GoGreenNation news

What is pasteurization? A dairy expert explains how it protects against foodborne illness

"The detection of avian flu virus fragments in milk is a new challenge for the dairy industry"

Nonetheless, raw (unpasteurized) milk sales are up, despite health experts' warning that raw milk could contain high levels of the virus, along with many other pathogens. As an extension food scientist in a state where raw milk sales are legal, I provide technical support to help processors produce high-quality, safe dairy foods. I also like to help people understand the confusing world of pasteurization methods on their milk labels, and why experts strongly discourage consuming raw milk and products made from it. What can make milk unsafe Dairy products, like many foods, have inherent risks that can cause a variety of illnesses and even death. Our milk comes from animals that graze outdoors and live in barns. Milk is picked up from the farm in tanker trucks and delivered to the processing plant. These environments offer numerous opportunities for contamination by pathogens that cause illness and organisms that make food spoil. For example, listeria monocytogenes comes from environmental sources like soil and water. Mild infections with listeriosis cause flu-like symptoms. More serious cases are, unfortunately, too common and can cause miscarriages in pregnant women and even death in extreme cases.   Other pathogens commonly associated with dairy animals and raw milk include E. coli, which can cause severe gastrointestinal infections and may lead to kidney damage; Campylobacter, the most common cause of diarrheal illness in the U.S.; and Salmonella, which cause abdominal pain, diarrhea and other symptoms.            Washington State University students explain the process of milking cows in their school's herd and pasteurizing the milk at the university creamery.           Keeping beverages safe with heat In the 1860s, French microbiologist Louis Pasteur discovered that heating wine and beer killed the organisms that caused spoilage, which then was a significant problem in France. This heating process, which became known as pasteurization, was adopted in the U.S. prior to World War II, at a time when milk was responsible for 25% of all U.S. outbreaks of foodborne illnesses. In 1973, the federal government required that all milk sold across state lines in the U.S. had to be pasteurized, and in 1987, it banned interstate sales of raw milk. Pasteurization heats every particle of a food to a specific temperature for a continuous length of time in order to kill the most heat-resistant pathogen associated with that product. Different organisms have different responses to heat, so controlled scientific studies are required to determine what length of time at a given temperature will kill a specific organism. Since 1924, pasteurization in the U.S. has been guided by the Grade "A" Pasteurized Milk Ordinance, a federal guidance document that is updated every two years to reflect current science and has been adopted by all 50 states. Pasteurization equipment in the U.S. must meet stringent requirements that include sanitary design, safety controls and material standards.             A farmer unloads milk cans for processing at a cooperative creamery in East Berkshire, Vt., on Jan. 1, 1941. Jack Delano, FSA/Library of Congress                       Pasteurization methods Dairy processors can choose among several different types of pasteurization. When executed properly, all of these methods produce the same result: pathogen-free milk. Processors may treat milk beyond minimum times or temperatures to provide an extra margin of safety, or to reduce bacteria that can cause milk to spoil, thus increasing the product's shelf life. Vat pasteurizers, also known as batch pasteurizers, often are used by smaller-scale processors who handle limited volumes. The milk is pumped into a temperature-controlled tank with a stirrer, heated to a minimum of 145 degrees Fahrenheit (63 Celsius) and held there continuously for 30 minutes. Then it is cooled and pumped out of the vat. The most common method used for commercial milk is high-temperature short-time pasteurization, which can treat large volumes of milk. The milk is pumped through a series of thin plates at high speed to reach a minimum temperature of 161 F (71 C). Then it travels through a holding tube for 15 seconds, and the temperature is checked automatically for safety and cooled. The most complex and expensive systems are ultra-pasteurizers and ultra-high-temperature pasteurizers, which pasteurize milk in just a few seconds at temperatures above 285 F (140 C). This approach destroys many spoilage organisms, giving the milk a significantly longer shelf life than with other methods, although sometimes products made this way have more of a "cooked" flavor. Ultra-high-temperature products are processed in a sterile environment and packaged in sterile packaging, such as lined cartons and pouches. They can be shelf-stable for up to a year before they are opened. Ultra-high-temperature packaging makes taking milk to school for lunch safe for kids every day. Avian flu in milk The detection of avian flu virus fragments in milk is a new challenge for the dairy industry. Scientists do not have a full picture of the risks to humans but are learning.            Health experts are warning against consuming raw milk during the H5N1 avian flu outbreak.           Research so far has shown that virus particles end up in the milk of infected cows, but that pasteurization will inactivate the virus. However, the FDA is advising consumers not to drink raw milk because there is limited information about whether it may transmit avian flu. The agency also is urging producers not to manufacture or sell raw milk or raw milk products, including cheese, made with milk from cows showing symptoms of illness. It's never a good time to get a foodborne illness, and this is the beginning of ice cream season. At a time when avian flu is showing up in new species and scientists are still learning about how it is transmitted, I agree with the FDA that raw milk poses risks not worth taking.   Kerry E. Kaylegian, Associate Research Professor of Food Science, Penn State   This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

What Is Pasteurization, and How Does It Keep Milk Safe?

The pasteurization process was invented in the 1860s and continues to keep people safe from a range of foodborne illnesses

What Is Pasteurization, and How Does It Keep Milk Safe?The pasteurization process was invented in the 1860s and continues to keep people safe from a range of foodborne illnessesBy Kerry E. Kaylegian & The Conversation USJacobs Stock Photography Ltd/Getty ImagesThe following essay is reprinted with permission from The Conversation, an online publication covering the latest research.Recent reports that the H5N1 avian flu virus has been found in cow’s milk have raised questions about whether the U.S. milk supply is safe to drink. According to the federal Food and Drug Administration, the answer is yes, as long as the milk is pasteurized.Nonetheless, raw (unpasteurized) milk sales are up, despite health experts’ warning that raw milk could contain high levels of the virus, along with many other pathogens.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.As an extension food scientist in a state where raw milk sales are legal, I provide technical support to help processors produce high-quality, safe dairy foods. I also like to help people understand the confusing world of pasteurization methods on their milk labels, and why experts strongly discourage consuming raw milk and products made from it.What can make milk unsafeDairy products, like many foods, have inherent risks that can cause a variety of illnesses and even death. Our milk comes from animals that graze outdoors and live in barns. Milk is picked up from the farm in tanker trucks and delivered to the processing plant. These environments offer numerous opportunities for contamination by pathogens that cause illness and organisms that make food spoil.For example, listeria monocytogenes comes from environmental sources like soil and water. Mild infections with listeriosis cause flu-like symptoms. More serious cases are, unfortunately, too common and can cause miscarriages in pregnant women and even death in extreme cases.Other pathogens commonly associated with dairy animals and raw milk include E. coli, which can cause severe gastrointestinal infections and may lead to kidney damage; Campylobacter, the most common cause of diarrheal illness in the U.S.; and Salmonella, which cause abdominal pain, diarrhea and other symptoms.Keeping beverages safe with heatIn the 1860s, French microbiologist Louis Pasteur discovered that heating wine and beer killed the organisms that caused spoilage, which then was a significant problem in France.This heating process, which became known as pasteurization, was adopted in the U.S. prior to World War II, at a time when milk was responsible for 25% of all U.S. outbreaks of foodborne illnesses. In 1973, the federal government required that all milk sold across state lines in the U.S. had to be pasteurized, and in 1987, it banned interstate sales of raw milk.Pasteurization heats every particle of a food to a specific temperature for a continuous length of time in order to kill the most heat-resistant pathogen associated with that product. Different organisms have different responses to heat, so controlled scientific studies are required to determine what length of time at a given temperature will kill a specific organism.Since 1924, pasteurization in the U.S. has been guided by the Grade “A” Pasteurized Milk Ordinance, a federal guidance document that is updated every two years to reflect current science and has been adopted by all 50 states. Pasteurization equipment in the U.S. must meet stringent requirements that include sanitary design, safety controls and material standards.Pasteurization methodsDairy processors can choose among several different types of pasteurization. When executed properly, all of these methods produce the same result: pathogen-free milk. Processors may treat milk beyond minimum times or temperatures to provide an extra margin of safety, or to reduce bacteria that can cause milk to spoil, thus increasing the product’s shelf life.Vat pasteurizers, also known as batch pasteurizers, often are used by smaller-scale processors who handle limited volumes. The milk is pumped into a temperature-controlled tank with a stirrer, heated to a minimum of 145 degrees Fahrenheit (63 Celsius) and held there continuously for 30 minutes. Then it is cooled and pumped out of the vat.The most common method used for commercial milk is high-temperature short-time pasteurization, which can treat large volumes of milk. The milk is pumped through a series of thin plates at high speed to reach a minimum temperature of 161 F (71 C). Then it travels through a holding tube for 15 seconds, and the temperature is checked automatically for safety and cooled.The most complex and expensive systems are ultra-pasteurizers and ultra-high-temperature pasteurizers, which pasteurize milk in just a few seconds at temperatures above 285 F (140 C). This approach destroys many spoilage organisms, giving the milk a significantly longer shelf life than with other methods, although sometimes products made this way have more of a “cooked” flavor.Ultra-high-temperature products are processed in a sterile environment and packaged in sterile packaging, such as lined cartons and pouches. They can be shelf-stable for up to a year before they are opened. Ultra-high-temperature packaging makes taking milk to school for lunch safe for kids every day.Avian flu in milkThe detection of avian flu virus fragments in milk is a new challenge for the dairy industry. Scientists do not have a full picture of the risks to humans but are learning.Research so far has shown that virus particles end up in the milk of infected cows, but that pasteurization will inactivate the virus. However, the FDA is advising consumers not to drink raw milk because there is limited information about whether it may transmit avian flu.The agency also is urging producers not to manufacture or sell raw milk or raw milk products, including cheese, made with milk from cows showing symptoms of illness.It’s never a good time to get a foodborne illness, and this is the beginning of ice cream season. At a time when avian flu is showing up in new species and scientists are still learning about how it is transmitted, I agree with the FDA that raw milk poses risks not worth taking.This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Highlights of Cinema Verde's 2023 Earth Day Celebration

Cinema Verde’s 2023 Three-Day Earth Day Celebration began with a clean-up of Ashley Creek on April 21st where community members came together and got their hands dirty while making a visible difference. Thank you to Keep Alachua County Beautiful and Current Problems for providing all the supplies to make this day successful! Attendees also had the opportunity to learn about waste dangers and management.

Cinema Verde’s 2023 Three-Day Earth Day Celebration began with a clean-up of Ashley Creek on April 21st where community members came together and got their hands dirty while making a visible difference. Thank you to Keep Alachua County Beautiful and Current Problems for providing all the supplies to make this day successful! Attendees also had the opportunity to learn about waste dangers and management. Then, everyone was welcome to relax and get to know one another over dinner at the afterparty, generously hosted by Son Vo at Swamp Boil restaurant. On April 22nd, Cinema Verde partnered with #UNLITTER UF to present a Sustainable Showcase which featured local vendors with unique designs and individual missions, all with the shared goal of bettering the environment. Some of the products included handmade crochet designs by Crochizzydesigns, jewelry made from preserved plant materials by Flores de Miel, and artwork of lesser-known animal species by Colorful Creature Shop which donates to conservation institutions, to name a few. It was a blast getting to know every vendor present. Afterward, attendees got to sit back and relax at Cypress & Grove where Cinema Verde held a casual screening of the 2023 Cinema Verde award-winning festival films. One highlight of the evening was Keil Trosiri from the notorious culture-jamming collective The Yes Men, who presented documentary shorts that were comedic, surprising, and unafraid to push the boundaries in order to promote environmental justice campaigns. He discussed mischief-activism techniques, how to hack media attention, and how to undermine oppressive systems through humor, shock, and play.On April 23rd, Cinema Verde sponsors, filmmakers, and valued guests arrived at Passions Field, a lovely wildflower farm that utilizes regenerative agriculture techniques to maintain the natural beauty of the landscape, thanks to Txong Moua who generously provided the venue and taught attendees all about her landscape. The evening was a true celebration of mother earth as guests dined among the flowers and under a large oak that provided the perfect amount of shade. Louis Marks, founder of The Carnivore Connection, a carnivorous plant expert and conservation enthusiast, gave guests a talk about indigenous carnivorous plants and what makes them so unique. Then, Txong took guests on a tour of the farm grounds and gave them a more in-depth look into the diverse plant life as well as an interesting discussion on invasive species and more. Floridian landscape painter Peter Carolin provided a few of his sought-after art pieces for guests to browse on sight, as well as generously pledged half his proceeds that day to Cinema Verde as a donation. Later, renowned chef Mark Newman of the iconic Leonardo’s 706 restaurants provided a colorful, sustainable dining experience. Guests could not get enough of the unique, delectable display which included fresh fruit, Mediterranean salad, tuna tartar, baked salmon with a dill sauce, rustic homemade pita bread, a garlic hummus to die for, spanakopita, the list goes on. Once everyone was seated and the dining experience was wrapping up, Dr. Ed Kellerman, the emcee of the evening, took to the mic to emphasize the importance of environmental awareness and Cinema Verde’s role in that mission. Then, he introduced the organization’s director Trish Riley to say a few words as well as honor some of the 14th annual Cinema Verde festival filmmakers with awards. Some of the filmmakers honored included Keil Troisi in collaboration with Molly Gore for their film Total Disaster and winner of the strategic targeting award, Megan Cahill, director of Nature Nut: Wet N’ Wild and winner of the education award, Alycin Hayes for her work with Jimmy Evans on the film Wild Florida’s Vanishing Call and winner of the local award. Marin Best, only fourteen, was also honored for her role in the film Home Waters in which she trekked through Rainbow Springs State Park with a small group of conservationists to film, a 50-mile trip, and no small venture. Marin talked about her experience and hopes to inspire other young women in conservation. The evening slowly came to a close as guests continued to socialize and enjoy the atmosphere as the sun set on the beautiful, natural landscape.

The misleading information in one of America’s most popular podcasts

Andrew Huberman, a neurobiology professor and host of the Huberman Lab podcast, attending INBOUND 2023 in Boston, Mass. | Photo by Chance Yeh/Getty Images for HubSpot The Huberman Lab has credentials and millions of fans, but it sometimes oversteps medical fact. Sometimes, misleading information is easy to spot, traveling in the same conspiracy-theory-slicked grooves it has for decades. The same ideas that undermined belief in the safety of Covid-19 vaccines have been around for more than a century, adapting the same message to suit new media formats, new epidemics, and new influential endorsements. In a way, George Bernard Shaw’s outspoken opposition to the smallpox vaccine in the first half of the 20th century is not unlike that of, say, Aaron Rodgers’s misleading statements about the Covid-19 vaccines. Such misleading information is relatively easy to see. But spotting other kinds of misleading information is more like identifying planets in other star systems. It’s difficult to find such a planet by just taking a direct image; the radiation from the star the planet orbits can obscure it. Instead, you might look for the shadow in front of the star or the “wobble” of a star caused by the gravitational pull of an orbiting planet. You find it by looking around it. Over time, with this kind of misleading information, you learn to spot the wobble, the tells that something might not be right. This is what happened for me when I began to listen to Huberman Lab last fall. Huberman Lab is one of the most popular podcasts in the country, led by Stanford neuroscientist Andrew Huberman. His most ardent fans — and there are millions — tend to be fitness enthusiasts, self-optimizers, and crossover listeners who heard about his podcast from other influencers in the Joe Rogan Extended Universe. Huberman looms large in the minds of his biggest fans. If you’re outside of that circle, perhaps you heard of his work after a New York magazine profile earlier this year detailed his personal conduct. The podcast’s premise is simple: presenting science-based overviews and conversations on a broad range of topics, from longevity to mental health to nutrition. A fawning profile in Time magazine last summer credited Huberman with getting America to care about science again. More than anything, though, the episodes I listened to conveyed a promise: If you want to optimize your body and mind, science has the answers, and all we need to do is listen. It’s a riveting promise, one that Huberman is not alone in making. Silicon Valley, in particular, is filled with wellness guides and well-funded laboratories seeking the secret to living the best and longest life. There are other well-credentialed promises of cures and solutions circulating, especially on podcasts, a format that seems to lend itself to this slippage between the reputable and the freewheeling. Huberman’s rise to popularity during the Covid-19 pandemic should have been a win for information: Huberman, an associate professor of neurobiology at Stanford with an active lab, it seemed, was a respected researcher in his field of visual neuroscience, and he filled his multi-hour podcast episodes with citations and caution. Popular science communication isn’t always the best science communication. The implicit pact that Huberman’s podcast makes with its audience — that it will, if you listen and follow, help you optimize your life — has turned the podcast into a powerful force that shapes how his audience of millions understands science. But listeners of Huberman Lab may be, at times, hearing what some call an illusion. When good communication goes bad In late March, New York magazine reported that Huberman’s Stanford laboratory “barely exists” and that, according to multiple women who dated him during his rise to fame, Huberman had manipulated and lied to his partners (Huberman’s spokesperson denied both of these allegations to the magazine, which shares a corporate owner with Vox). The profile was one tell — obscuring aspects of his personal and professional lives. But even before it came out, the same subject experts on the topics Huberman covered had been questioning some of the science of the podcast itself. This liminality, or in-betweenness, of Huberman Lab is key to its success. When speaking about vaccines, Huberman is no Alex Jones or Aaron Rodgers. He’s a real scientist who cites real studies. He approaches topics that might end up drawing scrutiny with a great deal of caution. For example, Huberman never tells his audience to avoid the flu vaccine. All he’s saying is that he doesn’t take it himself. And yet, the subtext is there. “Now, personally, I don’t typically get the flu shot. And the reason for that is that I don’t tend to go into environments where I am particularly susceptible to getting the flu,” Huberman said in an episode earlier this year on avoiding and treating the cold and flu. He went on: “When you take the flu shot, you’re really hedging a bet. You’re hedging a bet against the fact that you will be or not be exposed to that particular strain of flu virus that’s most abundant that season, or strains of flu virus that are most abundant that season, and that the flu shot that you’re taking is directed at those particular strains.” Make the choice that’s right for you, Huberman says. Talk to your doctor. “He’s a good communicator, right? That’s why he’s a star,” Tim Caulfield, a professor of health law and science policy at the University of Alberta, told me in late 2023. Huberman often does a “very good job” talking about the science behind a topic he’s exploring in an episode, Caulfield added, but “in the end, the overall takeaway, I think, is less supported by the science than the impression you’re given listening to the episode.” Instead of recommending a flu shot, Huberman introduces his listeners to a series of other ideas. Andrea Love, a microbiologist, immunologist, and science communicator herself, wrote a four-part newsletter series addressing Huberman’s claims in greater detail. She says he promoted possibly using a sauna to improve immune function, citing a study that had just 20 participants and did not directly measure immune function. She says he promoted the potential use of unproven supplements, including those sold by AG1, a company that partners with Huberman and sponsors his podcast. Huberman and his spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on Love’s characterization of this episode. For Love, it was easy to see Huberman Lab as sleight of hand even before the New York magazine story was published. The ingredients were there: Huberman is a magnetic personality capable of capturing attention with implied promises of the secrets to longevity, a perfect body, a perfect mind, even perfect sleep — much of which he says can be achieved with the help of the supplements that he himself advertises. Love was part of a cohort of scientists and public health communicators who raised concerns about Huberman’s wildly popular podcast over several months. When Huberman had Robert Lustig on as a guest, those concerns grew louder. Lustig is a pediatric endocrinologist at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF), but he’s perhaps best known for arguing that sugar, particularly fructose, is a “toxin.” Love, who said that Lustig’s claims about the uniquely causal relationship between fructose and childhood obesity remain unproven, listened to the conversation between the two scientists. (Disclosure: I recently accepted a contract for non-editorial freelance work at UCSF Health.) “I was floored with how many different types of misinformation he was able to shove into a single episode,” Love said earlier this year, after listening to the majority of Huberman’s 3-hour interview with Lustig. Like many of Huberman’s lengthy episodes, this one racked up millions of views on YouTube alone. In 2023, Huberman Lab was the eighth most listened to podcast on Apple Podcasts, and the third most popular on Spotify. As she listened, she took notes, marking moments where she felt the podcast omitted important facts, misinterpreted the progression of disease, or provided confusing information to listeners. At one point, Lustig cited a study that he said “showed” ultra-processed foods inhibit bone growth — one that, according to Huberman’s exchange with Lustig, used human subjects in Israel to test its claims. Love tracked down the 2021 paper easily. “This was in vivo - IN RODENTS,” she wrote in her notes. In her view, the podcast was “outright LYING to listeners.” A spokesperson for Andrew Huberman responded to a request for comment by noting that the podcast team “review studies mentioned on the podcast by guests, however the conclusions drawn by guests are their own and our guests are the foremost experts in their fields.” The show links to referenced studies in the show notes for each episode. Misleading information can be hard to see Nailing down Huberman’s beliefs is, likewise, tricky, straddling the line between endorsement and implication. In October, Huberman commented on an Instagram post by his friend Joe Rogan promoting an interview with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the presidential candidate who was once a respected environmental lawyer but is now perhaps best known for promoting conspiracy theories about vaccines, including those for Covid-19. “I’m eager to listen to this and to learn more about Robert’s stance on a number of issues. Whenever I run into him at the gym, he is extremely gracious and asks lots of questions about science and, by my observation, trains hard too!” Huberman’s verified Instagram account posted. When I told Caulfield about this post, he described it as “infuriating.” Huberman and his spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on his post about Kennedy. “Any kind of legitimization and normalization of that rhetoric, especially by someone who professes to be informed by science and has the credentials of a renowned institution behind him should be ashamed of doing that,” he said. Huberman’s relationship to the information in his podcast can be viewed through a series of glancing blows; through the subtext of deciding not to take the flu vaccine himself and telling that to his audience; through serious questions about how he handles himself in romantic relationships; and through the selection of his guests, the framing of his episodes, and his friends. Although Huberman has not directly responded to the New York magazine piece after its publication, his friends in the podcasting world, along with several more right-leaning media personalities, have called it a hit piece, and dismissed criticism of Huberman as either sloppy or mean-spirited. “Andrew should be celebrated. Period,” wrote Lex Fridman, a computer scientist and podcaster who has long been one of Huberman’s friends. And it appears his podcast viewers are still tuning in.

Higher levels of omega-6 fatty acids could reduce the risk of bipolar disorder, new study finds

Researchers at the University of South Australia discovered a link between one omega-6 fatty acid and the disorder

A world-first study from the University of South Australia recently discovered a link between omega-6 fatty acids and bipolar disorder. Researchers found that higher levels of arachidonic acid, a polyunsaturated omega-6 fatty acid obtained from foods like poultry, seafood and eggs, led to a lower risk of bipolar disorder. Conversely, lower levels of arachidonic acid led to a higher risk of bipolar disorder.     The study tested a total of 913 metabolites across 14,296 European patients using a mass spectrometry-based platform. Thirty-three metabolites were identified and associated with the risk of bipolar disorder. Most of them were lipids, including arachidonic acid and other complex lipids containing either an arachidonic or a linoleic fatty acid side chain, the study specified. The causal associations only concerned bipolar disorder, the study added, and didn’t account for other closely related psychiatric disorders like schizophrenia or depression. “There’s growing evidence to suggest that metabolites play a key role in bipolar and other psychiatric disorders,” said chief investigator Dr. David Stacey, per the university’s official website. “This is extremely encouraging, because if we can find factors that connect certain health conditions, we can identify ways to negate these through potential lifestyle or dietary interventions.” Arachidonic acid can be sourced “directly from meat and seafood products or [synthesized] from dietary linoleic acid (such as nuts, seeds, and oils),” he continued. The omega-6 fatty acid is also found in human milk, making it an essential nutrient for infant brain development. “In fact, in many countries, arachidonic acid is added to infant formula to ensure a child gets the best start to life,” Stacey said. “So, there is certainly potential to boost this through supplements for people at greater risk of bipolar disorder.” Researchers know that arachidonic acid plays a key role in early brain development. But the challenge, they said, is determining whether arachidonic acid supplementation for bipolar disorder should occur “perinatally, during early life, or even whether it would benefit those already diagnosed.”      Professor Elina Hyppönen, who co-authored the study, said both preclinical studies and randomized controlled trials are necessary in order to determine how beneficial supplementation would be. Want more great food writing and recipes? Subscribe to Salon Food's newsletter, The Bite. “We need further studies to rigorously assess the potential for arachidonic acid supplementation in bipolar disorder prevention and treatment, particularly in people who carry genetic risks,” Hyppönen said, adding that it’s important to determine “how, why and when” people respond to arachidonic acid supplementation in order to determine further solutions. Bipolar disorder is a serious mental illness associated with episodes of mood swings ranging from emotional highs (mania or hypomania) to lows (depression). The exact cause of bipolar disorder still remains unknown, although research suggests that a contribution of genetic and environmental factors may contribute to the illness. An estimated 2.8% of U.S. adults had bipolar disorder in the past year, according to the National Institute of Mental Health. Approximately 4.4% of U.S. adults experience bipolar disorder at some time in their lives. Read more about bipolar disorder: