It may not come as a surprise but the world as a whole is getting richer. Some people have more disposable(可支配的) income to spend on luxuries such as holidays, cars, TVs and smartphones. Recent data has shown that the number of people living in extreme poverty(贫穷) has halved in recent decades. So should we celebrate the fact that more of us now have a better standard of living?

    Maybe not. Whilst the gap between rich and poor in some countries is narrowing, there is still a lot of inequality in other places-some people have a lot of money and opportunities and others don't. A recent report by Oxfam and Credit Suisse revealed how divided many of us are when it comes to wealth. A lot of the money in the world is in the hands of very few people. In fact, 48% of global wealth is owned by the richest 1% of the population.

    But some countries are attempting to reduce this inequality and make the poor, less poor. According to David Bryer from Oxfam, Brazil has been taking "some really sensible measures-measures around having more progressive(逐步发展的) tax, around investing in a higher minimum wage and investing in central public services." Having a higher minimum wage, can help people eat better and seek a better education. And more people with more money buy more things-and factories can produce more. In turn, a factory which produces more will need more workers. So, more jobs are created.

    Other wealthy individuals are doing their bit to help reduce inequality. Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, earned a lot of money from his company but when he retired, he and his wife Melinda, created a foundation to help the poor. He thinks that rich people should, of course, pay their taxes but he also advises that they should all "look at taking their wealth and being philanthropic, both in their own country and to help the global poorest."

    Bill Gates feels that giving money to help poor people is "fulfilling". But if other super-rich people don't want to experience this fulfilment then, according to Oxfam, very soon the wealthiest 1% will soon own more money than the rest of the world's population.

    Eating spicy foods frequently may be tied to a slightly lower risk of an earlier death, according to a new study. However, more research is needed to confirm the link, experts say.

    The researchers found that the people in the study who ate spicy foods one or two days a week were 10 percent less likely to die during the study, compared with those who ate spicy foods less than once a week, according to the study published today(Aug. 4) in the journal The BMJ. Moreover, the people in the study who ate spicy foods three or more days a week were 14 percent less likely to die during the study, compared with those who ate spicy foods less than once a week.

    However, the study was observational, and so it is too early to tell whether there is a causal relationship between eating spicy food and lower mortality, said study author Lu Qi, an associate professor at Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts. "We definitely need more data from other populations," Qi told Live Science. “The researchers don't know why exactly the consumption of spicy food may be linked to lower mortality, but previous research on cells and animals has suggested several possible mechanisms,” Qi said.

    “It is unclear whether the observed associations are the direct result of spicy food intake, or whether spicy foods are simply a marker for other beneficial but unmeasured dietary components(成分),” said Nita Forouhi, a nutritional expect. At this point, researchers don't know for sure whether eating spicy foods can have a beneficial effect on human health and mortality, Forouhi wrote. "Future research is needed to make sure whether spicy food consumption has the potential to improve health and reduce mortality directly, or if it is merely a marker of other dietary and lifestyle factors," she said.

    When we think about happiness, we usually think of something surprising and unexpected, a top great delight.

    For a child, happiness has a magic quality. I remember playing police and robbers in the woods, getting a speaking part in the school play. Of course, kids also experience lows, but their delight at tops of pleasure is easily seen, such as winning a race or getting a new bike.

    For teenagers, or people under 20, the idea of happiness changes. Suddenly it's conditional on such things as excitement, love, and popularity. I can still feel the pain of not being invited to a party that almost everyone else was going to. I also recall the great happiness of being invited at another event to dance with a very handsome young man.

    In adulthood the things that bring great joy — birth, love, marriage — also bring responsibility and the risk of loss. Love may not last; loved ones die. For adults, happiness is complex.

    My dictionary explains “happy” as “lucky” or “ fortunate”, but I think a better explanation of happiness is “ the ability to enjoy something”. The more we can enjoy what we have, the happier we are. It's easy for us not to notice the pleasure we get from loving and being loved, the company of friends, the freedom to love where we please, and even good health. Nowadays, with so many choices and much pleasure, we have turned happiness into one more thing we have. We think we own the right to have it, which makes us extremely unhappy. So we try hard to get it and consider it to be the same as wealth and success, without noticing that the people who have those things aren't necessarily happier.

    While happiness may be more complex for us, the answer is the same as ever. Happiness isn't about what happens to us. It's the ability to find a positive for every negative, and view a difficulty as a challenge. Don't be sad for what we don't have, but enjoy what we do possess.

Summer Camps

    We Brits love the idea of a real Christmas tree but not so many of us like the realities of dragging (拖拽) a 7ft Norway Spruce through the house and leaving needles all over the place.

    If you count yourself among the reluctant group, then it may be time to go fake (假的) . After all, buying an artificial Christmas tree needn't mean accepting defeat. There's a huge range of choices and sizes, including pre-lit trees, which will save you the frustration of trying to string your own lights.

    Another big advantage of choosing an artificial Christmas tree is cost: artificial trees can last for decades, so they work out cheaper than paying for a real tree every year. Like now retailers (零售商) are offering great deals at the moment: at Tesco, there's 25 percent off artificial Christmas trees. Meanwhile, you can take advantage of the current 3 for 2 offer at Argos to fill your house with not one, not two, but three. You may perhaps partner up with friends who are also looking to invest.

    Of course, keep your tree for years and years and it will start to pay you back in terms of carbon footprint; however, a “real” one will always have to be transported, used and dealt with every year.

    Are there any downsides? Yes. You might think you're saving the planet, but a fake tree is actually not an environmentally friendly option. Most are made in factories in Asia, resulting in some serious air miles to reach the UK. They're made from metal and plastic, and many end their lives in landfill (垃圾填埋).

    Another problem with a fake tree is that they don't look very natural and of course you won't get that lovely pine smell either. You'll also need to find space for storage.

    Imagine this: You're at the movies seeing the latest box-office hit. The leading actor chases down the film's bad guy before winning over the beautiful leading lady. What does he do next? He sucks on a cigarette.

    What's wrong with this picture? Doesn't the beautiful woman see her hero's yellow teeth? Doesn't she smell his smoky breath? And wouldn't the good guy have trouble chasing, since smoking causes a person to cough?

    But you don't see any of that when someone smokes cigarettes in the movies. And there is a lot of smoking in movies. Actors light up in more than 50 percent of youth-rated (G, PG, PG-13) movies, according to the American Legacy Foundation, which aims to put an end to smoking among young people. That means that Hollywood is showing 14 billion images of smoking to young people every year.

    All that exposure to on-screen smoking can influence teens to smoke. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) argues that 44 percent of teens who begin smoking do so because they've seen smoking in movies. The CDC reports that teens are two to three times more likely to start smoking after seeing repeated smoking scenes in movies than teens who are lightly exposed to smoking in movies.

    Several organizations are working to remove smoking in youth-rated movies. And adults are not the only ones who care about this issue. Many teens are actively involved. Livia Clandorf, 16, of Chatham, New York, is a member of Reality Check, an organization that educates teens about what it considers to be the manipulative(巧妙处理的) practices of tobacco companies. Livia participated in an event called a "movie stomp(跺脚)". Reality Check rents out a movie theater and screens a youth-rated film that shows smoking, they stomp their feet and show disapproval by shouting “boo”.