6.

The Brains Business

A. For those of a certain age and educational background, it is hard to think of higher education without
thinking of ancient institutions. Some universities are of a venerable age - the University of bologna was
founded in 1088, the University of Oxford in 1096 - and many of them have a strong sense of tradition. The
truly old ones make the most of their pedigrees, and those of a more recent vintage work hard to create an
aura of antiquity. Yet these tradition-loving (or -creating) institutions are currently enduring a thunderstorm of
changes so fundamental that some say the very idea of the university is being challenged. Universities are
experimenting with new ways of funding (most notably through student fees), forging partnerships with
private companies and engaging in mergers and acquisitions. Such changes ate tugging at the ivy's toots.

B. This is happening for four reasons. The first is the democratisation of higher educa-tion - “massification". in
the language of the educational profession. In the rich world, massification has been going on for some time.
The proportion of adults with higher educational qualifications in developed countries almost doubled
between l975 and 2000. From 22% to 41%. Most of the rich countries are still struggling to digest this huge
growth in numbers. Now massification is spreading to the developing world. China doubled its student
population in the late 1990s, and India is trying to follow suit.

C. The second reason is the rise of the knowledge economy. The world is in the grips of a “soft revolution” in
which knowledge is replacing physical resources as the main driver of economic growth. Between 1985 and
1997, the contribution of knowledge-based industries to total value added increased from 51% to 59% in
Germany and from 45% to 51% in Britain. The best companies are now devoting at least a third of their
investment to knowledge-intensive intangibles such as R&D, licensing, and marketing. Universities are among
the most important engines of the knowledge economy. Not only do they produce the brain workers who
man it, they also provide much of its backbone, from laboratories to libraries to computer networks.

D. The third factor is globalisation.. The death of distance is transforming academia just as radically as it is
transforming business. The number of people from developed countries studying abroad has doubled over the
past twenty years, to 1.9 million; universities are opening campuses all around the world; and a growing
number of countries are trying to turn higher education into an export industry. The fourth is competition.
Traditional universities are being forced to compete for students and research grants, and private companies
are trying to break into a sector which they regard as “the new health care”. The World Bank calculates that
global spending on higher education amounts to $300 billion a year, or 1 % of global economic output. There
are more than 80 million students worldwide, and 3.5 million people are employed to teach them or look
after them.

E. All this sounds as though a golden age for universities has arrived. However, inside academia, particularly in
Europe, it. does not feel like it. Academics complain and administrators are locked in bad-tempered exchanges
with the politicians who fund them. What has gone wrong? The biggest problem is the role of the state. If
more and more governments are embracing massification, few of them are willing to draw the appropriate
conclusion from their enthusiasm: that they should either provide the requisite hinds (as the Scandinavian
countries do) or allow universities to charge realistic fees. Many governments have tried to square the circle
through lighter management, but management cannot make up for lack of resources.

F. What, if anything can be done? Techno-utopians believe that higher education is ripe for revolution. The
university, they say, is a hopelessly antiquated institution, wedded in outdated practices such as tenure and
lectures, and incapable of serving a new world of mass audiences and just-in-time information. “Thirty wars
from now the big university campuses will be relics," says Peter Drucker, a veteran management guru. "I
consider the American research university of the past 40 years to be a failure." Fortunately, in his view, help is
on the way in the form of Internet tuition and for-profit universities. Cultural conservatives, on the other
hand, believe that the best way forward is backward. They think it is foolish to waste higher education on
people who would rather study "Seinfeld" than Socrates, and disingenuous to contuse the pursuit of truth
with the pursuit of profit.
8. The Fertility Bust
A. Falling populations - the despair of state pension systems - are often regarded with calmness, even a
secret satisfaction, by ordinary people. Europeans no longer need large families to gather the harvest or to
look after parents. They have used their good fortune to have fewer children, thinking this will make their
lives better. Much of Europe is too crowded as it is. Is this all that is going on? Germans have been agonising
about recent European Union estimates suggesting that 30% of German women are, and will remain,
childless. The number is a guess: Germany does not collect figures like this. Even if the share is 25%, as other
surveys suggest, it is by far the highest in Europe.

B. Germany is something of an oddity in this. In most countries with low fertility, young women have their
first child late, and stop at one. In Germany, women with children often have two or three, but many have
none at all. Germany is also odd in experiencing low fertility for such a long time. Europe is demographically
polarised. Countries in the north and west saw fertility fall early, in the 1960s. Recently, they have seen it
stabilise or rise back towards replacement level (i.e. 2.1 births per woman). Countries in the south and east,
on the other hand, saw fertility rates fall much faster, more recently (often to below 1.3, a rate at which the
population falls by half every 45 years). Germany combines both. Its fertility rate fell below 2 in 1971.
However, it has stayed low and is still only just above 1.3. This challenges the notion that European fertility is
likely to stabilise at tolerable levels. It raises questions about whether the low birth rates of Italy and Poland,
say, really are, as some have argued, merely temporary.

C. The list of explanations for why German fertility has not rebounded is long. Michael Teitelbaum, a
demographer at the Sloan Foundation in New York ticks them off: poor childcare; unusually extended higher
education; inflexible labour laws; high youth unemployment; and non-economic or cultural factors. One
German writer, Gunter Grass, wrote a novel, “Headbirths”, in 1982, about Harm and Dorte Peters, “a model
couple” who disport themselves on the beaches of Asia rather than invest time and trouble in bringing up a
baby. “They keep a cat,” writes Mr. Grass, “and still have no child.” The novel is subtitled “The Germans Are
Dying Out”. With the exception of this cultural factor, none of these features is peculiar to Germany. If social
and economic explanations account for persistent low fertility there, then they may well produce the same
persistence elsewhere.

D. The reason for hoping otherwise is that the initial decline in southern and eastern Europe was drastic, and
may be reversible. In the Mediterranean, demographic decline was associated with freeing young women
from the constraints of traditional Catholicism, which encouraged large families. In eastern Europe, it was
associated with the collapse in living standards and the ending of pro-birth policies. In both regions, as such
temporary factors fade, fertility rates might, in principle, be expected to rise. Indeed, they may already be
stabilising in Italy and Spain. Germany tells you that reversing these trends can be hard. There, and elsewhere,
fertility rates did not merely fall; they went below what people said they wanted. In 1979, Eurobarometer
asked Europeans how many children they would like. Almost everywhere, the answer was two: the traditional
two-child ideal persisted even when people were not delivering it. This may have reflected old habits of mind.
Or people may really be having fewer children than they claim to want.

E. A recent paper suggests how this might come about. If women postpone their first child past their mid-
30s, it may be too late to have a second even if they want one (the average age of first births in most of
Europe is now 30). If everyone does the same, one child becomes the norm: a one-child policy by example
rather than coercion, as it were. If women wait to start a family until they are established at work, they may
end up postponing children longer than they might otherwise have chosen. When birth rates began to fall in
Europe, this was said to be a simple matter of choice. That was true, but it is possible that fertility may
overshoot below what people might naturally have chosen. For many years, politicians have argued that
southern Europe will catch up from its fertility decline because women, having postponed their first child, will
quickly have a second and third. The overshoot theory suggests there may be only partial recuperation.
Postponement could permanently lower fertility, not just redistribute it across time.
F. There is a twist. If people have fewer children than they claim to want, how they see the family may
change, too. Research by Tomas Sobotka of the Vienna Institute of Demography suggests that, after decades
of low fertility, a quarter of young German men and a fifth of young women say they have no intention of
having children and think that this is fine. When Eurobarometer repeated its poll about ideal family size in
2001, support for the two-child model had fallen everywhere. Parts of Europe, then, may be entering a new
demographic trap. People restrict family size from choice. Social, economic, and cultural factors then cause
this natural fertility decline to overshoot. This changes expectations, to which people respond by having even
fewer children. That does not necessarily mean that birth rates will fall even more: there may yet be some
natural floor, but it could mean that recovery from very low fertility rates proves to be slow or even non-
existent.

9. Sunday Is a Fun Day for Modern Brits

In a new study, Essex University sociologists have dissected the typical British Sunday, and found we get up
later and do fewer chores than we did 40 years ago - and we are far more likely to be out shopping or enjoying
ourselves than cooking Sunday lunch. Academics at the university’s Institute of Social and Economic Research
asked 10,000 people to keep a detailed diary of how they spent Sundays in 2001. Then they compared the
results with 3,500 diaries written in 1961, a treasure trove of information that had been uncovered ‘in two egg
boxes and a tea chest’ in the basement of the BBC by ISER’s director, Professor Jonathan Gershuny.

The contrast between the two periods could not be more striking. Forty years ago, Sunday mornings were a
flurry of activity as men and women - especially women - caught up on their weekly chores and cooked up a
storm in the kitchen. Women rarely allowed themselves any ‘leisure’ until the afternoon, after the dishes were
cleaned. In 1961, more than a fifth of all men and women in Britain were sitting at a table by 2 p.m., most
likely tucking into a roast with all the trimmings. Then there would be another rush to the table between 5
p.m. and 6 p.m. for high tea.

Since the arrival of brunch, the gastropub and the all-you-can-eat Sunday buffet at the local curry house, such
institutions have become extinct. Today, we graze the entire day. You only have two free days a week. You
don’t want to have to waste one because there is nothing to do but watch TV. Sunday has leapfrogged
Saturday in the fun stakes. On Saturdays, you are recovering from the week. Sundays are the last bastion of
the weekend - you want to get as much as you can out of the day before you have to go back to work.

According to researchers, the ability to trail around B&Q has made the most dramatic difference to our
Sundays. In 1961, adults spent an average of 20 minutes a day shopping; by 2001, it was 50 minutes.
‘Shopping used to be a gender segregated activity that would take place during the week, while the husband
was at work. Now it’s as much men as women,’ said Gershuny. We’re all more likely to be relaxing or shopping
on a Sunday morning these days than scrubbing the floor or putting up shelves. ‘Men now stay in bed longer,
and get up not, as previously, to work around the house, but rather to shop or to pursue other outside leisure
activities.’

Men do about the same amount of unpaid work around the house as they used to on a Sunday, but it’s spread
throughout the whole day, instead of crammed into the morning. Women do considerably less than 40 years
ago. Indeed, men and women were ‘pretty much different species’ in 1961, as far as the way they spent
Sundays was concerned, with men far more likely to be out of the house - at the pub or playing football -
before lunch. ‘For women, leisure happened only in the afternoon. But by 2001, the shapes of men’s and
women’s Sundays were much more similar,’ says the report.

‘Sunday for me is all about holding on to the weekend and trying to stave off Monday. An ideal Sunday would
involve getting up and having a nice lunch. Sometimes we cook, but more often I go out to get a roast or
bangers and mash at a gastropub. If it is a nice day, there is nothing better than sitting outside in the beer
garden, reading the Sunday papers - one tabloid and one broadsheet - with a Guinness, extra cold. Sunday is
often a chance to visit other parts of London, as long as it is not too far. I use Sundays to go clothes shopping,
or to the cinema. I often go to Camden market, as I love the international foods on offer and hunting for
bargains and vintage clothes.’

Jonathan Bentley Atchison (25, Clapham, London, works in communications)

‘I am usually at home making the Sunday lunch. Some friends go out to eat, but my husband Mark loves a
roast, so we don’t. After that, I do the washing, like every day, and then I take my daughter Grace to netball
and watch her play. Mark potters around - last Sunday, he tidied the garage. He works six days a week, so on
Sunday he stays at home. I don’t like shopping on a Sunday because every man and his dog is out. I don’t
work, so I can do it in the week. I tend to watch television and chill out. When summer comes, we go to
barbecues at family or friends’ houses. When I was growing up, my dad would do the gardening and paint the
fences while my mum would do housework.’

Hazel Hallows (42, Manchester, housewife, married with three children)

‘When we were at home, I would get out in the garden, and my late wife Rose would cook the Sunday lunch
and do the housework. I was an engineer, and Rose worked full-time as a supermarket manageress. In 1961,
we had just moved to Bristol, and I spent Sunday maintaining the new house. The washing and ironing had to
be done - it was a working-together atmosphere. We would sometimes go and spend the day with Rose’s
sister or other relatives. In 1961, it was the first time I had a new car, so we spent time in the countryside or
garden centres. Now, I get up on Sundays and spend a couple of hours reading the newspapers.’

Bryan Jones (79, pensioner, Frampton Cotterell, near Bristol)

10. Teens Try to Change the World, One Purchase at a Time

When classes adjourn here at the Fayerweather Street School, eighth-graders ignore the mall down the street
and go straight to the place they consider much cooler: the local natural-foods grocer’s. There, they gather in
groups of ten or more sometimes, smitten by a marketing atmosphere that links attractiveness to eating well.
When time comes to buy something even as small as a chocolate treat, they feel good knowing a farmer
somewhere probably received a good price. “Food is something you need to stay alive,” says eighth-grader
Emma Lewis. “Paying farmers well is really important because if we didn’t have any unprocessed food, we’d
all be living on candy.”

Eating morally, as some describe it, is becoming a priority for teenagers as well as adults in their early 20s.
What began a decade ago as a concern on college campuses to shun clothing made in overseas sweatshops
has given birth to a parallel phenomenon in the food and beverage industries. Here, youthful shoppers are
leveraging their dollars in a bid to reduce pesticide usage, limit deforestation, and make sure farmers are not
left with a pittance on payday. Once again, college campuses are setting the pace. Students at 30 colleges
have helped persuade administrators to make sure all cafeteria coffee comes with a “Fair Trade” label, which
means bean pickers in Latin America and Africa were paid higher than the going rates. Their peers on another
300 campuses are pushing to follow suit, according to Students United for Fair Trade in Washington, D.C.

Coffee is just the beginning. Bon Appetit, an institutional food-service provider based in California, relies on
organic and locally grown produce. In each year since 2001, more than 25 colleges have asked the company to
bid on their food-service contracts. Though Bon Appetit intentionally limits its growth, its collegiate client list
has grown from 58 to 71 in that period. “It’s really just been in the last five years that we’ve seen students
become concerned with where their food was coming from,” says Maisie Ganzler, Bon Appetit’s director of
strategic initiatives. “Prior to that, students were excited to be getting sugared cereal.”

To reach a younger set that often does not drink coffee, Fair Trade importer Equal Exchange rolled our a line
of cocoa in 2003 and chocolate bars in 2004. Profits in both sectors have justified the project, says Equal
Exchange co-president Hob Everts. What is more, dozens of schools have contacted the firm to use its
products in fundraisers and as classroom teaching, tools. "Kids often are the ones who agitate in the family’"
for recycling and other eco-friendly practices, Mr. Everts says. “So, it’s a ripe audience.”

Concerns of today’s youthful food shoppers seem to reflect in some ways the idealism that inspired prior
generations to join boycotts in solidarity with farm workers. Today’s efforts are distinct in that youthful
consumers say they do not want to make sacrifices. They want high-quality, competitively priced goods that
do not require exploitation of workers or the environment. They will gladly reward companies that deliver.
One activist who shares this sentiment and hears it repeatedly from her peers is Summer Rayne Oakes, a
recent college graduate and fashion model who promotes stylish Fair Trade clothing. “I’m not going to buy
something that can’t stand on its own or looks bad just because it’s socially responsible,” Ms. Oakes says. “My
generation has come to terms with the fact that we’re all consumers, and we all buy something. So, if I do
have to buy food, what are the consequences?”

Wanting to ameliorate the world’s big problems can be frustrating, especially for those who feel ineffective
because they are young. Marketers are figuring out that teenagers resent this feeling of powerlessness and
are pushing products that make young buyers feel as though they are making a difference, says Michael
Wood, vice president of Teenage Research Unlimited. His example: Ethos Water from Starbucks, which
contributes five cents from every bottle sold to water-purification centres in developing countries. “This is a
very easy way for young people to contribute. All they have to do is buy bottled water,” Mr. Wood says.
“Buying products or supporting companies that give them ways to support global issues is one way for them
to get involved, and they really appreciate that.”

Convenience is also driving consumer activism. Joe Curnow, national coordinator of United Students for Fair
Trade, says she first got involved about five years ago as a high schooler when she spent time hanging out in
cafes. Buying coffee with an eco-friendly label “was a very easy way for me to express what I believed in”, she
says. For young teens, consumption is their first foray into activism. At the Fayerweather Street School, Emma
Lewis teamed up with classmates Kayla Kleinman and Therese LaRue to sell Fair Trade chocolate, cocoa, and
other products at a school fundraiser in November. When the tally reached $8,000, they realised they were
striking a chord.

Some adults hasten to point out the limitations of ethical consumption as a tool for doing good deeds and
personal growth. Gary Lindsay, director of Children’s Ministries, encourages Fair Trade purchases, but he also
organises children to collect toys for foster children and save coins for a playground-construction project in
Tanzania. He says it helps them learn to enjoy helping others even when they are not getting anything tangible
in return. “When we're benefiting, how much are we really giving? Is it really sacri-lice?" Mr. Lindsay asks. Of
Fair Trade products, he says: “Those things are great when we’re given opportunities like that once in a while,
but I think for us to expect that we should get something out of everything we do is a very selfish attitude to
have.”

13. SPEECH DYSFLUENCY AND POPULAR FILLERS

A speech dysfluency is any of various breaks, irregularities or sound-filled pauses that we make when we are
speaking, which are commonly known as fillers. These include words and sentences that are not finished,
repeated phrases or syllables, instances of speakers correcting their own mistakes as they speak and "words"
such as 'huh', 'uh', 'erm', 'urn', 'hmm', 'err', 'like', 'you know' and 'well'.

Fillers are parts of speech which are not generally recognised as meaningful and they include speech
problems, such as stuttering (repeating the first consonant of some words). Fillers are normally avoided on
television and films, but they occur quite regularly in everyday conversation, sometimes making up more than
20% of "words" in speech. But they can also be used as a pause for thought.

Research in linguistics has shown that fillers change across cultures and that even the different English
speaking nations use different fillers. For example, Americans use pauses such as 'um' or 'em' whereas the
British say 'uh' or 'eh'. Spanish speakers say 'ehhh' and in Latin America (where they also speak Spanish) but
not Spain, 'este' is used (normally meaning 'this').

Recent linguistic research has suggested that the use of 'uh' and 'um' in English is connected to the speaker's
mental and emotional state. For example, while pausing to say 'uh' or 'um' the brain may be planning the use
of future words. According to the University of Pennsylvania linguist Mark Liberman, 'um' generally comes
before a longer or more important pause than 'uh'. At least that's what he used to think.

Liberman has discovered that as Americans get older, they use 'uh' more than 'um' and that men use 'uh'
more than women no matter their age. But the opposite is true of 'um'. The young say 'um' more often than
the old. And women say 'um' more often than men at every age. This was an unexpected result because
scientists used to think that fillers had to do more with the amount of time a speaker pauses for, rather than
with who the speaker is.

Liberman mentioned his finding to fellow linguists in the Netherlands and this encouraged the group to look
for a pattern outside American English. They studied British and Scottish English, German, Danish, Dutch and
Norwegian and found that women and younger people said 'um' more than 'uh' in those languages as well.

Their conclusion is that it is simply a case of language change in progress and that women and younger people
are leading the change. And there is nothing strange about this. Women and young people normally are the
typical pioneers of most language change. What is strange, however, is that 'um' is replacing 'uh' across at
least two continents and five Germanic languages. Now this really is a mystery.

The University of Edinburgh sociolinguist Josef Fruehwald may have an answer. In his view, 'um' and 'uh' are
pretty much equivalent. The fact that young people and women prefer it is not significant. This often happens
in language when there are two options. People start using one more often until the other is no longer an
option. It’s just one of those things.

As to how such a trend might have gone from one language to another, there is a simple explanation,
according to Fruehwald. English is probably influencing the other languages. We all know that in many
countries languages are constantly borrowing words and expressions of English into their own language so
why not borrow fillers, too? Of course, we don't know for a fact whether that's actually what's happening with
'um' but it is a likely story.

14. Care in the Community

'Bedlam' is a word that has become synonymous in the English language with chaos and disorder. The term
itself derives from the shortened name for a former 16th century London institution for the mentally ill,
known as St. Mary of Bethlehem. This institution was so notorious that its name was to become a byword for
mayhem. Patient 'treatment' amounted to little more than legitimised abuse. Inmates were beaten and forced
to live in unsanitary conditions, whilst others were placed on display to a curious public as a side-show. There
is little indication to suggest that other institutions founded at around the same time in other European
countries were much better.

Even up until the mid-twentieth century, institutions for the mentally ill were regarded as being more places
of isolation and punishment than healing and solace. In popular literature of the Victorian era that reflected
true-life events, individuals were frequently sent to the 'madhouse' as a legal means of permanently disposing
of an unwanted heir or spouse. Later, in the mid-twentieth century, institutes for the mentally ill regularly
carried out invasive brain surgery known as a 'lobotomy' on violent patients without their consent. The aim
was to 'calm' the patient but ended up producing a patient that was little more than a zombie. Such a
procedure is well documented to devastating effect in the film 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest'. Little
wonder then that the appalling catalogue of treatment of the mentally ill led to a call for change from social
activists and psychologists alike.
Improvements began to be seen in institutions from the mid-50s onwards, along with the introduction of care
in the community for less severely ill patients. Community care was seen as a more humane and purposeful
approach to dealing with the mentally ill. Whereas institutionalised patients lived out their existence in
confinement, forced to obey institutional regulations, patients in the community were free to live a relatively
independent life. The patient was never left purely to their own devices as a variety of services could
theoretically be accessed by the individual. In its early stages, however, community care consisted primarily of
help from the patient's extended family network. In more recent years, such care has extended to the
provision of specialist community mental health teams (CMHTs) in the UK. Such teams cover a wide range of
services from rehabilitation to home treatment and assessment. In addition, psychiatric nurses are on hand to
administer prescription medication and give injections. The patient is therefore provided with the necessary
help that they need to survive in the everyday world whilst maintaining a degree of autonomy.

Often, though, when a policy is put into practice, its failings become apparent. This is true for the policy of
care in the community. Whilst back-up services may exist, an individual may not call upon them when needed,
due to reluctance or inability to assess their own condition. As a result, such an individual may be alone during
a critical phase of their illness, which could lead them to self-harm or even become a threat to other members
of their community. Whilst this might be an extreme-case scenario, there is also the issue of social alienation
that needs to be considered. Integration into the community may not be sufficient to allow the individual to
find work, leading to poverty and isolation. Social exclusion could then cause a relapse as the individual is left
to battle mental health problems alone. The solution, therefore, is to ensure that the patient is always in
touch with professional helpers and not left alone to fend for themselves. It should always be remembered
that whilst you can take the patient out of the institution, you can't take the institution out of the patient.

When questioned about care in the community, there seems to be a division of opinion amongst members of
the public and within the mental healthcare profession itself. Dr. Mayalla, practising clinical psychologist, is
inclined to believe that whilst certain patients may benefit from care in the community, the scheme isn't for
everyone. 'Those suffering moderate cases of mental illness stand to gain more from care in the community
than those with more pronounced mental illness. I don't think it's a one-size-fits-all policy. But I also think that
there is a far better infrastructure of helpers and social workers in place now than previously and the scheme
stands a greater chance of success than in the past.'

Anita Brown, mother of three, takes a different view. 'As a mother, I'm very protective towards my children.
As a result, I would not put my support behind any scheme that I felt might put my children in danger... I guess
there must be assessment methods in place to ensure that dangerous individuals are not let loose amongst
the public but I'm not for it at all. I like to feel secure where I live, but more to the point, that my children are
not under any threat.'

Bob Ratchett, a former mental health nurse, takes a more positive view on community care projects. 'Having
worked in the field myself, I've seen how a patient can benefit from living an independent life, away from an
institution. Obviously, only individuals well on their way to recovery would be suitable for consideration as
participants in such a scheme. If you think about it, is it really fair to condemn an individual to a lifetime in an
institution when they could be living a fairly fulfilled and independent life outside the institution?'

17. DRINKING FILTERED WATER

A The body is made up mainly of water. This means that the quality of water that we drink every day has an
important effect on our health. Filtered water is healthier than tap water and some bottled water. This is
because it is free of contaminants, that is, of substances that make it dirty or harmful. Substances that settle
on the bottom of a glass of tap water and microorganisms that carry diseases (known as bacteria or germs)
are examples of contaminants. Filtered water is also free of poisonous metals and chemicals that are common
in tap water and even in some bottled water brands.

B The authorities know that normal tap water is full of contaminants and they use chemicals, such as chlorine
and bromine in order to disinfect it. But such chemicals are hardly safe. Indeed, their use in water is
associated with many different conditions and they are particularly dangerous for children and pregnant
women. For example, consuming bromine for a long time may result in low blood pressure, which may then
bring about poisoning of the brain, heart, kidneys and liver. Filtered water is typically free of such water
disinfectant chemicals.

C Filtered water is also free of metals, such as mercury and lead. Mercury has ended up in our drinking water
mainly because the dental mixtures used by dentists have not been disposed of safely for a long time.
Scientists believe there is a connection between mercury in the water and many allergies and cancers as well
as disorders, such as ADD, OCD, autism and depression.

D Lead, on the other hand, typically finds its way to our drinking water due to pipe leaks. Of course, modern
pipes are not made of lead but pipes in old houses usually are. Lead is a well-known carcinogen and is
associated with pregnancy problems and birth defects. This is another reason why children and pregnant
women must drink filtered water.

E The benefits of water are well known. We all know, for example, that it helps to detoxify the body. So, the
purer the water we drink, the easier it is for the body to rid itself of toxins. The result of drinking filtered water
is that the body does not have to use as much of its energy on detoxification as it would when drinking
unfiltered water. This means that drinking filtered water is good for our health in general. That is because the
body can perform all of its functions much more easily and this results in improved metabolism, better weight
management, improved joint lubrication as well as efficient skin hydration.

F There are many different ways to filter water and each type of filter targets different contaminants. For
example, activated carbon water filters are very good at taking chlorine out. Ozone water filters, on the other
hand, are particularly effective at removing germs.

G For this reason, it is very important to know exactly what is in the water that we drink so that we can decide
what type of water filter to use. A Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) should be useful for this purpose. This is
a certificate that is issued by public water suppliers every year, listing the contaminants present in the water.
If you know what these contaminants are, then it is easier to decide which type of water filter to get.

18. The Beginnings of Art Therapy

Art therapy is a relative newcomer to the therapeutic field. Art therapy as a profession began in the mid-20th
century, arising independently in English-speaking and European countries. Many of the early practitioners of
art therapy acknowledged the influence of a variety of disciplines on their practices, ranging from
psychoanalysis through to aesthetics and early childhood education. However, the roots of art as therapy go
back as far as the late 18th century, when arts were used in the 'moral treatment' of psychiatric patients.

It wasn't until 1942, however, that the British artist Adrian Hill coined the term 'art therapy', as he was
recovering from tuberculosis in a sanatorium. He discovered that therapeutic benefits could be derived from
drawing and painting whilst recovering. Art, he claimed, could become therapeutic since it was capable of
'completely engrossing the mind... releasing the creative energy of the frequently inhibited patient'. This
effect, argued Hill, could in turn help the patient as it would 'build up a strong defence against his
misfortunes'.

In 1964, the British Association of Art Therapists was founded. Proponents of art therapy fell into one of two
categories: those who believed that the therapeutic effect of art lay in its effectiveness as a psychoanalytic
tool to assess a patient through their drawings and those who held the belief that art-making was an end in
itself, the creative process acting therapeutically on the patient. The two practices, however, were not
incompatible, a degree of overlap occurring between the two. A patient, for example, could produce work
that could be analysed for content and forms of self-expression but which could also be a creative outlet at
the same time.
Who Benefits from Art Therapy

Art therapy in all its forms has proved effective in the treatment of individuals suffering with a wide range of
difficulties or disabilities. These include emotional, behavioural or mental health problems, learning or
physical disabilities. These include emotional, behaviour or mental health problems, learning or physical
disabilities, neurological conditions and physical illness. Therapy can be provided on a group or individual basis
according to the clients' needs. Whether the approach adopted by the therapist is oriented towards a
psychoanalytic or creative approach, the effect of therapy is multifold. Partaking in art therapy can raise a
patient's self-awareness and enable them to deal with stress and traumatic experience. In addition, art
therapy sessions can enhance a patient's cognitive abilities and help the patient enjoy the life-affirming
pleasures of making art.

What an Art Therapy Session Involves

Typically, an art therapy session is fundamentally different from an art class in that the individual is
encouraged to focus more on their internal feelings and to express them, rather than portray external objects.
Although some traditional art classes may ask participants to draw from their imagination, in art therapy the
patient's inner world of images, feelings, thoughts and ideas are always of primary importance to the
experience. Any type of visual art and medium can be employed in the therapeutic process including painting,
drawing, sculpture, photography and digital art.

Art therapy sessions are usually held by skilled and qualified professionals. The presence primarily of the
therapist is to be in attendance, guiding and encouraging artistic expression in the patient, in accordance with
the original meaning of the word for therapy derived from the Greek word 'therapeia', meaning 'being
attentive to'.

The Regulation of Art Therapy

Requirements for those wishing to become an art therapist vary from country to country. In the USA, where
entry to the profession is highly regulated, a master's degree in art therapy is essential. In addition, those
applying for such a post must have taken courses in a variety of studio art disciplines in order to demonstrate
artistic proficiency. On completion of the master's degree, candidates also have to complete a minimum of
1000 hours of direct client contact post-graduation that is approved by the American Art Therapy Association
(AATA).

However, whilst entry to the profession is strictly regulated in the USA, the same does not hold true for other
countries. The problem is that art therapy is still considered a developing field. As such, until it becomes truly
established as a therapy, its practice and application will remain unregulated in many countries for some time
yet.

19. Prison: The Solution or the Problem?

In the Netherlands and parts of the USA such as Johnson County, a move towards rehabilitation of offenders
and decreasing crime has seen a reduction in incarceration rates. Bucking this trend, the UK's prison
population has increased by an average rate of 3.6% per year since 1993. As the situation currently stands,
England's and Wales' incarceration rate is 148 per 100,000 compared to 98 in France, 82 in the Netherlands
and 79 in Germany. Without a shadow of a doubt, out of all European countries, the UK has adopted the most
hardline approach to offenders.

The trend towards imposing prison sentences on offenders in the UK is made to seem all the more harsh since
the Dutch Justice Ministry is actively in the process of systematically closing down prisons. In the period
between 2010-2015, 28 prisons were closed in total. If anything, the Dutch reform of the prison system has
been accelerating at a phenomenal pace, with 19 of the prisons being shut down in 2014 alone.
As would be expected, closures of prisons in the Netherlands have led to a drop in the numbers of
incarcerated offenders. This is also largely due to the fact that those convicted are choosing electronic tagging
instead of incarceration. However, there is more to these statistics than meets the eye. Defying all
expectations of the pro-incarceration lobbyists, crime rates in the Netherlands are also actually decreasing in
direct proportion to the closure of prisons.

With such statistics laid bare for all to see, many are now beginning to question the validity of incarceration as
a method of reforming offenders. All the more so since the average prison place costs the taxpayer £37,648
per year - a hefty sum for a service that fails to deliver, especially since there are vastly cheaper and more
effective methods to deal with offenders. Allowing offenders to be tagged electronically rather than be
incarcerated would save around £35 million per year for every 1000 convicted offenders. Serving a probation
or community service order would also be 12 times less costly than the average prison placement for an
offender.

More tellingly, a decreased incidence of relapse into criminal behaviour when offenders receive a community
sentence, rather than a custodial one, has been revealed in re-offending statistics issued by the UK Ministry of
Justice. There is definitely an argument that serving a prison term tends to create rather than alleviate the
problem of crime. As a Conservative white paper concluded in 1990, 'We know that prison is an expensive
way of making bad people worse.' Interestingly, the report also argued that there should be a range of
community-based sentences which would be cheaper and more effective alternatives to prison.

Quite apart from the cost and relative ineffectiveness of incarceration is the short-sightedness of imposing a
custodial sentence in the first place. A punitive system of incarceration presupposes that the prisoner needs
to be punished for bad behaviour. Since the prisoner is considered answerable for their behaviour, it is
believed that they are also completely responsible for their actions. Such an approach overlooks social and
economic factors that can play an integral role in the incidence of crime. Such an oversight only serves to
perpetuate crime and punish offenders who need help rather than a penal sentence.

It would do no harm for the UK to look to the Netherlands for an example in reducing crime through
addressing social problems as a key to reducing incarceration. In the Netherlands, the focus is on deterring
crime by investing in social services rather than seeking purely to punish the offender. In addition, those who
do offend are helped with rehabilitation programmes.

Overlooking the social circumstances of the offender can also be detrimental to children's welfare, especially
if a mother is convicted and given a custodial sentence. Often childcare arrangements are not in place when
custodial sentences are handed down to mothers caring for children. In fact, research suggests that more than
half of the women who go to court are not expecting a custodial sentence, leading to provisions made for the
children being haphazard at best. The number of children who fall foul of the custodial system in this way
totals a staggering 17,000 per year. Worse still, figures show that adult children of imprisoned mothers are
more likely to be convicted of a crime than adult children of imprisoned fathers. Viewing the offender and
their crime in isolation and disregarding all other social and environmental factors is therefore mistaken, if not
downright morally reprehensible.

All evidence would seem to point to a much needed shake-up of the English penal system. As things stand,
there are too many losers and no identifiable winners. It was Dostoevsky who said: 'The degree of civilisation
in a society is revealed by entering its prisons.' Maybe we would do better to go one step further and amend
his quotation to 'The degree of civilisation in a society is revealed by not having prisons and instead by
addressing social issues in society itself.'

20. Physiology and Criminality

Prior to the 19th century, criminality was considered more of a moral or philosophical issue. Only with the
advent of Italian anthropologist Cesare Lombroso did the subject of criminality take a more scientific turn.
With the publication of his theories of criminal behaviour, Lombroso advanced the idea that criminal
behaviour was attributable to physiological disposition rather than to any existential reasons.

In his 'atavistic form' theory published in 1876, Lombroso claimed that criminality was heritable. He proposed
that a distinct biological class of people were prone to criminality. Such people, he claimed, exhibited
'atavistic' or primitive features and were 'throwbacks', bearing physical resemblances to Man's predecessors,
the Neanderthals. Characterised by a strong, well-defined jaw and heavy brow, they certainly had little to
recommend them in the beauty stakes. With such features, coupled with a tendency towards criminal
behaviour, Lombroso's atavistic type was certainly not cut out for social success. Just for good measure,
Lombroso also included other distinguishing features to identify criminals, such as bloodshot eyes and curly
hair for murderers and thick lips and protruding ears for sex offenders. It has to be wondered, given the
unusual appearance with which they were credited, how such individuals would have got close enough to
their victims to begin with and, more to the point, how any such criminals hoped to get away with their crime,
seeing as they were so readily identifiable.

In hindsight, Lombroso's hypothesis seems ludicrous and deeply flawed. One major failing in Lombroso's
theory of an atavistic type is that no proper controls were used in studies designed to support his hypo-thesis.
All individuals were confined to a criminal population, no comparison being made at the time with non-
criminal control groups. Secondly, the concept of what constitutes a crime is in itself a social construct and can
vary cross-culturally and over time. Therefore, the argument that criminal behaviour is inherited is hard to
sustain. Finally, in the light of modern genetic research, complex behaviours are not considered to be
controlled by single genes, thereby completely ruling out any possibility of inherited criminality.

Surprisingly, given his strong conviction of a biological disposition towards criminality, Lombroso later
modified his views to admit environmental influences in determining criminal behaviour. Such views now
form the basis of contemporary theories of criminality. In recognition of this fact, contemporary criminologists
have bestowed on Lombroso the honorary title 'the father of criminology'. Furthermore, despite scientific
failings in his experimental approach, Lombroso is to be credited with shifting the study of criminal behaviour
from a moral basis to an empirical one, thereby placing the study of criminology on a more scientific footing.

The argument for a biological basis to criminality resurfaced, however, nearly a century later with Sheldon's
theory of somatotypes. In 1949, Sheldon advanced the theory that individuals fell within three broad physical
types: the ectomorph, mesomorph and endomorph. The ectomorph was essentially thin, the mesomorph
muscular and athletic, whilst the endomorph type was said to be fat and rather lethargic. Each physical type,
Sheldon claimed, was associated with a distinct personality and temperament. Ectomorphs were
characterised by a solitary and restrained nature, whilst mesomorphs were said to be adventurous and
endomorphs relaxed and pleasure-loving. Unfortunately for the mesomorphs, Sheldon also claimed that those
corresponding to this physical type had criminal tendencies. By linking inherited physical types with
personality, Sheldon thereby was hypothesising a hereditary aspect to criminal behaviour. Sheldon's studies
of mesomorphic college students did to some extent confirm his theory as did a later study conducted by
Putwain and Sammons as recently as 2002. In partial support of Sheldon's theory, an increased level of
testosterone associated with a mesomorphic build could explain such a biological disposition towards
criminality associated with a particular body type. However, social prejudices and self-fulfilling prophecies
could also be at play in the above average correlation between mesomorphic types and criminal behaviour in
society.

Following on from Sheldon's hypothesis, a further argument for a biological disposition to criminality was
proposed in the 1960s. This time, hereditary tendencies were linked to genetic defect or chromosomal
abnormality. Variations of the normal 'XY' genetic component or genotype of males were hypothesised to
determine criminal behaviour from homicide to violent crime. The theory was based on the unproven
assumption that possession of an extra 'X' chromosome 'feminises' a man and so conversely having an extra
male 'Y' chromosome should make a man more masculine and aggressive. However, this somewhat weak
hypothesis was severely undermined by the study of Epps in 1995. Epps demonstrated that possessing an
extra 'Y' chromosome, as in the 'XYY' genotype, made an individual no more likely to commit violent crime
than anyone else. The further finding that testosterone levels amongst 'XYY' men are no different from 'XY'
men and that the former are no more aggressive than the latter sounded the final death knell for the
hypothesis of a criminal type determined by genotype alone.

At least those who place trust in rehabilitation programmes to reform criminal types can now breathe a sigh
of relief. It would seem that the rather pessimistic prognosis for individuals born with a certain physique or
genotype no longer holds credence in scientific circles. If biological predisposition does play a role in
criminality, it seems to be at least tempered by environmental and social factors to a large extent.

21. Jack the Ripper: A Bungled Investigation?

Few murder enquiries have stirred the public imagination to such an extent as those relating to Jack the
Ripper. The report of murders worthy of a depraved savage simultaneously appalled and enthralled Victorian
society as the 19th century came to a close. The unleashing of a serial killer onto the London scene caught
police unprepared as did the unprecedented brutality of the killings which earned their perpetrator the
nickname 'Jack the Ripper'. So, given the heightened public interest and the existence of a police force more
competent than ever before since the formation of the Metropolitan Police in 1829, it has to be asked: why
did the Ripper evade capture and why was no one even charged with the five murders attributed to the
Ripper?

Conspiracy theorist would have us believe that the identity of the Ripper was, contrary to public belief,
unmasked by police. However, the truth about the Ripper's identity proved so unpalatable that it had to be
hushed up. Far-fetched as it may seem, Queen Victoria's grandson, Prince Albert Victor, was thought by some
to be the Ripper himself. Whilst he did frequent places of ill repute, there is no tangible evidence to support
this somewhat sensationalist theory. In fact, the Ripper may have successfully evaded the police for far more
prosaic reasons.

Back in 1888, when the Ripper began his reign of terror in the streets of Whitechapel, forensic science was
barely in its infancy. Rudimentary knowledge existed as to the necessity of keeping a murder scene intact to
preserve vital clues but the means to thoroughly analyse such evidence through DNA testing was light years
away still. In fact it was only with the publication of Hans Gross' 'A Handbook for Examining Magistrates,
Police Officials, Military Police, etc.' in 1893 that the foundation for forensic science was laid. It was too late,
however, to help the Ripper investigation that floundered in its ignorance of modern forensic techniques.

The Ripper investigation also just missed out on developments in fingerprint identification that might have led
police to the identity of the Ripper. Nearly a decade prior to the first Ripper murder, Dr. Henry Faulds had
published a letter in the scientific journal Nature in 1880. In the letter he outlined for the first time the
possibility of using fingerprints for identification purposes. It was only in 1896 that Sir Francis Galton,
Inspector General of Bengal Police, sought to put theory into practice. Using the new-found method of
'dactyloscopy' (later known as fingerprinting) he employed the technique to successfully identify criminals.
Again, new technology arrived just too late for the Ripper investigators.
Whilst investigative police could not be blamed for a lack of forensic knowledge, their failure to apply known
investigative methods to the crime scene certainly smacked of incompetence. Photographing the crime scene
was not exactly standard practice of the time but it was a known procedure. Unfortunately the officers leading
the investigation at the time saw fit to only photograph one of the Ripper's victims, a certain Mary Kelly, at the
crime scene. Even more bizarrely, photographs of the victim were more centred on photographing her eyes to
the neglect of all else. The reason or 'forlorn hope' as cited by Inspector Walter Dew was that the imprint of
the Ripper might have been recorded on the victim's retina at the time of her death. No conclusions were
drawn from the undertaking.

Another more serious criticism that has been levelled at the investigative police at the time is their deliberate
tampering with evidence. It is well-known that a semi-illiterate message was scrawled above one of the
Ripper's victims. However, before it could be properly analysed, the investigating officer ordered that it be
removed as it was thought to implicate the Jews and racial repercussions were feared. the motive was well-
intended but this action may have destroyed vital clues.

A final problem was the lack of co-operation that existed not just between the Press and the police but also
between law enforcement agencies themselves. With regard to the former problem, police distrust if the
Press led to limited information being released to the newspapers. This was due to a fear that information
made public could alert a suspect or waste time in throwing up false leads. Unfortunately, if information had
been circulated in the public arena, important information might have been uncovered that would have led to
the arrest of the Ripper. As regards the law enforcement agencies, in-fighting and rivalry between the City and
Metropolitan Police Forces served to delay exchange of information and so further hinder proceedings