Caitlin Milera, University of North Dakota

Thirteen years before any other woman joined the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics – or the NACA, NASA’s predecessor – in a technical role, a young lab assistant named Pearl Young was making waves in the agency. Her legacy as an outspoken and persistent advocate for herself and her team would pave the way for women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics for decades to come.

My interest in Young’s story is grounded in my own identity as a woman in a STEM field. I find strength in sharing the stories of women who made lasting impacts in STEM. I am the director of the NASA-fundedNorth Dakota Space Grant Consortium, where we aim to foster an open and welcoming environment in STEM. Young’s story is one of persistence through setbacks, advocacy for herself and others, and building a community of support.

Facing challenges from the beginning

Young was a scientist, an educator, a technical editor and a researcher. Born in 1895, she was no stranger to the barriers that women faced at the time.

In the early 20th century, college degrees in STEM fields were considered “less suited for women,” and graduates with these degrees were considered unconventional women. Professors who agreed to mentor women in advanced STEM fields in the 1940s and 1950s were often accused of communism.

In 1956, the National Science Foundation even published an article with the title: “Women are NOT for Engineering.”

Despite society’s sexist standards, Young earned a bachelor’s degree in 1919 with a triple major in physics, mathematics and chemistry, with honors, from the University of North Dakota. She then began her decades-long career in STEM.

Becoming a technical editor

Despite the hostile culture for women, Young successfully navigated multiple technical roles at the NACA. With her varied expertise, she worked in several divisions – physics, instrumentation and aerodynamics – and soon noticed a trend across the agency. Many of the reports her colleagues wrote weren’t well written enough to be useful.

In a 1959 interview, Young spoke of her start at the NACA: “Those were fruitful years. I was interested in good writing and suggested the need for a technical editor. The engineers lacked the time to make readable reports.”

Three years after voicing her suggestion, Young was reassigned to the newly created role of assistant technical editor in the publications section in 1935. After six years in that role, Young earned the title of associate technical editor in 1941.

In 1941, the NACA established the Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory, now known as NASA Glenn Research Center, in Cleveland. This new field center needed experienced employees, so two years later, NACA leadership invited Young to lead a new technical editing section there.

It was at the Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory that Young published her most notable technical work, the Style Manual for Engineering Authors, in 1943. NASA’s History Office even referred to Young as the architect of the NACA technical reports system.

Young’s style manual allowed the agency to communicate technological progress around the globe. This manual included specific formatting rules for technical writing, which would increase consistency for engineers and researchers reporting their data and experimental results. It was essential for efficient World War II operations and was translated into multiple languages.

But it wasn’t until after this publication that Young finally received the promotion to full technical editor, 11 years after she voiced the need for the role at the agency. She was the first person to hold this role, but she had to start at the assistant level, then move up to associate before receiving the full technical editor designation.

Pearl Young ‘raising hell’

Perhaps the most noteworthy piece of Young’s story is her character. While advocating for herself and her colleagues, Young often had to challenge authority.

She stood up for her editing section when male supervisors wrongfully accused them of making mistakes. She wrote official proposals to properly classify her office in the research division at the Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory. She regularly acknowledged the contributions of her entire team for the achievements they shared.

She also secured extra personnel to lessen unbearable workloads and wrote official memorandums to ensure that her colleagues earned rightful promotions. Young often referred to these actions as “raising hell.”

The archival documents I’ve analyzed indicate that Young’s performance at the NACA was exemplary throughout her career. In 1967, she was awarded the University of North Dakota’s prestigious Sioux Award in recognition of her professional achievements and service to the university.

In 1995, and again in 2014, NASA Langley Research Center dedicated a theater in her name. The new theater is located in NASA’s Integrated Engineering Services Building.

In 2015, Young was inducted into the inaugural NASA/NACA Langley Hall of Honor. But throughout her career, not all of her colleagues shared this complimentary view of Young and her work.

One of Young’s supervisors in 1930 thought it necessary to assess her “attitude” and fitness as an employee in her progress report – and justified his position by typing these additional words into the document himself.

Later that year, Young requested time off – likely for the holiday season – prompting a different supervisor to draft an official memorandum to the engineer in charge, a position akin to today’s NASA center director. He referred to Young’s “attitude” in requesting to use her vacation days.

Women not welcome in STEM

While sexism in STEM has shifted its forms over time, gender-based inequities still exist. Women in STEM frequently confront microaggressions, marginalization and hostile work environments, including unequal pay, lack of recognition and additional service expectations.

Women often lack supportive social networks and encounter other systemic barriers to career advancement, such as not being recognized as an authority figure, or the double standard of being perceived as too aggressive instead of as a leader.

Women of color, women who belong to LGBTQ+ communities and women who have one or more disabilities face even more barriers rooted in these intersectional identities.

One of the ways to combat these inequities is to call attention to systemic barriers by sharing stories of women who persisted in STEM – women like Pearl Young.

Caitlin Milera, Research Assistant Professor of Aerospace, University of North Dakota

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

David Acunzo, University of Virginia

We’ve all seen it, typically on television or on stage: A hypnotist selects a few members from the audience, and with what seems to be little more than a steely stare or a few choice words, they’re suddenly “under the spell.” Depending on what the hypnotist suggests, the participants laugh, dance and perform without inhibition.

Or perhaps you’ve experienced hypnosis another way – with a trip to a hypnotherapist for a series of sessions to help you stop smoking, lose weight, manage pain or deal with depression. This is no longer unusual; thousands of Americans have done the same thing. And many were helped.

Hypnosis has been found to be effective for treating irritable bowel syndrome, and it may be beneficial for weight reduction, sleep disorders and anxiety. For mild to moderate depression in adults, hypnotherapy is as effective as cognitive behavioral therapy, and it can help with depression in children. Hypnosis is also used to treat phobias, PTSD and to control pain during surgery and dental procedures in both adults and children.

Yet despite the evidence, its widespread use and its growing popularity, hypnosis is still viewed with skepticism by some scientists, and with curiosity by much of the public. As a researcher studying altered states from a cognitive and neuroscientific perspective, I’m happy to help pull back the curtain to show you how hypnosis works.

A hypnotherapy session

In simple terms, hypnosis is a procedure that helps people imagine different experiences that feel very real. When that occurs, the person can be said to be in a state of hypnosis.

Little is known about what characterizes a hypnotic state in terms of brain activity, but neuroimaging studies indicate a decrease in activity in the parts of the brain responsible for self-referential thought and daydreaming, and increased links between the parts responsible for attention and action.

These results are consistent with the idea that people who are hypnotized are in a state that inhibits internal thoughts and other distractions, such as bodily sensations or noises, that may interfere with the hypnosis.

A therapist’s first set of suggestions typically includes the “hypnotic induction,” which helps the subject increase their responsiveness to other suggestions. An induction may be like this: “I will now count from 5 to 1. At every count, you will feel even more relaxed, and that you are going deeper and deeper into hypnosis.”

When responding to suggestions, the subject’s experience feels involuntary. That is, it’s happening to them, rather than generated by them. This is known as the classical suggestion effect. Following a suggestion to move their arm, the subject may feel as though their arm rises on its own, rather than being raised of their own volition.

For perceptual suggestions, the experience can feel quite real and distinct from voluntary imagination. If I ask you to imagine hearing a dog barking outside, it requires an effort, and the experience does not feel like there’s really a dog barking outside. But through hypnotic suggestion, responsive subjects will feel like they hear a dog barking, and they won’t be cognizant of any effort to make it happen.

What makes people hypnotizable?

You can’t force anyone to be hypnotized. Willingness to participate, a positive attitude, motivation and expectation are hugely important. So is the ability to set aside the fact that the situation is imaginative. It’s like when you become fully absorbed with the story and characters in a movie – so absorbed you forget you’re in a theater.

Good rapport with the therapist is also critical. If you refuse to cooperate or decide hypnosis won’t work, it won’t. A good comparison may be meditation: You can listen to a meditation recording, but if you’re unwilling to follow the instructions, or if you’re unmotivated or distracted, it won’t have any effect.

Few traits predict whether someone is easily hypnotizable, but people are not equal in their ability to respond to hypnotic suggestions. Some people vividly experience a wide array of suggestions; others, not nearly as much. There are indications that women respond slightly better to hypnotic suggestions than men, and that peak hypnotizability occurs during late childhood and early teenage years.

From a neuroscientific perspective, it appears that hypnotic suggestions do not act directly on our executive functions, but rather on our self-monitoring functions. That is, hypnosis does not directly decide our behaviors for us. Rather, it modifies how the brain monitors what it’s doing. So when the hypnotist suggests that you raise your arm, you’re still the one making that decision – although your experience may seem like the arm is moving by itself.

Exposure therapy, self-hypnosis

The aim of hypnotherapy is to induce changes in negative emotions, perceptions and actions. Suppose you are afraid of public speaking. Through suggestions, the therapist may make you go through the experience of talking in front of an audience. Again, it feels real – your stress level will rise, but ultimately you’ll habituate yourself and learn to cope with the stress, even as the therapist suggests increasingly challenging scenarios.

Hypnosis can also be used as a preparation or replacement for exposure therapy, which is a method to treat phobias or anxiety related to specific situations by progressively exposing the patient to increasingly challenging situations. If you’re afraid of birds, the therapist may suggest you imagine holding a feather; then imagine getting near a bird in a cage; then imagine going to the park and feeding pigeons. This is more effective, and feels more real, than mere visualization.

The hypnotherapist can also teach self-hypnosis techniques. Subjects can learn to induce a state of relaxation that’s associated with a gesture, such as closing the left hand.

Hypnotic suggestions like this decrease anxiety by promoting activation of the parasympathetic nervous system, which stimulates bodily functions during times of rest, such as digestion and sexual arousal, and deactivates the sympathetic nervous system, which stimulates the fight-or-flight response.

Progress can occur after less than 10 sessions with some disorders, such as insomnia in children. But it may take longer for others, such as depression. And just as hypnosis is not suitable for everyone, it’s also not suitable for everything.

What’s more, not all hypnotherapy products on the market are backed by scientific evidence. It is safer to go to a hypnotherapist who’s licensed in your state. You should ask whether they are affiliated with or certified by a professional association of hypnotherapists. You can then confirm their affiliation on the association’s website. For instance, the American Society of Clinical Hypnosis allows you to search members by name.

Although Medicare does not cover hypnotherapy, some private insurance partially covers the costs for some conditions, provided the treatment is performed by a licensed clinical mental health professional. One session will typically cost between US$100 and $250.

David Acunzo, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences, University of Virginia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Kerry E. Kaylegian, Penn State

As the H5N1 avian flu virus continues to spread in poultry flocks and dairy cattle, consumers may worry about whether the U.S. milk supply is safe to drink. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the answer is yes, as long as the milk is pasteurized.

In late November 2024, however, California regulators recalled two batches of raw, unpasteurized milk from a Fresno dairy farm after bird flu virus was detected in the milk. The dairy subsequently recalled all of its raw milk and cream products from stores due to possible bird flu contamination. State regulators placed the farm under quarantine, suspending any new distribution of its raw milk, cream, kefir, butter and cheese products produced on or after November 27.

No human bird flu cases associated with the milk were detected immediately following the recalls. But officials strongly urged buyers not to drink raw milk from the affected batches and to return it to the store where they bought it.

Despite health experts’ warning that raw milk could contain high levels of the avian flu virus, along with many other pathogens, raw milk sales are up in the U.S. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whom President-elect Donald Trump has said he will nominate to head the Department of Health and Human Services, has asserted that raw milk “advances human health,” contrary to warnings from FDA officials and food scientists.

As an extension food scientist in a state where raw milk sales are legal, I provide technical support to help processors produce high-quality, safe dairy foods. I also like to help people understand the confusing world of pasteurization methods on their milk labels, and why experts strongly discourage consuming raw milk and products made from it.

What can make milk unsafe

Dairy products, like many foods, have inherent risks that can cause a variety of illnesses and even death. Dairy milk comes from animals that graze outdoors, live in barns and lie in mud and manure. Milk is picked up from the farm in tanker trucks and delivered to the processing plant. These environments offer numerous opportunities for contamination by pathogens that cause illness and produce organisms that make food spoil.

For example, listeria monocytogenes comes from environmental sources like soil and water. Mild infections with listeriosis cause flu-like symptoms. More serious cases are, unfortunately, too common and can cause miscarriages in pregnant women and even death in extreme cases.

Other pathogens commonly associated with dairy animals and raw milk include E. coli, which can cause severe gastrointestinal infections and may lead to kidney damage; Campylobacter, the most common cause of diarrheal illness in the U.S.; and Salmonella, which cause abdominal pain, diarrhea and other symptoms.

Keeping beverages safe with heat

In the 1860s, French microbiologist Louis Pasteur discovered that heating wine and beer killed the organisms that caused spoilage, which then was a significant problem in France.

This heating process, which became known as pasteurization, was adopted in the U.S. prior to World War II, at a time when milk was responsible for 25% of all U.S. outbreaks of foodborne illnesses. In 1973 the federal government required that all milk sold across state lines in the U.S. had to be pasteurized, and in 1987 it banned interstate sales of raw milk.

Pasteurization heats every particle of a food to a specific temperature for a continuous length of time in order to kill the most heat-resistant pathogen associated with that product. Different organisms have different responses to heat, so controlled scientific studies are required to determine what length of time at a given temperature will kill a specific organism.

Since 1924, pasteurization in the U.S. has been guided by the Grade “A” Pasteurized Milk Ordinance, a federal guidance document that is updated every two years to reflect current science and has been adopted by all 50 states. Pasteurization equipment in the U.S. must meet stringent requirements that include sanitary design, safety controls and material standards.

Pasteurization methods

Dairy processors can choose among several different types of pasteurization. When executed properly, all of these methods produce the same result: pathogen-free milk. Processors may treat milk beyond minimum times or temperatures to provide an extra margin of safety, or to reduce bacteria that can cause milk to spoil, thus increasing the product’s shelf life.

Smaller-scale processors who handle limited volumes use what are known as vat pasteurizers, also known as batch pasteurizers. Milk is pumped into a temperature-controlled tank with a stirrer, heated to a minimum of 145 degrees Fahrenheit (63 Celsius) and held there continuously for 30 minutes. Then it is cooled and pumped out of the vat.

The most common method used for commercial milk is high-temperature short-time pasteurization, which can treat large volumes of milk. Milk is pumped through a series of thin plates at high speed to reach a minimum temperature of 161 F (71 C). Then it travels through a holding tube for 15 seconds, and the temperature is checked automatically for safety and cooled.

The most complex and expensive systems are ultra-pasteurizers and ultra-high-temperature pasteurizers, which pasteurize milk in just a few seconds at temperatures above 285 F (140 C). This approach destroys many spoilage organisms, giving the milk a significantly longer shelf life than with other methods, although sometimes products made this way have more of a “cooked” flavor.

Ultra-high-temperature products are processed in a sterile environment and packaged in sterile packaging, such as lined cartons and pouches. They can be shelf-stable for up to a year before they are opened. Ultra-high-temperature packaging makes taking milk to school for lunch safe for kids every day.

Avian flu in milk

The detection of avian flu virus fragments in milk is a new challenge for the dairy industry. Scientists do not have a full picture of the risks to humans but are learning.

Research so far has shown that virus particles end up in the milk of infected cows, but that pasteurization will inactivate the virus. The FDA advises consumers not to drink raw milk because there is limited information about whether it may transmit avian flu.

The agency also is urging producers not to manufacture or sell raw milk or raw milk products, including cheese, made with milk from cows showing symptoms of illness.

Avian flu continues to appear in new species, and as of early December 2024, 57 human cases had been confirmed in the U.S. Of these, all but two were people who worked with livestock.

Two recent cases – a child in California and a teen in Canada – may indicate that young people with immature immune systems are more vulnerable than adults to the virus. With medical researchers still learning how H5N1 is transmitted, I agree with the FDA that raw milk poses risks not worth taking.

This is an updated version of an article originally published on May 17, 2024.

Kerry E. Kaylegian, Associate Research Professor of Food Science, Penn State

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.