Will it matter if you don't take your breakfast? A short time ago, a test was given in the United States. People of different ages, from 12 to 83, were asked to have a test. During the test, these people were given all kinds of breakfast, and sometimes they got no breakfast at all. Scientists wanted to see how well their bodies worked when they had eaten different kinds of breakfast.

    The results show that if a person eats a right breakfast, he or she will work better than if he or she has no breakfast. If a student has fruit, eggs, bread and milk before going to school, he or she will learn more quickly and listen more carefully in class. The result is opposite to what some people think. Having no breakfast will not help you lose weight. This is because people become so hungry at noon that they eat too much for lunch. They will gain weight instead of losing it. You will lose more weight if you reduce your other meals.

    We have a problem，and the strange thing is that we not only know about it, but also celebrate it. Just today, someone boasted (自夸) to me that she was so busy she's averaged four hours of sleep a night for the last two weeks. She wasn't complaining; she was proud of the fact. She is not alone.

    Why are rational (理性的) people so irrational in their behavior? The answer is that we're in the midst of a bubble (泡沫). I call it “The More Bubble”.

    The nature of bubbles is that something is overvalued until—eventually—the bubble bursts, and we're left wondering why we were so irrational in the first place. The thing we're overvaluing now is the opinion of doing it all, having it all, achieving it all.

    This bubble is being enabled by a combination of three powerful trends: smart phones, social media, and extreme consumerism (消费主义). The result is not just information overload, but opinion overload. We are more aware than at any time in history of what everyone else is doing and, therefore, what we should be doing. In the process, we have been sold a bill of goods: that success means being supermen and superwomen who can get it all done. Of course, we boasted about being busy—it's code for being successful and important.

    And our answer to the problem of more is always more. We need more technology to help us create more technologies. We need to move our workload to free up our own time to do yet even more.

    Luckily, there is a solution to asking for more: asking for less, but better. A growing number of people are making this change. I call these people Essentialists.

    These people are designing their lives around what is essential and removing everything else. These people arrange to have actual weekends (during which they are not working). They create technology-free zones in their homes. They trade time on Facebook with calling those few friends who really matter to them. Instead of running to different meetings, they put space on their plans to get important work done.

    So we have two choices: We can be among the last people caught up in “The More Bubble,” or we can join the growing community of Essentialists and get more of what matters in our one precious life.

    The hemlock(铁杉) trees along the Wappinger Creek, New York, look healthy. However, scientist Gary Lovett says the white balls which provide protection for the bugs are created by a tiny insect. It's hard to believe the tiny bug could kill a tree. However, trees can end up with millions and millions of the pests. When there are that many, it ends up killing the tree.

    The bug from East Asia is slowly killing trees across the USA. The trouble－making bug is just one of many invasive(入侵的) pests that have slipped into the United States. They can hurt other living things in their new home.

    Many invasive pests arrive on wooden pallets piled inside shipping containers. They support and separate goods, and keep them from sliding around. Invasive pests often tunnel into the pallets.  How can we stop pests from riding on pallets? Lovett says new rules are needed. The companies that make pallets don't want more rules. Congress has added an amendment(修正案) in the 2018 Farm Bill to try and prevent this problem. However, Lovett is not hopeful it will make much of a difference. Pallets are checked by inspectors. Many are sprayed with bug－killing pesticide. "I believe in the system，" said Brent McClendon, president of The National Wooden Pallet and Container Association. He also said shipping containers are checked very carefully.

    Still, each year 13 million containers are shipped to the U.S. Each is full of wooden pallets. Lovett says: "Inspectors can't possibly check everything. All it takes are a few bad pallets; we should get rid of wooden pallets." He believes pallets should be made of plastic or eco－composite wood. Eco－composite wood is a mix of wood fiber and plastic. Insects cannot hide into it. One problem is that these choices cost more. They may be worth the extra money, though. Invasive pests cost the U.S. $5 billion a year. Trees don't just die in forests. They also die in cities and our yards. Then, they need to be replaced. That costs money, too.

    Professional athletes pay a high price for their pursuit of excellence and glory. Training to the limit tears muscles and wears out joints. Gymnasts often need hip replacements when barely into middle age. Few footballers make it to the end of their careers with their knees intact.

    But many also run a darker risk: doping—the use of banned athletic performance-enhancing drugs by athletic competitors. The Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang, in South Korea, starts this week in its shadow. Years after whistle-blowers first revealed wholesale (大规模的) doping in Russia, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) at last decided to bar it from taking part. But it has allowed many Russians to compete as individuals. And on the eve of the competition the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) said that 28 others should receive a more tolerant penalty from the IOC, further muffling the anti-doping message.

    Russia's doping is unusual only in its scale and institutional nature. No country or sport is immune. Studies, and an anonymous survey at the World Athletics Championships in 2011, suggest that a third of athletes preparing for big international competitions take banned substances. Yet just 1-2% fail a test each year. Lance Armstrong, a cyclist who won the Tour de France seven times and later admitted to doping all the while, was tested on 250 occasions. The few times he failed, he avoided punishments by claiming he had taken anti-inflammatories (消炎药) for saddle-sores (骑行引起的肌肉酸痛).

    Doping is more sophisticated than when some states used steroids (类固醇) to bulk up athletes. New drugs are designed to be undetectable in a blood or urine sample. Many athletes "blood dope," receiving transfusions or taking a drug that stimulates the production of red blood cells to improve their physical strength. Soviet athletes who were fed steroids suffered a host of serious problems in later life. They were more likely to commit suicide, or to miscarry (流产) or have a disabled child. No one knows what risks those taking new "designer" versions are running. Blood-doping can cause heart attacks; more than a dozen cyclists' deaths have already been linked to it.

    The agencies that set out to stop doping are hugely outclassed. As the argument over punishments on Russia illustrate, they are divided and weak. Most testing is done by national bodies, which may not try very hard to find evidence that would get their own stars banned. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), which oversees them, is packed with officials from national sports federations and the IOC. Their interests are likewise conflicted. Its budget is tiny. The system seems to be designed to look tough but punish only the occasional scapegoat (替罪羊). Honest athletes deserve better.

    Until the 1990s coffee was rarely served in China except at luxury hotels aimed at foreigners. When Starbucks opened its first outlet there in 1999, it was far from clear that the country's avid tea-drinkers would take to such a different-and usually more costly- source of caffeine. Starbucks tried to attract customers unused to coffee's bitter taste by promoting milk and sugar-heavy concoctions(调和) such as Frappuccinos.

    But coffee has become fashionable among the middle class in China. Starbucks now has about 3, 800 outlets in China- more than in any other country outside America. Statista, a business-intelligence portal(门户网站), says the roast coffee market in China is growing by more than 10 % a year. Starbucks and its rivals see big opportunities for expanding there.

    So too, however, do home-grown competitors. A major new presence is Luckin Coffee, Beijing- based chain. Since its founding less than two years ago, it has opened more than 2,300 outlets. On May 17th Luckin's initial public offering on the Nasdaq stockmarket raised more than $570m, giving it a value of about $4bn.

    Luckin's remarkable growth is sign of change. No longer do Chinese consumers see coffee as such a luxury. Most of Luckin's outlets are merely kiosks where busy white-collar workers pick up their drinks, having ordered them online. Super-fast delivery can also be arranged through the company's app. Independent coffee shops are springing up. The growth is striking given the country's reputation for its tea-drinking culture where many residents like to relax in teahouses sipping tea served gracefully.

    But the two markets are different. The teahouses tend to cater to older people who like to spend long hours playing mahjong and gossiping. At the coffee shops it is rare to see anyone over 40. Young people use them for socialising, but much of their interaction is online -sharing photos of their drinks and of the coffee-making equipment. An option on the Chinese rating app Dianping allows users to search for wanghong ("internet viral") coffee houses: ones with particularly photogenic decor(照片装饰) where better to sip and We Chat?