Blind tasting is a very strange activity. Contrary to what many people imagine, it has nothing to do with blindfolds. It involves tasting a wine without seeing the label and it can deliver shocking surprises. I tasted seven champagnes (香槟) blind with a group of professionals recently. There was a shock when they discovered the wine most of them preferred carried a label they regarded as their least favorite. That sort of result is especially common with champagne, the most image-driven rather than quality-driven wine of all. But it happens all the time when wine is tasted blind.

    Because I'm interested in how wines really taste instead of how I think they should, I taste wine blind as often as I can, especially when assessing similar young wines. But blind tasting when you know absolutely nothing about the wine in front of you is something completely different. The most difficult Master of Wine exams include three sessions during which you have a dozen glasses in front of you and nothing more helpful than a printed exam paper asking you to identify each wine as closely as possible, and assess its quality.

    Now that the MW is behind me, I taste wine completely blind only very rarely, and never in public. So my blind tastings these days are round the dinner table with good friends and once a year when I act as a judge, with Hugh Johnson, in the Oxford vs Cambridge wine-tasting competition. This is the most extraordinary match, always held before the Boat Race but taken just as seriously nowadays. This year's taste-off took place at the end of last month, as usual in the Oxford and Cambridge Club on Pall Mall in London.  

There is plenty of complaints about how social media-texting in particular—may be harming children's social and intellectual development. But a new study suggests that constant instant messaging (IM'ing) and texting among teens may also provide benefits, particularly for those who are introverted (内向的).

British researchers studied instant messages exchanged by 231 teens, aged 14 to 18. All of the participants were “regular” or “extensive” IM'ers. In the U. S., two thirds of teens use instant messaging services regularly, with a full third messaging at least once every day.

The researchers analyzed 150 conversations in the study, and reported the results in the journal Computers in Human Behavior. In 100 of these chats, the study participant began IM'ing while in a negative emotional state such as sadness, distress or anger. The rest were conversations begun when the participant was feeling good or neutral. After the chat, participants reported about a 20% reduction in their distress—not enough to completely eliminate it, but enough to leave them feeling better than they had before reaching out.

“Our findings suggest that IM'ing between distressed adolescents and their peers may provide emotional relief and consequently contribute to their well-being,” the authors write, noting that prior research has shown that people assigned to talk to a stranger either in real life or online improved their mood in both settings, but even more with IM. And people who talk with their real-life friends online also report feeling closer to them than those who just communicate face-to-face, implying a strengthening of their bond.

    Why would digital communication do better than human contact? The reasons are complex, but may have something to do with the fact that users can control expression of sadness and other emotions via IM without exposing emotional elements like tears that some may consider as embarrassing or sources of discomfort. Studies also show that the anonymity (匿名) of writing on a device blankets the users in a sense of safety that may cause people to feel more comfortable in sharing and discussing their deepest and most authentic feelings. The research has shown that expressive writing itself can vent the stress and provide a sense of relief—and doing so, knowing that your words are reaching a sympathetic friend, may provide even more comfort and potentially be therapeutic(治愈的). Researchers also found that introverted participants reported more relief from IM conversations when they were distressed than extroverts did. Susan Cain, author of Quiet wrote recently for TIME: Introverts are often overfilled with thoughts and care deeply for their friends, family and colleagues. But even the most socially skilled introverts sometimes long for a free pass from socializing or talking on the phone. This is what the Internet offers: the chance to connect—but in measured doses and from behind a screen.

Like many Czechs (捷克人), Lukáš Berný, 38, enjoys going out to the pub with his friends for conversation and a few beers. "I don't drink every day," he says. "I think about three times a week. When I go out, I usually have five to six beers at a time, about the same as my friends." The beers are half-liters, or 500ml each.

    If a half-liter of four-percent beer contains 16g of pure alcohol（酒精）, Berný and his friends are drinking 80 to 96 grams of pure alcohol on each outing. The Czech Republic's National Institute of Public Health, however, suggests that men take in fewer than 24g of pure alcohol per day; women, fewer than 16g.

Medical experts in over 40 countries around the world have agreed that drinking "too much" can cause harm. What they can't seem to agree upon is just how much is "too much." National safety levels are quite different, from a limit of 10g a day in the Netherlands to Denmark's 60g.

There are a number of reasons for this. Dr. Larry Altshuler, a medicine expert for the Cancer Treatment Centers in Tulsa, explains that while everything is based on research, "Every group, race, and gender responds to alcohol differently."

Also, researchers aren't using the same models or methods. He adds, "It can be like apples and oranges. How do you measure alcohol? Units, drinks, bottles or cans? What's the alcohol content（含量）? Is it light or heavy?" While a half-liter of four percent beer contains 16g of pure alcohol, a half-liter of five percent lager contains 20g.

Constance Scharff, a director of Addiction Research at Cliffside Malibu Treatment Center in California, says she believes the reason "is largely cultural." "But the evidence is clear that the more you drink, the more likely you are to develop alcohol-related health problems."

The Cost of Higher Education

    Individuals (个人) should pay for their higher education.

    In general, a university education is of huge and direct benefit to the individual. Whether they are majoring in geography, geometry or any other subject, graduates earn more than non-graduates. Meanwhile, social mobility is ever more dependent on having a degree. However, only some people have it. So the individual, not the taxpayers should pay for it. There are pressing calls on the resources (资源) of the government. Using taxpayers' money to help small number of people to earn high incomes in the future is not one of them.

    Full government funding (资助) is not very good for universities. Adam Smith worked in a Scottish university whose teachers lived off student fees. He knew and looked down upon 18th-century Oxford, the grand university having much glory, where the academics lived comfortably off the income received from the government. Guaranteed salaries, Smith argued, were the enemy of hard work and when the academics were lazy and incompetent, the students grew similarly lazy in a gradual way.

    If students have to pay for their education, I guess they not only work harder, but also demand more from their teachers and have a better grasp of the subjects. And their teachers have to keep them satisfied. If that means taking teaching seriously, and giving less time to their own research interests, that is surely something to celebrate.

    Many people believe that higher education should be free because it is good for the economy (经济). Many graduates clearly do contribute to national wealth, but so do all the businesses that invest (投资) and create jobs. If you believe that the government should be generous enough to pay for higher education because graduates are economically productive, you should also believe that the government should pay part of business costs. Anyone promising to create jobs should receive a gift of capital（资金） from the government to invest.

    Therefore, it is the individual, not the government who should pay for their university education.

    Who can think of the race between the tortoise and the rabbit when it comes to the greatest races? Sure, that race only took place in ancient Aesop's mind, but while the great modern races can teach us a lot about commitment, perseverance (毅力) and the virtues of having a rather large engine, "The Tortoise and the Rabbit" may tell us everything about animals and even vehicles on this planet.

    In a study published this week, Adrian Bejan, a professor of mechanical engineering, concludes that no one should be surprised that the tortoise wins over the seemingly speedier rabbit. In fact, after analyzing the reported speeds of land-air-and-water-based animals, Bejan concludes that the world's well-known speedsters are actually among the slowest when their movements are averaged out over the course of a lifetime.

    The study builds on Bejan's previous research showing that an animals speed increases with mass regardless of species. And that principle can also be extended to non-living things, like aircraft.

    After studying data from historical airplane models, Bajan noted the speed of each model increased with its size, too. That doesn't sound right. What about the modern jet fighter? How is that relatively small craft not faster than a clumsy large transport plane?

    Again, Bejan harks back to the tortoise. That transport plane spends lots of time in the air, moving regularly across long distances. The fighter jet, on the other hand, may fly across the sky occasionally, but-like the rabbit-it's often found resting on the ground.

    The slow and steady transport plane wins the marathon of life.

    But like so many good stories, Aesop's tale offers even more than a lesson in perseverance.

    At one point, the rabbit asks the tortoise how he expects to win a race at such a slow pace.

    The tortoise—ever focused—doesn't respond But it's the rabbits own words that provide the moment to reflect on, especially in modem times.

    "There is plenty of time to relax," Until there isn't.

Lisinopril

    What is lisinopril? Lisinopril is a medicine to treat high blood pressure. This medicine is only available on prescription. It comes as tablets. It also comes as a liquid for people who find it hard to swallow tablets, but this has to be ordered specially by your doctor.

    Important information

    To make sure lisinopril is safe for you, tell your doctor if you have:

    Heart, liver or kidney problems

    Diabetes (糖尿病)

    Higher levels of potassium (钾) in your blood

    Women who are pregnant can't take the medicine. It could harm the unborn baby.

    How should I take lisinopril?

    Take lisinopril exactly as prescribed by your doctor. Follow all directions on your prescription label. Your doctor may sometimes change your dose (剂量) to make sure you get the best results.

    Drink plenty of water each day while you are taking this medicine.

    Lisinopril can be taken with or without food.

    Your blood pressure needs to be checked often, and you may need frequent blood tests.

    What if I forget to take it?

    If you miss a dose of lisinopril, take it as soon as you remember. If you don't remember until the following day, skip the missed dose. Do not take a double dose to make up for a forgotten one. If you forget doses often, it may help to set an alarm to remind you.

    What should I avoid while taking lisinopril?

    Avoid drinking alcohol, because it can further lower your blood pressure and may increase certain side effects of lisinopril.

    Avoid getting up too fast from a sitting or lying position, or you may feel dizzy. Get up slowly and steady yourself to prevent a fall.