Today in research: staying in a good mood, drinking a bit, mapping a land grab and more about apples.
- Ways to not be an angry person: eat food and try not to get stressed out. Got that? By following those straightforward, research-driven directives, you may get enough serotonin in your system, which helps curb aggression. That's what we learned, anyway, from a study published by Cambridge University researchers that's being touted as the first "to show how this chemical helps regulate behavior in the brain as well as why some individuals may be more prone to aggression." [Reuters]
- We don't have a drinking problem, per se. But since World War II a meta-analysis of 31 alcohol studies finds a trend, loosely paraphrased as: every American generation drinks more than the last. Maybe that's why we've seen all those "moderate alcohol consumption is good for you" studies out there. [The Los Angeles Times]
- Apples aren't supposed to be controversial. In its coverage of a study that linked eating apples to avoiding a stroke, The New York Times explains that the "findings counter the widespread belief that the most healthful fruits and vegetables are those that come in deep, rich colors inside and out." That may be a widespread belief, but we've also never heard apples left out from the list of things that are good for you. Until that odd apple juice inquiry we heard about yesterday, that is. [The New York Times]
- Researchers peer into the future and see a lot of urban sprawl. A meta-analysis of 326 studies mapping urban land conversion also included this theoretical model for what the next 20 years will bring: "by 2030, urbanized land worldwide will grow by 590,000 square miles--more than twice the size of Texas, or about the size of Mongolia," goes the prediction, according to the press release. That's a big chunk of land. [Eurekalert, PLOS One]
- Add this to the list of things nice guys have to do. We wonder about the methodology of these types of widely-covered studies that claim to know what women find desirable, but anyway, from CBS News: "Evidence suggests that deep voices are more likely than high-pitched voices to be associated with emotional warmth and other highly desirable traits, according to the researchers." The idea is a little stale: Jezebel made fun of a similar study ages ago. [CBS News]