My husband and I had been married nearly twenty-two years when I acquired Stevens-Johnson syndrome, a disorder where my immune system (免疫系统) responded to a virus by producing painful blisters (水疱). Although my long-term evaluation was good, I, who had been so fiercely independent, rapidly became absolutely helpless.

    My husband, Scott, stepped up to the plate, taking care of kids and cooking dinners. He also became my personal caretaker, applying the medicine to all of my blisters because my hands couldn't do the job. Needless to say, I had negative emotions, bouncing from embarrassment to shame caused by total reliance on someone other than myself.

    At one point when I had mentally and physically hit bottoms I remember thinking that Scott must somehow love me more than I could ever love him. With my illness, he had become the stronger one, and I the weaker one. And this disturbed me.

    I recovered from my illness, but I couldn't seem to recover from the thought that I loved my husband less than he loved me. This seeming distinction in our love continued to annoy me for the year following my illness.

    Then recently Scott and I went on a long bike ride. He's an experienced cyclist; I'm quite the green hand. At one point with a strong headwind and sharp pain building in my tired legs, I really thought I couldn't go any further. Seeing me struggle, Scott pulled in front of me and yelled over his shoulder, “Stay close behind me.” As I fell into the draft of his six- foot- three- inch frame and followed his steps, I discovered that my legs quit burning and I was able to catch my breath. My husband was pulling me along again. At this very moment I woke up to what I now believe: during these and other tough times, love has the opportunity to become stronger when one partner learns to lean on the other.

    I pray my husband will always be strong and healthy. But if he should ever become the struggling one, whether on a bike ride or with an illness, I trust I'll be ready to call out to him: Stay close behind me-my turn to pull you along.

    I'd always dreamed of exploring Africa, ever since I read my first Tarzan (《人猿泰山》)comic as a child. Finally, in 2004, to celebrate my 60th birthday, I went to Tanzania to experience a safari （东非游猎）and climb Mount Kilimanjaro, the highest mountain in Africa. Seated next to me on the flight was Tanzania's minister of water and wildlife development. We talked for thousands of miles, and he arranged me to visit a school. When I toured the school, I was shocked. The leaky (漏的) roofs turned the dirt floors into mud during the rainy season, and the walls couldn't keep out the heat, cold or bugs (小昆虫). The school was in need of all material goods, but the kids possessed great human spirit.

    It broke my heart that these children had to struggle to survive, so I asked the headmaster what it would cost to feed them. As little as 20 cents per child per day, he told me. Immediately I got home, I founded Kids of Kilimanjaro. Since then we've grown to provide hot lunches for nearly 13,000 schoolchildren every day. The free lunch program has eased a major problem the youngsters face.

    I know a good education could really make a difference in these children's lives. My parents always stressed the importance of education. I paid my own way through college in Tokyo by teaching English to students and businesspeople. After attending university I moved to San Francisco, when I was 25 years old. In 1978 I realized my American dream when I founded my own company. My success all started with a good education.

    It's amazing that something as simple as a nutritious lunch can change and enrich so many lives. Giving young people a better, healthier life can inspire them to go all the way through college and lead a movement that transforms their country.

    Here are some schools in Southeast England. Find out if you are interested in any of them.

    After many considerations and years of heated argument, gray wolves were brought back to Yellowstone National Park. Fourteen wolves were caught in Canada and transported to the park. By last year, the Yellowstone wolf population had grown to more than 170 wolves.

    Gray wolves once were seen here and there in the Yellowstone area and much of the continental United States, but they were gradually displaced by human development. By the 1920s, wolves had practically disappeared from the Yellowstone area. They went farther north into the deep forests of Canada, where there were fewer humans around.

    The disappearance of the wolves had many unexpected results. Deer and elk populations — major food sources for the wolf — grew rapidly. These animals consumed large amounts of vegetation (植被), which reduced plant diversity in the park. In the absence of wolves, coyote populations also grew quickly. The coyotes killed a large percentage of the park's red foxes, and completely drove away the park's beavers.

    As early as 1966, biologists asked the government to consider reintroducing wolves to Yellowstone Park. They hoped that wolves would be able to control the elk and coyote problems. Many farmers opposed the plan because they feared that wolves would kill their farm animals or pets.

    The government spent nearly 30 years coming up with a plan to reintroduce the wolves. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service carefully monitors and manages the wolf packs in Yellowstone. Today, the debate continues over how well the gray wolf is fitting in at Yellowstone. Elk, deer, and coyote populations are down, while beavers and red foxes have made a comeback. The Yellowstone wolf project has been a valuable experiment to help biologists decide whether to reintroduce wolves to other parts of the country as well.

    Sitting has been called the new smoking for its supposed Public health risks, especially for people with sitting down office jobs. Over the past 15 years or so sitting has been connected with heart disease and diabetes (糖尿病). But is sitting really that risky?

    In our latest study we examined if not only the total amount of sitting, but different types of sitting, were connected with developing type 2 diabetes. We wanted to see if there was any difference among sitting watching TV, sitting at work, or sitting at home but not watching TV.

    We studied sitting habits of 4. 811 middle-aged people, who didn't have diabetes or heart problems at the start of the study. Over the next 13 years, 402 people developed diabetes. Once we considered obesity (AE RF), Physical activity, and other things that may develop type 2 diabetes, neither total sitting time, sitting at work nor sitting at home but not watching TV were connected with developing diabetes. We found only a weak connection with the time spent sitting watching TV and an increased risk of developing diabetes.

    This is different from the results of five older TV studies that showed a stronger connection. But hardly any of the included studies mentioned obesity, a major cause of diabetes.

    For people who are physically inactive, though, the story's different. Two recent studies show the total time spent sitting a day is connected with developing diabetes, but only in people who are physically inactive or both physically inactive and obese.

    That's not the whole story. At least two things determine if sitting is a risk factor in its own right: the type and situation of sitting.

    For example, sitting down at work isn't strongly connected with long-term health risks, Perhaps that's because higher position jobs needs more sitting, and higher socioeconomic (社会经济) position is connected with a lower risk of disease. It's a different case for sitting watching TV, the type of sitting most possibly connected with long-term health risks. People who watch a lot of TV tend to (a) be of lower socioeconomic positions, unemployed, have poorer mental (精神上的) health, eat unhealthy foods and face more unhealthy food advertising.

    Studies have shown most people fail to realize how much time they spend on their smart­phones each day.

    Frank and Amelia's family were put to a test, using a free app called "Moment­screen Time Tracker". The Vascellaros—Frank, Amelia, 14­year­old twins Frankie and Joe, and 17­year­old Sam—all said they did not really know they were spending so much time on their phones each day.

    "Honestly, I don't feel like I'm on my phone a lot," Amelia Vascellaro said. Amelia was on her phone far less often than Frank, according to the app. While Amelia spent about an hour per day on the phone, Frank spent close to four hours on his phone—which came as a shock to him. The children's times varied but they often spent more than a couple of hours on the phone as well.

    Minneapolis­based Dr Kirsten Lind Seal sees phone usage come up a lot among families. Lind Seal said many family members' phone use has become problematic.

    "If we hear more than once, 'Do you have to be on your phone right now? Can you please put your phone down? Did you hear what I said?' it may be a sign that it is negatively influencing our family relationships and our daily lives," she said.

    Lind Seal said actually paying attention to how much time one spends on the phone is a good first step in deciding when to put it down.

    She asks parents to encourage more face­to­face communication for teens and young adults as they continue developing their social and emotional skills. "What we find is that we are really losing out on empathy—the ability to understand other people's feelings and problems——when we spend a lot of time on our smart­phones to communicate with other people she said.