Bacon vs. Orgasms vs. Drugs

Bacon: delicious, succulent, juicy, tender, satisfying!

Orgasm: sexy, hot, intense, amazing, satisfying!
Drugs: fun (in the moment), escape (at a cost), satisfying!

How would anyone be able to choose between the three? Well, honestly, you may not have to. Studies are showing the similarities between these guilty pleasures. When it comes to the brain, there is almost no differences between bacon, drugs, or an orgasm. It may seem shocking at first, but lets learn a little about the brain first.

The brain is still a mystery, hiding secrets mankind will be unlocking for many years to come. We do still have some facts on the brain and its processes. The limbic system, for example, is what houses the pleasure center. This pleasure center, also known as the reward circuit, not only gives us the feeling of enjoyment but also drives the desire to seek out this pleasure again. This is true for all pleasures: food (bacon), sex (orgasms), and even drugs (cocaine, heroine, etc.). Some of these pleasure components of the brain and their functions are found below:

• Amygdala- regulates emotion
• Nucleus Accumbens- regulates the release of dopamine
• Ventral Tegmental Area- actually releases the dopamine
• Cerebellum- controls muscle function
• Pituitary Gland- releases beta-endorphins, which decrease pain; oxytocin, which increases feelings of trust; and vasopressin, which increases bonding.

Now, it is fairly obvious that the intensity levels of having an orgasm and eating bacon or doing drugs are at different levels. However, they all use the same pleasure center and use the above components of the brain similarly. Dopamine is a chemical in the brain usually brought up when talking about pleasure. Dopamine is not the only neurological chemical at play when it comes to pleasure, but it is one that is important when it comes to going after said pleasure. Whether it is any of the three pleasures, dopamine is what motivates us to obtain it again. This happens after someone feels pleasure, which comes from the opioids. This is the actual pleasure chemical that is delivered after eating something delicious such as bacon, or having an orgasm. This chemical is the brains natural endorphin and morphine.


Drugs, such as heroine or cocaine, are stimulants that do just that. They stimulate the brain by flooding the reward system with dopamine, keeping people addicted and wanting more.To get the sensation time and time again, someone must seek out that pleasure, which is where addictions come in. You can obviously be addicted to drugs, but sex and fatty foods? Scientists are saying yes. These pleasures can take control of people's lives and lead to plenty of health risks. Obesity and drug-related health problems are serious issues in today's society.

An experiment was conducted on rats to test addiction to food. They were so succumbed by the pleasure fatty foods brought, that they suffered through the pain of electrical shocks to their feet just to enjoy this pleasure. If you did not know, rats and humans use the same neurochemicals to control the same components of the brain. The study actually showed the rats becoming so addicted to the food that they would have rather starved than eat anything else. An explanation to this would be the Nucleus Accumbens and the Ventral Tegmental Area that control the release of dopamine. Dopamine is produced in excess amounts when high-calorie foods are consumed in comparison to that of your average calorie foods.

I'm going to keep it safe and wrap it up now. The limbic system, or reward circuit, is a series of components in the brain that work as a pleasure center. It's what gives us pleasure and the need to obtain the pleasure. This is done through neurochemicals in the brain. Two of the more important chemicals being opioids, which give the pleasurable feeling; and dopamine, which keeps us going back for more. Our pleasure center works the same when it comes to drugs, bacon, or even orgasms. It may be at different levels of intensity, however, they are still similar in brain chemistry. I would like to say bacon causes orgasms, but I can't, which may be a good thing. Too much pleasure at one time, I would think.

FUN FACT: Pigs are known to have the longest orgasms, lasting up to 30 minutes long. 

 "5 Warning Signs of Heroin Use." Addictions.com. Web. 27 Oct. 2013.

Freeman, Shanna. "What Happens in the Brain during an Orgasm?" HowStuffWorks. Web. 26 Oct. 2013.

Kirkey, Sharon. "Bacon and Cheesecake Have an Effect on the Brain Similar to Heroin and Cocaine: Study - AR15.COM." Bacon and Cheesecake Have an Effect on the Brain Similar to Heroin and Cocaine: Study - AR15.COM. National Post, Oct. 2005. Web. 26 Oct. 2013. (originally posted on National Post)

Marnia. "Your Brain On Sex." Reuniting. 24 June 2005. Web. 26 Oct. 2013.

Negative0. "Push Button. Receive Bacon." Meh.ro. 08 Nov. 2010. Web. 27 Oct. 2013.

Is Bigger Really Better?

Ask any of the lady biologists out there and I am sure they will tell you that bigger is better. However, most men would argue that it isn't necessarily the size that matters, instead it depends on how well the animal forages. I mean lets face it, survival of the fittest doesn't segregate by size, but I'm still thinking the women are on to something here. Let's take for instance our scaly (possibly feathery) friends the dinosaurs.

Dinosaurs walked the earth for thousands of years, and grew to massive sizes. For example, the well known Apatosaurus (formerly the brontosaurus), grew to 35 meters in length and up to 26 tons. This creature isn't even the biggest sauropod discovered. The Argentinosaurus grew upwards of 100 tons and reached lengths of about 40 meters and still didn't top the charts. Its not to be taken lightly, the incredible size these organisms grew to become. Now here comes the big "BUT." But why did these sauropods grow to such great sizes. What is the reason they evolved to tower in their environments. We know not all dinosaurs grew to such great stature so what is the reasoning?

Like most hypotheses there are plenty out there including gravity differences from then and now; how dinosaurs used the energy they consumed; and finally a coevolution between predator and prey. All of which I feel deserve a little discussion in this post.

First off, millions of years ago the Earth was smaller. Geologists have discovered this and I wouldn't argue in opposition. A smaller earth would therefore have a lower gravitational pull. Another valid point that I would not contend against. I just do not believe that dinosaurs would grow to such enormous sizes just because of less gravity. I am going to leave it at that because I think the other to hypotheses are far more likely.

The second theory has to do with the way these sauropods expended there energy. During the Mesozoic area the environment was abundant in plants to sustain large animals. Sauropods were able to obtain immense amounts of energy in the "all you can eat buffet" around them. Now I also want to add about the 'heated' debate on wether or not dinosaurs were warm or cold blooded. One man, a Dr. Brian K. McNab from the University of Florida, is suggesting a homeothermic body climate for dinosaurs. What this means is that dinosaurs were neither warm blooded or cold blooded but somewher in between. A warm blooded animal, humans and other mammals, must use the energy the consumed to keep themselves warm. Cold blooded animals, such as amphibians and reptiles, has their heat regulated by the environment around them which fluctuates and energy is used to regulate this. So the idea that dinosaurs have a homeothermic body climate would mean that the energy they consumed could be used for growth. This would account for why some dinosaurs were able to grow so big.

The last popular theory is that of coevolution between predator and prey. This is a classic case of
evolution that could explain the increased size of dinosaurs. The easiet prey for a predator would be the smallest and weakest. With these small, weak dinosaurs out of the picture the larger, more powerful dinosaurs would breed to produce large, and powerful offspring. Likewise, the predators ability to attack its prey comes from the fact that they can take their prey down. This would mean that if a predator was not big enough or strong enough to take its prey down then it will not be getting a meal and most likely die off .This leaves the larger predators who could hunt and feast to breed and produce offspring that is bigger and more powerful. This coevolution goes back and forth creating dinosuars in massive sizes.

Like I said these are all hypotheses, backed up by some scientific facts of course, which is why they are such popular ideas. Although some seem more likely than others, none of these have solid evidence to prove them correct. It's completely possible that all were factors in the growth of dinosaurs, but it is just as plausible that not one of these factors contributed. Discovery is what motivates many scientists and I am sure more ideas have and will come about as to why these creatures grew so big.

For those wondering what the largest dinosaur ever discovered is, it is the Amphicoelias. This massive sauropod has been found at lengths of up to 60 meters and a mass of around 220 tons. In case it isn't obvious that is BIG.

"Was Weaker Gravity Responsible for Larger Dinosaur Size?" Earic.com (n.d.): n. pag. 27 Feb. 2013. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.

Rettner, Rachael. "How Dinosaurs Got So Big." LiveScience.com. LiveScience, 06 July 2009. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.

"Why Were Dinosaurs so Big?" Dino Dinosaurs. N.p., 02 Dec. 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.

Doggie Style

Doggie style. Do our canine friends, the dogs, deserve all the credit here? Do we humans learn from dogs just as the dogs learn from us? I believe you biology/history buffs out there will enjoy evolutionary history of man's best friend. Let's narrow things down a bit: The kingdom, Animalia; phylum, Chordata; class, Mammalia; order, Carnivora; family, Canidae; and finally the genus, Canis. "Where does this leave us?" you might ask...well this would be the split between familiaris (dog) and lupus (wolf). Dogs and wolves are not only similar physically, but they also have a few behavioral characteristics between the two. For example, they are very social animals. I'm not saying you should start a conversation with a grey wolf anytime soon, but they live in packs for a reason. Dogs don't necessarily work together for the hunt like their cousins, the wolves, would. In fact, they may fight each other off just to get a dead bird. Dogs, however, work a little better with humans. Their domestication is the big separator between grey wolves and dogs.


Their similarities are not a coincidence as some of you may know. In fact, all dogs that we know and love today come from the grey wolf. This is just the beginning of dog ancestry. So where do the grey wolves come from? Well, wolves and dogs, along with jackals, foxes and coyotes are all a part of the group called the Canids. Canids were much different back 35 million years ago. Their were more than 40 species ranging in their morphology. Some look like hyenas, others like cats, and even a few were more like bears. The carnivorous family, which includes the dogs, goes back at least another 20 million years. The animal I am speaking about is none other than the Miacis. The Miacis were a very diverse species ranging in shape and size but for the most part, had a dog-like appearance to them. They were most likely forest dwellers, feeding on insects, eggs and even small mammals. So, in case you haven't realized, we may need to start changing the name of doggie style to Miacis-style. A little much, I would agree, but it's only fair considering they were around first.

Miacis

 Now that we found out how it started, let's recap quickly: Miacis was the early ancestors to the group of carnivores, the canids, from which the grey wolves come from and are the ancestors to all domesticated dogs. This brings us back to about 15,000 years ago when experts believed wolves and dogs separated. (By "separation," I mean they became domesticated.) It's up for debate on how this domestication of dogs all started. Some believe man hunted dog as a food source and took home the litters of puppies to raise and train. Others think it was the dog that would tolerate the humans enough to sneak around their settlements and eat the scraps. Either way, it's easy to see that both man and dog have benefited from this relationship. Not only were the dogs getting shelter and food from man, but the dogs act similarly to the way many dogs do today. Some were guard dogs, protecting the home from predators, not to mention they were already the best hunters and could hear prey miles away, which allows man to hunt more easily. This connection between humans and dogs began happening all over the world in a short time frame. Dogs are a diverse species and have evolved to adapt to just about any environment.

References

"Dog." Life Of Dog. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2013.

"Dog Wallpaper 18." Wallpapermint. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2013.

"Miacis (extinct Mammal Genus)." Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2013.

Crivello, Jacqueline. "Timber Wolves." National Geographic. National Geographic Society, 13 Jan. 2011. Web. 14 Oct. 2013.

Rose, Autumn L. "The Differences and Similarities Between Dogs and Wolves."EzineArticles. SparkNET, n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2013.

Strauss, Bob. "Prehistoric Dogs - The Story of Dog Evolution." About.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2013.

White, Simon. "One Man and His Dog." Flickr. Yahoo!, 27 Sept. 2010. Web. 14 Oct. 2013.