • Third, the effects of cellular damage are greatest on growing, developing organisms (i.e., the young), so limit children's use of cell phones!
  • Finally, in a car, use an external antenna mounted outside the vehicle to move the source of the radiation farther from you!

And don't believe the claims of conmen preying on people's fear of radiation, selling fraudulent devices that they say protect against radiation. These useless items are mostly sold as "shields" on the Internet. Experts says none of these devices work.

To reduce the risk of an accident while driving, here's a simple tip: enter the several numbers you call the most often in a way that brings them to the top of the list, so you can use fewer keystrokes to dial them. For example, the Motorola V60 starts with an alphabetized list when you press the multi-function button; so start your most commonly called number with "AAA", Like "aaaParents" and the next number with "AAB", like "aabHusband", then they will always appear at the top of the list, which should take fewer keystrokes and less time to dial!


Studies

Epidemiological and animal studies undertaken by the U.S. cell phone industry and others have yielded mixed results.

  • "No Link Between Cell Phone Use and Brain Tumors" - 12 Apr 2005. A new study has found no link between use of cell phones and the risk of developing a brain tumor. The study is published in the April 12 issue of Neurology, the scientific journal of the American Academy of Neurology.. The Danish study questioned 427 people with brain tumors and 822 people without brain tumors about their cell phone use. The study found no increased risk for brain tumors related to cell phone use, frequency of use, or number of years of use.
  • Finnish Study: February 2005: The amount of radiation most popular cell phones emit is well below agreed limits and largely in line with data published by manufacturers. The survey conducted by Finland's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) covered 16 new models made by top handset makers including Finland's own Nokia, Motorola of the United States and South Korea's Samsung Electronics. At this level, the study found that head tissue does not warm significantly and no other harmful effects have been proved scientifically.
  • Video interviews with American Cancer Society, and other researchers.
  • Orebro, Sweden, 1999: No connection: In a study published in 1999, investigators at the Orebro Medical Centre in Sweden compared the past mobile phone use of 209 Swedish brain tumor patients and 425 healthy people. Conclusion: The study found no mobile phone/brain cancer link "in virtually all respects," cancer researcher John E. Moulder, Ph.D., says in the August 2000 issue of IEEE Spectrum, the official magazine of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Investigators did find that mobile phone users who got certain types of brain tumors tended to report using the phone on the side of the head where they developed the tumor. The study's limitations, according to Moulder, include a weak association between cell phone use and tumor development, as well as a possibility that the cancer patients' recollections were biased by already knowing on which side of their head the brain cancer developed.
  • Joshua Muscat, 1999: Glioma: In a yet-unpublished study presented at a 1999 scientific meeting, researcher Joshua Muscat looked for an association between mobile phone use and a type of brain cancer called glioma. Muscat did not find evidence that cell phone use increased people's risk of this type of brain cancer generally. He did, however, observe an increase in one rare kind of glioma, which FDA scientists say might have occurred by chance. Interestingly, with increased hours of mobile phone use, the risk tended to decrease rather than increase as might be expected.
  • A few animal studies have suggested that low levels of RF exposure could speed up development of cancer in laboratory animals. In one recent Australian study, for example, mice genetically altered to be predisposed to developing lymphoma got more than twice as many of these cancers when exposed to RF energy compared to mice not exposed to the radiation.
  • A large number of laboratory tests have been conducted to assess RF's effects on genetic material, looking for mutations, chromosomal changes, DNA strand breaks, and structural changes in blood cells' genetic material. One kind of test, called a micronucleus assay, showed structural changes in genetic material after exposure to simulated cell phone radiation. The changes occurred only after 24 hours of continuous exposure, which experts say raises questions about this test's sensitivity to heating effects and whether that sensitivity could be solely responsible for the results.

Kamis, 19 Maret 2009 | By: XAVIER

Technology

Bad Effects of Technology:

Along with many advantages, technology also has some bad effects. One of the disadvantages of this technology is the affect on the smaller dairies. If they do not have enough money to expand, they will eventually be left in the dust in the dairy industry and be forced to quit farming. Statistics show that there are now fewer herds, but they are larger. There are even fewer cows, but with such efficient equipment there is just as much, if not more, milk. "According to USDA data, the number of dairy farm operations in the U.S. declined from 159,450 in 1993 to 97,560 in 2001." (B5) Many farms end up going bankrupt or just start to dislike milking because of their low technology systems. As mentioned by Ken Bailey, of Penn University (B5) , it is a proven study that large dairy farms are more profitable than small, family farms.
Technology has also added a qualification to milk that is accepted. You have to have the cleaner and higher quality of milk in order to even have your milk be sold. If not, your milk will be dumped and you will lose the profits for that day. Another thing that often happens is if your milk is bad and it is loaded into the truck with other dairies' milk, you will have to pay for all of the milk in that truckload.

Another major disadvantages of technology is the expense. This is the cause for most of these small farms quitting. Small, family dairies feel scared to spend that kind of money on something they might now know about. Some people don't even know what kind of technology is available. Not investing in such technology is what causes many problems to these farms. An exception to this would be having expensive equipment, but you still have low production. In this type of situation, the farm will struggle very much. "There are economic risks that result from any dairy expansion!" (B5)

As with any other piece of technology, there is always a chance that your computer can crash. If the power goes out, or some other unusual event, all of your records are lost unless you have backed them up.

Many farmers complain that good help is hard to find on a dairy farm. "Managing labor appeared to be the biggest challenge facing producers following expansion." (B7) Dairy technology produces careers as well as takes them away. Some of these careers that are taken away include:

* Need less people to manage farm
* Milkers (milking robot)
* Dairy managers (software programs)
* Nutrionists (EZ Feed)

There are many factors that affect the success of a farm. These factors include:

* Ability to manage by farmer
* Environment
* Economic conditions
* Farmer experience
* The less money put in, the less satisfied with output
* Higher pay to employees like managers
* Difficulty with expansion
* "Burn out" cows quickly

Selasa, 17 Maret 2009 | By: XAVIER

All About Kentut





1. Darimana asal Kentut ?
Dari gas dalam usus. Gas dalam usus berasal dari udara yang kita telan, gas yang menerobos ke usus dari darah, gas dari reaksi kimia dan gas dari bakteri perut.

2. Apa komposisi Kentut ?

Bervariasi. Makin banyak udara anda telan, makin banyak kadar nitrogen dalam kentut (oksigen dalam udara terabsorbsi oleh tubuh sebelum sampai usus). Adanya bakteria dan reaksi kimia antara asam perut dan cairan usus menghasilkan karbondioksida. Bakteria juga menghasilkan metana dan hidrogen. Proporsi masing-masing gas tergantung apa yang anda makan, berapa banyak uidara yang tertelan, jenis bakteri dalam usus, berapa lama kita menahan kentut. Makin lama menahan kentut, makin banyak kadar nitrogen dalam kentut karena gas-gas lain terabsorbsi oleh darah melalui dinding usus. Orang yang makannya tergesa-gesa kadar oksigen dalam kentutnya lebih banyak karena tubuh tidak sempat mengabsorbsi oksigem.
3. Kenapa Kentut berbau busuk ?
Bau kentut karena kandungan hidrogen sulfida dan merkaptan. Kedua senyawa ini mengandung sulfur (belerang). Makin banyak kandungan sulfur dalam makanan anda, makin banyak sulfur dan merkaptan diproduksi oleh bakteri dalam perut dan makin busuklah kentut anda. Telur dan daging berperan besar dalam menghasilkan bau busuk kentut. Kacang-kacangan berperan dalam memproduksi volume kentut dan bukan kebusukannya.




4. Kenapa Kentut menimbulkan bunyi ?
Karena adanya vibrasi lubang anus pada saat kentut diproduksi. Kerasnya bunyi tergantung kecepatan gas.

5. Kenapa Kentut yang busuk itu hangat dan tidak bersuara ?
Salah satu sumber kentut adalah bakteri. Fermentasi bakteri dan proses pencernaan memproduksi panas, dan hasil sampingannya adalah gas busuk. Ukuran gelembung gas lebih kecil, hangat dan jenuh dengan produk metabolisme bakteri yang berbau busuk. Ini kemudian menjadi kentut, walau hanya kecil volumenya tapi SBD (Silent but Deadly).

6. Berapa banyak Kentut diproduksi dalam sehari ?
Rata-rata setengah liter sehari dalam 14 kali kentut.


7. Mengapa Kentut keluar melalui lubang dubur ?
Karena density-nya lebih ringan, mengapa gas tidak melakukan perjalanan ke atas ? Tidak demikian. Gerak peristaltik usus mendorong isinya ke arah bawah. Tekanan di sekitar anus lebih rendah. Gerak peristaltik usus menjadikan ruang menjadi bertekanan, sehingga memaksa isi usus termasuk gas-ganya untuk bergerak ke kawasan yang bertekanan lebih rendah, yaitu sekitar anus. Dalam perjalanan ke arah anus, gelembung-gelembung kecil bergabung menjadi gelembung besar. Kalau tidak ada gerak peristaltik, gelembung gas akan menerobos ke atas lagi, tapi tidak terlalu jauh karena bentuk usus yang rumit dan berbelit-belit.

8. Berapa waktu yang diperlukan Kentut untuk melakukan perjalanan ke hidung orang lain ?
Tergantung kondisi udara seperti kelembaban, suhu, kecepatan dan arah angin, berat molekul gas kentut, jarak antara transmitter dengan receiver. begiotu meninggalkan sumbernya, gas kentut menyebar dan konsenstrasinya berkurang. Kalau kentut tidak terdeteksi dalam beberapa detik berarti mengalami pengenceran di udara dan hilang ditelan udara selam-lamanya. Kecuali kalau anda kentut di tempat sempit seperti lift atau mobil, konsentrasinya lebih banyak sehingga baunya akan tinggal dalam kurun waktu lama sampai terserap oleh dinding.

9. Apakah setiap orang Kentut ?
Sudah pasti, kalau masih hidup. Sesaat setelah matipun orang masih bisa kentutJose.

10. Betulkan laki-laki kentut lebih sering daripada perempuan ?
Tidak ada hubungannya dengan gender. Kalau benar, maka perempuan menahan kentutnya dan saat kentut banyak sekali jumlah yang dikeluarkan.

11. Saat apa biasanya orang Kentut ?
Pagi hari saat di toilet, yang disebut "morning thunder". Kalau resonansinya bagus, boleh kedengaran diseluruh penjuru rumah.

12. Mengapa kacang-kacangan menyebabkan banyak kentut ?
Kacang-kacangan mengandung zat gula yang tidak bisa dicerna tubuh. Zat gula tersebut (raffinose, stachiose, verbascose) jika mencapai usus, bakteri di usus langsung berpesta pora dan menghasilkan gas. Jagung, kubis, susu juga penyebab banyak kentut (bukan baunya).

13. Selain makanan, apa saja penyebab Kentut ?
Udara yang tertelan, makan terburu-buru, makan tanpa dikunyah, minum soft drink, naik pesawat udara (karena tekanan udara lebih rendah, sehingga gas di dalam usus mengalami ekspansi, sehingga muncul sebagai kentut).

14. Apakah kentut sama dengan sendawa, tapi muncul di lain lubang ?
Tidak. Sendawa muncul dari perut, komposisi kimianya lain dengan kentut. Sendawa mengandung udara lebih banyak, kentut mengandung gas yang diproduksi oleh bakteri lebih banyak.

15. Kemana perginya kentut kalau ditahan atau tidak dikeluarkan ?
Bukan diabsorbsi darah, bukan hilang karena bocor. Kentut berimigrasi menuju ke bagian atas menuju usus dan pada gilirannya akan keluar juga. Jadi bukan lenyap, hanya mengalami penundaan.

16. Mungkinkah kentut terbakar ?
Kentut mengandung metana, hidrogen yang combustible (gas alam mengandung komponen ini juga). Kalau terbakar, nyalaannya berwarna biru karena kandungan unsur hidrogen.








17. Bisakah menyalakan korek api dengan kentut ?
Jangan mengada-ada ! Konsistensinya lain. Juga suhunya tidak cukup panas untuk memulai pembakaran.

18. Mengapa Kentut anjing dan kucing lebih busuk ?
Karena kucing dan anjing adalah karnivora. Daging kaya akan protein. Protein mengandung banyak sulfur, jadi kentut binatang ini lebih busuk. Lain dengan horbivor seperti gajah, kuda, kambing yang memproduksi banyak kentut, lebih lama, lebih keras bunyinya, tapi relatif tidak berbau.

19. Betulkah pening kepala kalau mencium bau kentut 2-3 kali berturut-turut ?
Kentut mengandung sedikit oksigen. Mungkin sedikit saja anda akan mengalami pening kepala kalau mencium bau kentut terlalu banyak.



20. Apakah warna kentut ?
Tidak berwarna. Kalau warnanya oranye seperti gas nitrogen oksida akan ketahuan siapa yang kentut.

21. Apakah kentut itu acid, basa, atau netral
Acid, karena mengandung karbondioksida (CO2) dan hidrogen sulfida (H2S).

22. apakah yang terjadi kalau seseorang kentut di planet venus ?

Planet venus sudah banyak mengandung sulfur (belerang) di lapisan udaranya, jadi kentut disana tidak akan banyak pengaruhnya.
Sabtu, 07 Maret 2009 | By: XAVIER

Pembuatan MSG (Mono Sodium Glutamat)


1. MSG dibuat melalui proses fermentasi dari tetes-gula (molases) oleh bakteri (Brevibacterium lactofermentum). Dalam peroses fermentasi ini, pertama-tama akan dihasilkan Asam Glutamat. Asam Glutamat yang terjadi dari proses fermentasi ini, kemudian ditambah soda (Sodium Carbonate), sehingga akan terbentuk Monosodium Glutamat (MSG). MSG yang terjadi ini, kemudian dimurnikan dan dikristalisasi, sehingga merupakan serbuk kristal-murni, yang siap di jual di pasar.

2. SEBELUM bakteri (pada Butir 1) tersebut digunakan untuk proses fermentasi pembuatan MSG, maka terlebih dahulu bakteri tersebut harus diperbanyak (dalam istilah mikrobiologi: dibiakkan atau dikultur) dalam suatu media yang disebut Bactosoytone. Proses pada Butir 2 ini dikenal sebagai proses pembiakan bakteri, dan terpisah sama-sekali (baik ruang maupun waktu) dengan proses pada Butir 1. Setelah bakteri itu tumbuh dan berbiak, maka kemudian bakteri tersebut diambil untuk digunakan sebagai agen-biologik pada proses fermentasi membuat MSG (Proses pada Butir 1).

3. Bactosoytone sebagai media pertumbuhan bakteri, dibuat tersendiri (oleh Difco Company di AS), dengan cara hidrolisis-enzimatik dari protein kedelai (Soyprotein). Dalam bahasa yang sederhana, protein-kedelai dipecah dengan bantuan enzim sehingga menghasilkan peptida rantai pendek (pepton) yang dinamakan Bactosoytone itu. Enzim yang dipakai pada proses hidrolisis inilah yang disebut Porcine, dan enzim inilah yang diisolasi dari pankreas-babi.

4. Perlu dijelaskan disini bahwa, enzim Porcine yang digunakan dalam proses pembuatan media Bactosoytone, hanya berfungsi sebagai katalis, artinya enzim tersebut hanya mempengaruhi kecepatan reaksi hidrolisis dari protein kedelai menjadi Bactosoytone, TANPA ikut masuk ke dalam struktur molekul Bactosoytone itu. Jadi Bactosoytone yang diproduksi dari proses hidrolisis-enzimatik itu, JELAS BEBAS dari unsur-unsur babi!!!, selain karena produk Bactosoytone yang terjadi itu mengalami proses "clarification" sebelum dipakai sebagai media pertumbuhan, juga karena memang unsur enzim Porcine ini tidak masuk dalam struktur molekul Bactosoytone, karena Porcine hanya sebagai katalis saja .

5. Proses clarification yang dimaksud adalah pemisahan enzim Porcine dari Bactosoytone yang terjadi. Proses ini dilakukan dengan cara pemanasan 160oF selama sekurang-kurangnya 5 jam, kemudian dilakukan filtrasi, untuk memisahkan enzim Porcine dari produk Bactosoytone-nya. Filtrat yang sudah bersih ini kemudian diuapkan, dan Bactosoytone yang terjadi diambil.

6. Perlu dijelaskan disini, bahwa proses pembuatan Media Bactosoytone ini merupakan proses yang terpisah sama sekali dengan proses pembuatan MSG. Media Bactosoytone merupakan suatu media pertumbuhan bakteri, dan dijual di pasar, tidak saja untuk bakteri pembuat MSG, tetapi juga untuk bakteri-bakteri lainnya yang digunakan untuk keperluan pembuatan produk biotek-industri lainnya.

7. Catatan: nama Bactosoytone merupakan nama dagang, yang dapat diurai sebagai berikut: Bacto adalah nama dagang dari Pabrik pembuatnya (Difco Co); Soy dari asal kata soybean:kedelai, tone, singkatan dari peptone; jadi Bactosoyton artinya pepton kedelai yang dibuat oleh pabrik Difco.

8. Setelah bakteri tersebut ditumbuhkan pada Media bactosoytone, kemudian dipindahkan ke Media Cair Starter. Media ini sama sekali tidak mengandung bactosoytone. Pada Media Cair Starter ini bakteri berbiak dan tumbuh secara cepat.

9. Kemudian, bakteri yang telah berbiak ini dimasukkan ke Media Cair Produksi, dimana bakteri ini mulai memproduksi asam glutamat; yang kemudian diubah menjadi MSG. Media Cair Produksi ini juga tidak mengandung bactosoytone.

10. Perlu dijelaskan disini bahwa bakteri penghasil MSG adalah Brevibacterium lactofermentum atau Corynebacterium glutamicum, adalah bakteri yang hidup dan berkembang pada media air. Jadi bakteri itu termasuk aqueous microorganisms.

11. Hasil penelitian yang dilakukan oleh Direktorat Jenderal POM di Jakarta menunjukkan bahwa:
Bactosoytone tidak terkontaminasi (tidak tercampur) dengan Lemak babi (data Analisis Gas Chromatography); Protein babi (data Analisis HPLC), maupun DNA-babi (data Analisis PCR).
MSG tidak terkontaminasi (tidak tercampur) dengan: Lemak babi (data Analisis Gas Chromatography); Protein babi (data Analisis HPLC), maupun DNA babi (data Analisis PCR).

12. Hasil Analisis yang dilakukan di Jepang (Kyoto University) juga menunjukkan bahwa baik MSG maupun Bactosoytone tidak terkontaminasi oleh enzim babi.

KESIMPULAN:
Bactosoytone (dari Difco Co) maupun Produk MSG (Ajino moto), jelas sedikitpun tidak mengandung unsur-unsur babi, baik lemak, protein maupun DNA-babi.

Soda


24 February 2008, 01:45 AM
Soda pertama kali ditemukan oleh seorang ilmuwan Inggris bernama Joseph Priestley pada tahun 1770-an, yaitu ketika ia berusaha mencampurkan air destilasi dengan gas karbondioksida (CO2). Soda mulai dikenal luas ketika ilmuwan Inggris lainnya, yaitu John Mervin Nooth menyempurnakan penemuan Joseph Priestley dan menjualnya sebagai obat. Pada tahun 1830, sebuah pabrik minuman berkarbonasi pertama kali berdiri di Amerika Serikat.

Air soda memiliki rumus kimia H2CO3. Untuk membuat air soda, komponen yang paling penting adalah air dan gas karbondioksida. Air soda memang dibuat dengan melarutkan gas karbondioksida (CO2) ke dalam air.

Sama seperti oksigen, karbondioksida merupakan gas yang banyak terdapat di alam. Karbondioksida merupakan gas yang kita keluarkan saat bernapas dan diambil oleh tanaman untuk proses fotosintesis. Bila diinjeksi ke dalam air dengan tekanan tinggi, karbondioksida akan membentuk asam karbonat. Itulah sebabnya minuman berkarbonasi disebut juga minuman berkarbonasi (carbonated beverages). Asam karbonat tersebutlah yang bertanggung jawab terhadap timbulnya sentuhan khas soda di mulut (mouthfeel) dan perasaan yang mengigit (bite) pada saat minuman berkarbonasi.diminum.

Selain itu, gas karbondioksida juga berpengaruh terhadap timbulnya efek extra sparkle, yang membedakan minuman ringan berkarbonasi dengan non-karbonasi. Extra sparkle adalah efek penampakan berkelap-kelip pada minuman. Secara praktis CO2 adalah satu-satunya gas yang paling cocok untuk memproduksi penampakan sparkle dalam minuman ringan berkarbonasi. Kelarutan gas karbondioksida sedemikan rupa, sehingga dapat bertahan dalam cairan pada suhu ruang. Jika dikocok secara perlahan, gas tersebut akan melepaskan gelembung dalam minuman.

Keberadaan karbondioksida pada minuman dapat diibaratkan seperti rempah-rempah pada makanan. Karbondioksida dapat meningkatkan citarasa pada minuman sehingga orang menikmati saat mengonsumsinya. Pada saat larut dalam air, CO2 memberikan rasa asam sehingga dapat menurunkan pH menjadi sekitar 3,2 รข€“ 3,7. Rasa asam tersebut merupakan rasa khas soda yang membuat orang teringat terus akan rasanya.

Salah satu keunggulan minuman berkarbonasi adalah aman dari kontaminasi bakteri, terutama bakteri yang bersifat patogen (penyebab penyakit). Gas karbondioksida yang larut dalam air, bukan hanya menghasilkan rasa yang spesifik, tetapi juga dapat berfungsi sebagai antibakteri untuk mengawetkan minuman secara alami.

Kandungan karbondioksida di dalam minuman ringan tergantung dari jenis minumannya. Untuk minuman yang mengandung flavor imitasi, biasanya digunakan kadar karbonasi yang tinggi. Pada minuman dengan flavor buah yang mengandung gula tinggi lebih disukai kadar karbondioksida yang rendah.
Senin, 02 Maret 2009 | By: XAVIER

Murid Kelas 1 SD Belajar Peribahasa


Di kelas 1 SD Seorang guru bahasa Indonesia sedang mengajarkan pelajaran tentang peribahasa.

Guru : "Anak-anak, apa lanjutannya peribahasa ini... 'Biar lambat asal......' "

Anak-Anak: "SELAMAAAAAAT, PPPAAAAKKKK!"

Guru : "Betul.. seratus buat anak-anak, sekarang peribahasa selanjutnya 'Lain padang lain belalang.....?' "

Anak-Anak: "LAIN LUBUK LAIN IKANNYA PPPPAAAAAKKKK !!!!!"

Guru : Pinter kalian! Sekarang apa lanjutannya.... 'Guru kencing berdiri...?'

Anak-anak: "SIAPA YANG MAU LIAAAAT !!!!!!!! EMANGNYA KAMI HIDUNG BELANG...HUUUUUUUU !!!!!"

Guru : ^#^#@^$@!@%$#^$&%*%&$##!!!!

Peran Indonesia dalam Asean


ASEAN adalah kerjasama regional antar negara Asia Tenggara

kerjasama itu di bidang ekonomi, politik, pariwisata, pertahanan dan keamanan, pendidikan dan sosial budaya

*Peranan Asean dalam Ekonomi
Indonesia menjadi tempat pembuatan pupuk se-ASEAN, tepatnya di Aceh yg nantinya akan digunakan negara-negara ASEAN, otomatis Indonesia mendapatkan keuntungan dan juga bisa mengurangi pengangguran di indonesia

*Peranan ASEAN dalam bidang politik
Dengan Indonesia mengikuti kerjasama regional seperti ini maka akan lebih dihormati negara lain, seperti halnya kerjasama regional yg di eropa ataupun timur tengah, lebih-lebih kalau ASEAN kuat di mata Internasional (sayangnya di Internasional ASEAN kurang dipandang)


*Peranan dalam bidang Pariwisata
Dalam pariwisata negara ASEAN sangat subur, terutama Singapura, Thailand, Malaysia dan Indonesia.... dan rata-rata pengunjung pariwisata di negara ASEAN adalah warga negara anggota ASEAN lainnya, contohnya Jogja yg rata-rata touristnya adalah tourist malaysia, begitu jg dg Singapura yg rata-rata touristnya adalah org Indonesia dan Malaysia.

*Peranan ASEAN dalam bidang Pertahanan dan Keamanan
AL-TNI sering melakukan latihan bersama dengan Singapura sehingga akan membuktikan pada dunia bahwa militer Indonesia masih kuat,.... dan Indonesiapun melakukan perjanjian Ekstradisi di semua negara ASEAN, walaupun agak lama untuk mendekati Singapura....


*Peranan dalam bidang pendidikan, Sosial dan Budaya
Indonesia sering melakukan pertukaran mahasiswa dengan negara ASEAN lainnya seperti Singapura dan Malaysia, begitu juga dengan pementasan karya seninya....