If you are taking vitamin supplements to reduce your risk of heart disease or cancer, a group of health experts want you to know that those vitamins may actually increase your risk of cancer.

The US Preventive Services Task Force came to this conclusion after reviewing dozens of studies. Nearly half of adults in the US take at least one vitamin or mineral supplement on a regular basis. These pills are advertised as a way to promote general health. In some cases, producers promote them as cancer fighters and heart protectors.

    Studies in animals and in laboratory dishes suggest that oxidative(氧化性的) stress contributes to diseases like cancer and heart disease. If so, there is a reason to believe that antioxidants—including beta－carotene, vitamins A, C, and E—could be useful as preventive medicines.

    But when the Task Force examined the medical evidence on vitamins, it found "inadequate(不充分的) evidence" to support the claims that vitamin and mineral supplements benefit healthy adults.

    "Cardiovascular(心血管的) disease and cancer have a significant health impact in America, and we all want to find ways to prevent these diseases，" Dr. Virginia Moyer, who heads the Task Force, said in a statement. But so far, she added, the medical evidence does not show that taking vitamins is helpful in this aspect.

    However, the Task Force did find "adequate evidence" that people with a raised risk for lung cancer actually increase their risk further by taking beta－carotene, a precursor of vitamin A.

The Task Force recommendations of taking vitamins regularly apply to healthy adults aged 50 and older who don't have "special nutritional needs". The advice does not apply to children, women who are pregnant or may become pregnant, people with chronic illnesses, or people who have to take supplements because they can't get all their essential nutrients from their diet.

    Being crazy about perfection(完美) among young people has risen by more than 30 per-cent over the last three decades, a study has found.

    Many of them believe that their environment is very demanding and that others judge them strictly, according to analysis of data from more than 40,000 British, Canadian and American university students from 1989 t0 2018.

    The research, carried out by the University of Bath and York St John University, found that the extent to which young people attach an irrational importance on being perfect, hold unrealistic expectations of themselves and are highly self-critical has increased by 10 percent when compared to previous generations. The authors suggested their findings point to the impact of three decades of neoliberalism (新自由主义) forcing young people to compete against one another.

    Lead author Dr Thomas Curran from the University of Bath's Department for Health said he hoped organizations responsible for guarding the welfare of young people, such as schools, universities, and policymakers who shape the environments in which these organizations operate, would resist the promotion of competitiveness at the expense of young people's psycho-logical health.

    He said, "Rising rates of perfectionism highlighted in this study correspond to three decades of neoliberalism, which has forced young people to compete against each other in an in-creasingly demanding social and economic environment." The study also found the extent to which young people impose (迫使) unrealistic standards on those around them and evaluate others critically has increased by 16 percent.

    The researches defined perfectionism as a combination of extremely high personal standards and overly harsh self-criticism, leading to psychological difficulties.

    Co-author Dr Andrew Hill of York St John University added, "The increase in mental health difficulties among young people makes for a setting for our findings. The higher level of perfectionism may be a key contributing factor to such difficulties. Young people are trying to find ways to cope with increasing demands being placed on them and they are responding by becoming more perfect towards themselves and others."

    If you are heading for Paris this year, be sure to include at least one of these shopping malls in your schedule.

    Au Printemps

    Tel: 01133014282

    Located near the Paris Opera, this huge store is well-known for household goods as well as its fashion. The store also offers many services to overseas visitors, including shipping, translation and a personal shopping service. Au Printemps, whose name means springtime, hosts several free fashion shows each week. The store's beauty department has one of the world's largest selections of perfumes（香水）.

    Galeries Lafayette

    Tel: 01133014283

    The Galeries Lafayette was built in 1906. It is as much fun to look at as it is to shop in this 10-storey shopping palace. In fact, the flagship store is the second most visited attraction in Paris, after the Louvre Museum. This shopping palace specializes in women's clothing. Make sure to take in the view from the tea shop on the top floor; it's well worth the visit.

    Le Bon Marche

    Tel: 01133014439

    This stylish Left Bank department store was Paris' first such store. Designed by Gustave Eiffel, Le Bon Marche is particularly known for its food hall, its wedding shops and its selection of modern clothes.

    La Forum des Halles

    Tel: 01133014476

    This modern, underground shopping center was built in 1979. La Forum des Halles, the three-storey-tall shopping center offers everything from souvenirs to haute couture（高级女子时装）to entertainment, such as first-run movies and street performers. The shopping center is attached to the busy La Halle-Chatelet metro station and can be easily reached from all over Paris.

    From Madrid to Buenos Aires to Panama City to Lisbon, President Xi Jinping has tirelessly promoted the building of a community of shared future for mankind, and the Belt and Road Initiative(倡议) as a means to achieve that.

    But all don't see it that way. While some are quick to see its positive potentials, other countries insist on viewing it skeptically. There have been the usual doubts about the intention behind, although the mysterious threat they speak of is one they seem unable to explain clearly.

    To some of them, it is a vague assumption that investments from China are potential "debt traps" that call for extreme caution or "threats to national security". That is why the business combinations involving Chinese companies which would be mutually(相互地)beneficial have hit the rocks. The Chinese telecommunications technology giant Huawei, for instance, has found the doors to the 5G telecommunications markets of advanced countries closed to it on "national security" grounds. Likewise, the European Union has agreed on a framework regulating foreign investment(投资) particularly those from China on the same account.

    Even as Chinese and Portuguese leaders discuss bilateral(双边的)cooperation under the Belt and Road, there is no lack of concern about "Chinas influence". But existing EU rules do not forbid Lisbon from seeking such a partnership. If Lisbon sees no harm from foreign investment, no outsider is in a position to prevent it from making a choice in its own best interests.

    Portuguese Prime Minister Antonio Costa has reminded EU decision-makers of his country's desire for foreign investment, and advised the latter to avoid taking "the path of protectionism". It was a timely reminder.

    Facing the challenges in today's world, China and the countries that have embraced the Belt and Road are convinced it is the way to common development and the world's lasting peace and stability.

    A scientist working at her lab bench and a six-old baby playing with his food might seem to have little in common. After all, the scientist is engaged in serious research to uncover the very nature of the physical world, and the baby is, well, just playing…right? Perhaps, but some developmental psychologists have argued that this "play" is more like a scientific investigation than one might think.

Take a closer look at the baby playing at the table. Each time the bowl of rice is pushed over the table edge, it falls in the ground—and, in the process, it belongs out important evidence about how physical objects interact; bowls of rice do not flood in mid-sit, but require support to remain stable. It is likely that babies are not born knowing the basic fact of the universe; nor are they ever clearly taught it. Instead, babies may form an understanding of object support through repeated experiments and then build on this knowledge to learn even more about how objects interact. Though their ranges and tools differ, the baby's investigation and the scientist's experiment appear to share the same aim(to learn about the natural world ), overall approach (gathering direct evidence from the world), and logic (are my observations what I expected?).

Some psychologists suggest that young children learn about more than just the physical world in this way—that they investigate human psychology and the rules of language using similar means. For example, it may only be through repeated experiments, evidence gathering, and finally overturning a theory, that a baby will come to accept the idea that other people can have different views and desires from what he or she has, for example, unlike the child, Mommy actually doesn't like Dove chocolate.

Viewing childhood development as a scientific investigation throws on how children learn, but it also offers an inspiring look at science and scientists. Why do young children and scientists seem to be so much alike? Psychologists have suggested that science as an effort —the desire to explore, explain, and understand our world—is simply something that comes from our babyhood. Perhaps evolution provided human babies with curiosity and a natural drive to explain their worlds, and adult scientists simply make use of the same drive that served them as children. The same cognitive systems that make young children feel good about feel good about figuring something out may have been adopted by adult scientists. As some psychologists put it, "It is not that children are little scientists but that scientists are big children."

Recess (课间休息) time has been dropping for many children in America. This drop began the same year the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was passed. The law aimed to make American education system more internationally competitive by introducing achievement goals for schools. And the goals are gauged (评定) by standardized tests in reading and math. If schools missed their achievement goals, they could be in trouble, including loss of funding.

It's no surprise that teachers have felt the pressure to make sure students perform well on standardized tests. When educators are facing pay cuts, loss of funding to their school and perhaps even the loss of their jobs, it's no wonder that they started questioning if recess was a waste of time. This pressure to bring even more learning into the school day is especially felt by underperforming, low-income schools that are already short of funding.

It may seem strange to send kids out to play when they're falling below state standards, but getting outside for unstructured (散乱的) play may be more helpful than keeping kids in the classroom all day.

"Moving, running and playing outdoors freely have great influence on children. These activities play a role in children's abilities to focus and control themselves throughout the day," Marie Conti says, a famous educator of early childhood education. The mind cannot be educated without using the body. Learning is a whole of thinking and moving," she added.

Recess time makes it possible for children to learn something they can't get in class. Asking other kids to play, explaining the rules of a complex game and ending arguments are all important life lessons that children can only learn if they're given time to play. When something unhappy happens, children can find a way to get back to having fun themselves.

The physical activities kids take part in during recess can also reduce stress levels and allow children to feel more relaxed. In an education system that. Continues to place higher expectations on children to perform to a certain standard, less stress is just what the doctor ordered.