Change Your Ways, Or Else

If given the choice, many people would choose not to know how the rest of their life is going to end up. However, many of these same people would not pass up an opportunity to delay their death for at least a little while. When we participate in potentially health harming behaviors, we are doing the exact opposite of delaying death.

A recent study in Behavior Modification questions what causes people to engage in these risky behaviors, and particularly whether or not negative emotions predict alcohol consumption, saturated fat intake, and physical activity in older adults.

Those that participated in the study included 23 older adults, with the average age being 58 that were enrolled in either an in or outpatient executive health program. All of the participants completed a questionnaire focusing on their experience with and expression of anger. The respondents also completed a second questionnaire relating to feelings of depression in relation to how they have felt in the last week. Finally, the subjects completed a health appraisal survey.

Results of these questionnaires compared to other dietary and health evaluations led to results showing that levels of depression, anxiety, and anger all influence health behaviors. High levels of anger and depression proved to be accurate predictors of increased saturated fat intake while these same levels of anger were negatively correlated to the amount of time the participants put towards aerobic exercise per week. The levels of stress and anxiety reported by the participants also pointed to a negative correlation with alcohol consumption.

Previous research has stated that levels of anxiety were positively related to alcohol consumption, a finding that is the exact opposite of the one in this study. One possible cause of this difference in results could be the lack of alcohol consumption in this particular group of participants. While this may be a possible cause, the difference is still intriguing enough to warrant further inquiry from professionals.

The importance of this study lies in the fact that it is one of the first to expose the relationship between anger levels and the expression of this anger as related to health related behaviors. People experiencing such negative emotional states may suffer from lack of motivation to participate in self-improving health techniques.

If other studies continue to elaborate on this one to prove that there really is a strong relationship between anger and poor health habits, then at-risk individuals could be identified. Treatments for these at-risk individuals may include instructions and skills imperative to controlling their anger and managing the way they express their anger as well.

Limits to this study include a small sample size and the reliance of the investigators on the participants to accurately self-report their health behaviors. A more comprehensive study including a wider range of participants as well as covering a larger span of time may produce entirely different results. What is most important, however, is the fact that this subject has been brought up to stimulate further study.

Overall, the findings show the public that negative emotions such as anger and anxiety lead to a decrease in positive health behaviors. More research would be beneficial in understanding the relationship between mental and physical behaviors and could lead to worthwhile interventions and prevention.

References

http://bmo.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/29/4/677

http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/28/4/521

A New Perspective on the "Freshman 15" and Other Weight Gain...

It is common knowledge that eating bad foods and not exercising can lead to bad health, but these habits can also be caused by anger and depression. Recently, in an issue of Behavior Modification, Steven D. Anton and Peter M. Miller of the Medical University of South Carolina conducted a case study on how the negative emotions of older adults affect alcohol consumption, saturated fat intake, and physical activity. The study included a series of questionnaires proven to be accurate. There were 23 participants, 16 males and 7 females, all of whom were successful in corporate business and were Caucasian. It is important to realize that the health of the American society is on average, below normal and investigating the problem can only result in positive feedback on an issue that many people battle daily. The scientists made a new discovery in treating obesity and this experiment was just the beginning of more research to be conducted in this area of cognitive behavior.

Coronary Heart Disease (CDH) is defined as the end result of the accumulation of atheromatous plaques (fat/cholesterol build-up) within the walls of the arteries that supply the myocardium (the muscle of the heart). “Coronary heart disease and stroke are the leading cause of death and disability in the United States and while genetics may contribute to this disease, it has been proven that lifestyle factors play a significant role in the development and progression of chronic disease” (Anton, Miller 2). The main goal of this study was to isolate other causes of chronic disease besides strictly bad eating habits and no exercise. The participants, with an average age of 58, were given a series of questionnaires dealing with anger expression (STAXI), depression levels (CES-D), anxiety rating, fat intake (FIS), and a “focus on the heart” questionnaire, which analyzed alcohol consumption. Each of the surveys asked the subject specific questions where they rated their answers on number scales (Anton, Miller, 6). The authors clearly state more experimentation is necessary into the psychological aspect of these cognitive habits, as this study had several factors of deviation. All the participants are Caucasian and the race with the highest coronary heart disease risk are African-Americans. Also, only so much accuracy can be extracted from questionnaires, because the experimenters are putting great confidence in the truthfulness of the subjects.

After analyzing the answers, Anton and Miller came up with several common conclusions, as well as, one surprising cause of exercise. The first topic addressed was alcohol consumption. They multiplied quantity (number of drinks) by frequency (drinking days per week) to come up with correlation numbers. Levels of tension and anxiety were negatively correlated with alcohol consumption and neither depression nor anger scores were correlated with alcohol (Anton, Miller, 7). This means that as alcohol was consumed, the tension and anxiety levels were not affected. Next, levels of saturated fat intake were taken in. The CES-D survey and the FIS survey were directly correlated, which means that as depression increased, saturated fat intake also increased. The FIS survey was also correlated with the anger and expression survey, concluding that levels of saturated fat intake increased with poor anger expression. Exercise and aerobic conditioning were negatively affected by amount of stress. However, the one new, major conclusion of this experiment was that there was a strong positive correlation between internal anger expression and strength training. The scientists found that people who contain their anger without expression are more likely to participate in strength training because that type of exercise works to release anger.

In the scientists discussion of the experiment they state that they expected depression and trait anger would be positively associated with increased levels of saturated fat intake (Anton, Miller, 9). They also stated that they were surprised that stress and anxiety were negatively associated with alcohol consumption, as previous studies have found that negative emotions increase consumption. They attribute this deviation to the sample of subjects; by stating that most were successful corporate executives who tend to stray from alcohol because of decreased productivity (Anton, Miller, 10). “The key findings of this study were that anger levels and expression style were strongly associated with health behaviors” (Anton, Miller, 10). The researchers believe that if further research continues to conclude that there is a strong relationship between anger levels and poor health habits, then efforts should be made to identify and treat those at risk (Anton, Miller, 10).

The experimenters, as well as myself, believe that obesity is a problem and it is important to take in all the aspects of this problem. The findings of this study open the door for future research into this area of psychology. “Further research examining this relationship would enhance our understanding of both personality and health behaviors, leading to more effective interventions for CHD risk factors” (Anton, Miller, 12). It is essential that medical researchers address this issue to bring the large number of people affected by coronary heart disease down.

Works Cited:
Anton, Stephen D., and Peter M. Miller "Do Negative Emotions Predict Alcohol Consumption, Saturated Fat Intake, and Physical Activity in Older Adults?" Behavior Modification 29 (2005): 1-13. Sage Journals Online. 15 Feb. 2007 .

And You Thought Picking Your Nose was Gross....

We have all heard of different obsessive compulsive disorders that prevent individuals who experience them from carrying on an everyday routine, however most people are unaware of the very unusual disorder, chronic skin picking. Skin picking by definition is the recurrent picking of the skin accompanied by visible tissue damage, resulting in significant distress and/or functional impairment. (Flessner, 2) Classified as an obsessive compulsive disorder, skin picking most frequently occurs in females with the onset of the disorder happening at age 16. Since little research has been done regarding this disorder, Christopher Flessner and Douglas Woods, of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, conducted a case study to determine the phenomenological characteristics, social problems and economic impact of skin picking. The results of this study were analyzed and significant relationships were revealed between chronic skin picking and depression or anxiety disorders. The information collected from this study can help others gain a sense of knowledge for a disorder that is normally unheard of.

As I said before, little research has been done on the chronic skin picking disorder, however it was recently determined that a psychological reason behind skin picking is experimental avoidance. Experimental avoidance is the tendency for an individual to avoid or escape from negative private events or emotions, in other words picking the skin to relieve his/her anxiety or depression. (Flessner, 3) This relationship was the basis for the study conducted by Flessner and Woods to learn more about skin picking as a whole. To begin their study, participants were recruited through a link on the Trichotillomania Learning Center’s home page. Trichotillomania (TTM) is an impulse disorder that causes people to pull out hair from their bodies (http://www.trich.org, 1), therefore this website might also be visited by chronic skin pickers, making it an ideal site for recruitment. Receiving 101 responses from their internet survey, the authors analyzed the answers of 92 participants. Of these, 85 were completed by women, supporting the theory that the disorder is more common among females. The survey used in the study included demographic questions such as age, race and income, and phenomenological questions for instance, “Do you experience pleasure after picking?” These questions were included to learn more about the phenomenological characteristics of the disorder. As a whole, the survey took an average of 45 minutes to complete, at the end of which participants gave their consent to participate in research.

Although this study seems somewhat informal, the results obtained are beneficial when trying to learn more about the causes and effects of the chronic skin picking disorder. The most commonly picked area on the body was the face, arms and legs for the whole population survey, indicating a reason for depression in many because of the permanent scarring that can result from recurrent skin picking. A surprising fact found in the study was that those who pick their skin actually spend 2.75 hours per day picking the skin, resisting the urge to pick the skin, or thinking about picking the skin.

In relation to depression or anxiety, many facts were found to support this claim. 85% of participants reported engaging in behaviors to conceal the effects of their picking, and 40.2% of participants stated that they avoid social events all together, for fear of others noticing their scars. All respondents admitted to experiencing some form of depression or anxiety as a result of their skin picking, with ¼ of participants claiming to have been on medication to relieve these negative feelings.

As for the economic impact skin picking has on an individual, the study found that participants spend $160 per year on products to conceal the effects of their picking. A reported $500 per year are spent on physicians’ fees and $1000 per year on medications to relieve negative feelings from skin picking. Combined, these results signify that chronic skin picking can be financially harmful to the victim and/or the victim’s family.

Overall, this study conducted by Flessner and Woods was beneficial in the fact that it was the first of its kind. There have been no other studies conducted to learn of the social or economic impacts of chronic skin picking. Consequently, the results obtained from the study, that skin picking has a major economic impact, and impacts an individual’s social lifestyle, reveal that more research needs to be done in this area of healthcare. If more became known about the disorder, a cure may be found to alleviate victims from this unusual disease.

References:

Christopher A. Flessner and Douglas W. Woods Phenomenological Characteristics, Social Problems, and the Economic Impact Associated With Chronic Skin Picking
Behav Modif 2006 30: 944-963.

Why Must I Suffer?

Surgery for many children can be a stressful experience. For over sixty years, clinical researchers have observed significant emotional reactions in young children. For example, Eckenhoff (1953) look at six hundred children to discover a link between “unsatisfactory” anesthetic inductions and a change in a child’s personality. In the United States, approximately four million children undergo anesthesia and surgery (Kain and Caldwell-Andrews, 2005). Some people believe that an average of forty to sixty percent of children experience anxiety. Anxiety is expressed in many ways for children. For instance becoming agitated breathing deeply, trembling, crying, stop talking, etc. From high anxiety up to twenty-five percent of children requires physical restraint to help with anesthetic induction.

It appears anesthesia is the most stressful period during preoperative period. “Preoperative anxiety is anxiety associated with a particular event – surgery.” This is not to be associated with anxiety as children would have a greater response such as waking up, crying, disobeying parents, separation anxiety, etc. In order to reduce the results of children with anxiety, a number of prevention strategies have been “employed.” A drug has proven to be effective in reducing anxiety, Midazolam, a benzodiazepine and amnestic properties. At the same time the Midazolam has side effects such as delay on emergence behavioral changes and amnesia. In 1998, a US Food and Drug Administration approved of Midazolam in syrup in the form of 2 mg/mL. Although over time 0.50 mg/kg is the most effective dose amount with few side effects.
Another method to help reduce preoperative anxiety is music therapy. Kain, Caldwell-Andrews, Krivutza, Weinberg, Gaal, and colleagues (2004) found that children that undergone music therapy before and after surgery was less anxious. At the same time, hypnosis can reduce anxiousness in children. Furthermore, hypnosis has been found to reduce maladaptive behavioral. Hypnosis, also, allows children to go to participate in the induction experience in a relax state of mind.

Still a big debate faced by hospital across America is allowing parents to be present when treating or preventing preoperative anxiety. In 2003 “Kain, Caldwell-Andrews, Wang, and colleagues” observed that eighty percent of parents wanted to be present because they felt their presence would be a benefit (Wright, Kristi et al, 61). In 2002 twenty-six percent of hospital surveyed had a formal policy about parental presence during induction (Krivutza et al., 61). I can see why a hospital would not want a parent to present before a child goes into surgery. Since I was a child, I have been deathly afraid of needles. Just a regular check-up would make me cringe at the thought of the doctor giving me a shot. Every time I did get a shot my mom was present and by the time I was in high school I still would want my mom to be there with me in the doctor’s office. By having my mom constantly coming with me to the doctor’s office made me depended on her instead of realizing there is nothing to fear.

Even though I now go to the doctor’s office by myself, I still get nervous when it comes to getting a shot. Take for instance this year I need to get my wisdom teeth taken out. This is not major surgery, but when I first heard that all four of my wisdom teeth would be taken out some new fears arise. My dentist said that they needed to cut into my gums before my wisdom teeth start to push against my other teeth because my mouth is too small to hold all my teeth. That is why I was drawn to this article. This article realizes that major procedures can have a lasting affect on children, but if action is taken at a young age the anxiety felt before and after surgery can be reduced.

Source
Wright, Kristi D., Sherry H. Stewart, G. Allen Finley and Susan E. Buffett-Jerrott. “Prevention and Intervention Strategies to Alleviate Preoperative Anxiety in Children: A Critical Review.” Behavior Modification. 31.1 (2007): 52-79. http://bmo.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/31/1/52.

When it comes to nuclear fuel some aspects are dangerous but there are ways it can be extremely beneficial to meet our society’s energy needs. Whether it involves storage, recycling, or using nuclear energy, controversy always seems to arise. The author of a recent editorial from the scientific magazine, Nature, discussed reprocessing nuclear fuels. The author established that reprocessing should be laid to rest ending “a three-decade strategy to severe the connection between nuclear power and nuclear weapons” (Nature, 1). While this is true, it is plausible that storage in the Yukka Mountains and nuclear reprocessing are viable solutions to storage problems and less production.

To date, nuclear waste is being stored in several areas around the United States, with the majority located on the east coast. This poses more of a threat than if it were stored in one concrete place, like the Yukka Mountains. A journal article entitled, Nuclear Waste, describes the province by stating, “few signs of civilization can be seen from the windswept crest of Yucca Mountain, a flat-topped volcanic ridge about 100 desert miles northwest of Las Vegas. The closest humans live 15 miles to the south, at a desolate crossroads known as Lathrop Wells — population eight” (Hansen, 1). Many people argue that is too high risk and bad for the environment and the booming tourist city of Las Vegas, but let’s face the facts, nuclear power is vital to meet our energy needs and with nuclear energy use, comes nuclear waste storage. “This country is choking on its own nuclear waste,” Murkowski thundered. “If we don't solve the problem of our spent nuclear fuel soon, the American taxpayer will bear the cost of the financial liability . . .” (Hansen, 2). People have to think about a solution to waste storage and so far, the Yukka Mountain province is the only plausible presentation. While the process will be long, taking an estimated 25 years to transport all the waste to the site, it will, in my opinion, be better in the long run. Also, there is a good possibility that scientists could develop better ways of storage in the near future. They are now looking at a process called transmutation, “some experts believe that a still experimental waste reprocessing technique may someday reduce the required isolation time for spent nuclear fuel from thousands of years to just a few centuries” (Hansen, 3). Unfortunately some people, like the editor of the Nature article, would probably agree with others who say that transmutation is just another name for reprocessing. Personally, as a resident of the east coast, where the majority of the current storage sites are located, I am directly affected and feel that the Yukka Mountains is an ideal place for storage.

Nuclear reprocessing is another option because it aims to reduce the volume of nuclear waste that has to be stored safely by recycling it for use in nuclear reactors (Nature, 1). The United States and Germany abandoned this process earlier but France has kept up with the costly fuel recycling. The United States is now “recycling the past” with President Bush’s proposal to bring back the reprocessing. The editorialist in Nature feels that this is not the way to go about solving this crisis and that it would be backtracking (Nature, 1). However, on the contrary, I feel that even though the process is costly, the United States could benefit from recycling. Why would people support recycling plastics for less pollution, but do not support recycling nuclear fuel for less waste, storage, and potential danger? The issue is much more complicated than what I just proposed, but it seems that people are not supporting storage solutions because they would rather be idle and not worry about the problem now. “Let’s cross that bridge when it comes,” is the old saying, but when this bridge comes it’s probably already going to be flaming and broken.

The nuclear waste debate is a fragile subject. President Bush believes we should build more plants for nuclear power, but the problem of waste disposal needs to be solved first and foremost. “Will there be accidents? That's certainly a possibility,” Benson says. “But we haven't been able to come up with a credible, real-world scenario where there would be any kind of catastrophic release” (Hansen, 5). There are going to be risks on both sides of the argument. If we do not re-start reprocessing, then there will be much more nuclear waste to store, and if we do not agree on where to store the waste that we have now, it is going to become very dangerous. Either way, waste will be created and until we agree or have an authority proclaim it, the waste is going to be too widely dispersed. The safety of millions will be affected if this problem is not addressed. The government spends billions trying to protect its citizens from other countries, but the real threat might turn out to be in our homeland.

Hansen, B. (2001, June 8). Nuclear waste. CQ Researcher, 11, 489-504. Retrieved February 15, 2007, from CQ Researcher Online, http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2001060800.

“Recycling the Past.” Nature. 02 February 2006. 11 February 2007.

Transmutation of High-Level Nuclear Waste. Meyer Steinberg. 1990. JSTOR. 10 Feb. 2007 .

Immigration Restrictions Threaten Advancement in Pulbic Health

After September 11, 2001, America increased security including harder immigration restrictions. The restrictions affected those seeking citizenship and also scientists hoping to do research and teach. By 2004, the United State was warned that these policies would delay scientific exchange. According to a recent Nature editorial, these restrictions have improved. The government has managed to abandon a plan to force foreign scientists to obtain licenses to work in a laboratory. The editor feels complacent with the improvements made by the United States government. I feel that the United States has not done enough with the restriction policy for immigrants.

Right now America is faced with a big debate over the immigration between Mexico and America, its neighboring country. The reason why a lot of scientists want to come to America is because this country has a lot of new hi-tech equipment as well as a lot of funding that goes into scientific research. For scientists there is a great need to keep doors open between the science communities so that they can communicate ideas efficiently. According to another article by Nature in 2003, The Risk of Exclusion, an Australian citizen was sent to Montreal for a one-day visa interview. When he tired to return to the United States he was delayed for nine weeks because he was born in Malaysia and that was one of the 26 countries being investigated after 9/11(Nature, pg 1). This incident happened just two years before the editor in the 2006 article from Nature claimed that so much has been improved. I understand that the government finds a greater need to protect its citizens, but for the pursuit of higher knowledge in the field of science the government should try to find a more efficient means of allowing people to travel into the United States.

With these immigration restrictions not only are scientists feeling the affects but so are public-health programs. As mention in Nature’s 2003 article, “Chris Beyrer, who directs the AIDS International Training and Research Program at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, says that visa delays have occurred…in Uganda and Thailand”(Nature, 2). For scientists that live in Africa coming to America it is very important to learn how to implement “Antiviral therapy for AIDS” (Nature, 2). Without this knowledge there is no hope in ending the AIDS crisis in Africa. However, new guidelines for obtaining a visa have pushed back much needed information other countries need to fight illnesses. As mention in 2003 Nature magazine, now many scientists have to wait three to five months for their visa to be processed (Nature, 1). The second stage of obtaining an entry stamp is harder to predict because consular officials can be faced with criminal charges for admitting someone who commits a terrorist act (Nature, 1). These delays not only affect other countries but the United States as well.

As mention in a meeting amongst the House Science Committee many expressed satisfaction from the exclusion of foreign scientist (Nature, 2). It is unlikely for a large number of committee members to change their mind in three years, especially, as the United States continues to receive biological threats that can be easily transferred on an airplane. However, there is still a great risk from not involving foreign scientists. As mention in Peuples and Monde, the United States can deny funding for scientific research of HIV (Peuples and Monde, 1). The Bush Administration appears to be in denial that there should only be “abstinence-only” programs regardless of the thousands of people who already have HIV (Peuples and Monde, 1). By having scientist from other countries coming to America, our scientists can be introduced to new ways to neutralize or eliminate the HIV virus. These other countries can use the funding provided by their government to discover new treatment. Although, if the scientists from these countries can not come into the Unites States then American citizens will be behind in beneficial treatment. HIV is a rapidly growing problem that needs to be contained now before it becomes out of hand across the world.

I am not saying that America needs to forget about 9/11 and allow any scientist to come to America. At the same time be excluding every scientist America falls behind in new ways from improving public health. As a college student with the lack of international students I can not fully expand my potential because I am not exposed to other ideas. With my goals of becoming a Pharmacist other ideas are key factors to creating cures for some of the most deadly and harmful diseases. Outside influences can point out things that I or other colleagues may have over looked. If other countries continued to be prevented from entering the United States these countries could create weapons that could harm us without our knowledge. As the saying goes “Keep your friends close, keep you enemies closer.”

Sources

Brumfiel, Geoff. “Researchers rage at tightened restrictions on US immigration.” Nature. 422 (2003): 457-458. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v422/n6931/full/422457a.html;jsessionid=89B39DFE562FCBA9117E7C9507675363

“Five years on.” Nature. 433 (2006): 2. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v443/n7107/full/443002a.html

“In the United States, today Science, as science, is under attack as never before.” Peuples & Monde. (2006): 2. http://www.peuplesmonde.com/article.php3?id_article=574

“The risk of exclusion.” Nature. 6.2 (2003): 203. http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v6/n3/pdf/nn0303-203.pdf

How Much is Too Much?

As a whole, many American people are unhappy with the way the Bush administration has continued to increase the United States military’s nuclear weapon stockpile. Many feel that actions like these violate nuclear weapons acts that were put into effect long ago. Speaking on behalf of people who share this belief, the author of “Rich in Plutonium,” an editorial published on October 26, 2006 in Nature, expressed his/her own feelings that the US nuclear-weapons complex is way too large and continued growth should be stopped. My personal opinion regarding this issue is that the government has taken the right steps in acquiring more nuclear weapons and more nuclear weapon facilities considering the high threat of nuclear warfare posed by pro-terrorist countries. In order to protect American citizens, it is only right to take every precaution, and by nuclear weapon increase the US will intimidate competing countries and stay ahead in the weapons race.

As of October 26, 2006 the United States was retaining about 50 tons of plutonium for military use. This amount is enough to fuel approximately 9000 warheads. (Nature, 2) While many Americans feel strongly opposed to the fact that our military has equipped itself with a large amount of nuclear weaponry, including the author of “Rich in Plutonium,” I feel that this is necessary in order to intimidate other countries who are planning to attack. Most of the countries considered to be “nuclear weapon holders” are ones that we are not at peace with. Thus, it is necessary to increase the amount of nuclear weapons in the United States in order to create a feeling of threat towards these countries. If they are aware that we are fully equipped to go to war with them at any time they are less likely to initiate conflict and turmoil. On October 9, 2006 North Korea successfully conducted an underground nuclear test in Hwaderi. This was following the statement of the United Nations Security council that warned North Korea against nuclear testing saying that “if a nuclear test was carried out it would represent a clear threat to international peace and security.” It was also reported by US intelligence that traces of plutonium were found in the air over the Kharan Desert in Pakistan, indicating a joint test of nuclear weaponry with North Korea. (Global Security, 4) Obviously pro-terrorist countries like North Korea and Pakistan are not respecting the values of the United Nations, in which the United States is a member. In order to gain this respect the US government must show other pro-terrorist countries that they will not back down from their posed threats. In effect, it is vital that we increase the number of nuclear warheads in our disposal, as to create a sense of ultimate superiority that these countries will learn to respect. Those in opposition might argue that creating intimidation will only generate hatred from opposing countries, it is clear that these countries have already chosen to instigate conflict with us, making it clear that they wish nothing but distress upon us.

In order to be successful at keeping other nuclear countries at bay, the American government must continue to excel in creating new ideas, specifically nuclear weapons and improved weapons facilities. The country who is ahead in the weapons race is always at a great advantage; holding the upper hand when it comes to running the show. Therefore it is imperative that the United States occupy this position. The main reason the US government is constructing this new nuclear weapons facility is to accommodate the production of a new kind of nuclear warhead. This innovative missile would require less maintenance than existing designs, accelerating the United States ahead of other weapon producing countries such as India, Pakistan, and North Korea in nuclear advancement. (Nature, 5) (Wikipedia, 1) While those in opposition of more nuclear weapons facilities argue that increasing our stockpile will only prompt other countries to reinvent their own, I feel that this type of competition is only natural. Every citizen should be aware by now that there are other countries out there that do not share our beliefs and practices and will do anything to overcome us. They are not going to stop producing nuclear warheads no matter how many treaties or signed. Consequently, we must enter into the competition and do our best to come out on top.

Overall, the idea of nuclear warfare between opposing countries is always going to raise some type of controversy and debate. As for the actions of the United States government I disagree with the author of the editorial “Rich in Plutonium” who feels that our country’s nuclear weapon complex has become too large. In my opinion, the actions of the US government have been correct and they should continue to increase their stockpile of nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons facilities. By intimidating competing countries and staying ahead in the weapons race the US government is keeping the best interests of American citizens in mind.

Works Cited

“Rich in Plutonium.” Nature. 443 (2006): 883-884. University of North Carolina, Undergraduate Library. 10 Feb. 2007. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v443/n7114/full/443883b.html

Nuclear Weapons Testing. John Pike. Oct. 10, 2006. Global Security. 10 Feb. 2007 http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/nuke-test.htm

Lists of States with Nuclear Weapons. 14 Feb. 2007 Wikipedia. 14 Feb. 2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons