Step into a world where the focus is keenly set on i always want you meaning. Within the confines of this article, a tapestry of references to i always want you meaning awaits your exploration. If your pursuit involves unraveling the depths of i always want you meaning, you've arrived at the perfect destination.
Our narrative unfolds with a wealth of insights surrounding i always want you meaning. This is not just a standard article; it's a curated journey into the facets and intricacies of i always want you meaning. Whether you're thirsting for comprehensive knowledge or just a glimpse into the universe of i always want you meaning, this promises to be an enriching experience.
The spotlight is firmly on i always want you meaning, and as you navigate through the text on these digital pages, you'll discover an extensive array of information centered around i always want you meaning. This is more than mere information; it's an invitation to immerse yourself in the enthralling world of i always want you meaning.
So, if you're eager to satisfy your curiosity about i always want you meaning, your journey commences here. Let's embark together on a captivating odyssey through the myriad dimensions of i always want you meaning.
Is caffeine really bad for you a doctor weighs in spanish is caffeine really bad for you a doctor weighs in is caffeine really bad for you is caffeine really bad during pregnancy is caffeine really a diuretic is caffeine really bad during pregnancy is caffeine really that bad for you is caffeine healthy how long is caffeine withdrawal
Is caffeine really bad for you? A doctor weighs in
Is caffeine really bad for you? A doctor weighs in
Mmmm, coffee. If you're anything like me, you can't live without a morning cup (or four). But with all the fear mongering about how caffeine might give you heart disease or cancer, you may be feeling a little freaked out about the habit.
I was mainly terrified at the prospect of having to quit coffee, so I did some research and talked to Dr. Matthew Chow, a neurologist and assistant clinical professor at UC Davis, to get the lowdown on caffeine intake. He told me everything you need to know, including who should stay away from the stuff, what health benefits it could provide and how to know when you need to quit.
Who shouldn't drink caffeine?
Energy drinks aren't great for anyone to consume, least of all children.
Getty Images
Chow explains that children should refrain from ingesting any caffeine, as well as people with heart disorders (specifically arrhythmias) or peptic ulcer disease.
The main reason that kids should stay away from caffeine is because they tend to drink it in the form of sodas and energy drinks. These beverages are marketed toward children, but contain high levels of sugar and can contribute to childhood obesity and health disorders. The caffeine in those beverages could potentially be harmful when concentrated in childrens' smaller bodies as well, so Chow recommends that kids don't consume any at all.
Chow also notes that anyone who is pregnant should stay away from caffeine, though the evidence behind this rule of thumb is inconclusive. There are differing opinions about this guideline in the medical community -- Dr. Deep Bhatt of Weill Cornell Medicine tells CNET in an email statement that pregnant people should keep their caffeine intake below 300 milligrams per day. Anyone who is concerned about their caffeine intake while pregnant should talk to their doctor.
How much caffeine should I drink?
Beware of coffee drinks that contain extra shots of espresso.
Getty Images
For anyone who's cleared to drink caffeine, the upper limit is about 400 milligrams per day. That equals four cups of coffee, 8 cups of green tea or 10 cans of soda. However, this guideline is highly personal -- if you feel jittery or uncomfortable when drinking caffeine, consider limiting yourself further.
Will caffeine give me heart disease?
One comprehensive study debunked the myth that moderate caffeine intake in healthy adults leads to an increased risk of atrial fibrillation or arrhythmia. It also has not been demonstrated to raise the chance of coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction or stroke.
While caffeine causes a short-term increase in blood pressure (lasting for around three hours), it hasn't been shown to raise your blood pressure on a long-term basis. Still, anyone with chronic high blood pressure should talk to their doctor about consuming caffeine, or consider cutting back.
Is it bad if I'm addicted to caffeine?
It depends. If you find yourself physically dependent on caffeine, Chow says that it's a good idea to ask yourself why. Do you chug coffee throughout the day because you don't sleep well at night? If so, it's time to focus on getting enough high-quality rest during the nighttime instead of ordering more double shot espressos.
Again, if you're dependent on caffeine and also have a heart disorder, high blood pressure or any other chronic health conditions, you should highly consider weaning yourself off. Chow explained that a large part of caffeine addiction is psychological -- sometimes all we really want is a warm beverage in the morning. Substituting a latte for a hot cup of herbal tea may give you that same good feeling.
If you are downing several energy drinks each day, you might need to cut back.
Getty Images
Other than that, if you keep your caffeine intake to a safe level, there's not necessarily a compelling reason to force yourself to quit. Those two cups of black coffee in the morning most likely aren't doing you any harm.
Are there any health benefits to caffeine?
You're probably fairly familiar with the short-term cognitive benefits of caffeine: increased concentration, memory, alertness and attention. These advantages come from the fact that caffeine stimulates the sympathetic nervous system, meaning it activates your flight or fight response. Chow explains that people usually experience the benefits of caffeine most when they've gotten insufficient sleep.
One study suggested that drinking moderate amounts of coffee reduces the risk of several different types of cancer. However, the mechanism behind this correlation is unclear -- the lowered risk of cancer could come from the antioxidants naturally present in coffee, and not the caffeine. While the caffeine itself may be inconsequential, drinks like green and black tea contain plant chemicals that are suggested to reduce inflammation and the risk of cardiovascular disease.
The bottom line? As long as your doctor clears you to drink moderate amounts of caffeine, it's a very safe substance that might even have powerful health benefits. Just make sure you're in it for the right reasons.
The information contained in this article is for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended as health or medical advice. Always consult a physician or other qualified health provider regarding any questions you may have about a medical condition or health objectives.
Sci fi screenwriter gary whitta wants kids toothpaste sci fi screenwriter gary whitta wants kids toothbrush sci fi screenwriter gary whitta wants kids to go furniture sci fi screenwriter gary whitta wants kids tooth sci fi screenwriter gary whitta wants kids toms sci fi screenwriter gary whitta wants meaning sci fi screenwriter gary whitta forspoken sci fi screenwriter gary whitta youtube sci fi screenwriters sci fi movies sci fi series sci fi channel
Sci-fi screenwriter Gary Whitta wants kids to poop like Vulcans
Sci-fi screenwriter Gary Whitta wants kids to poop like Vulcans
Penny Arcade artist Michael Krahulik lends his talents to a book about potty training the Vulcan way. Gary Whitta
Science fiction author and screenwriter Gary Whitta has a pitch for the ultimate geeky parenting book on toilet training. "Pooping Is Logical" tackles the daunting task of teaching toddlers how to use the bathroom, with a "Star Trek" twist.
The book is told from the perspective of two very patient Vulcan parents who want to teach their child that not only is pooping is a natural process, but doing it in a toilet instead of a diaper makes much more sense. Vulcans are known for their logic and rationality, so they're ready to provide answers for little kids who always want to know, "Why?"
"With toddlers you're always looking to make the kind of stuff they don't always want to cooperate with more fun, whether it's getting dressed or transitioning out of diapers and onto the potty," Whitta told Crave. "There are a ton of books out there that can help with that, but I haven't really seen anything that comes at those subjects from a fun, geeky perspective. So we [Whitta and his wife Leah] came up with the idea of making a potty-training book set in the 'Star Trek' universe as a way of giving parents something that could be both fun and useful for them and their kids."
While it may add to the longstanding confusion between Starfleet officer Mr. Spock and parenting guru Dr. Spock, a Vulcan perspective on toilet training could have real advantages -- and be a lot less intimidating than being taught by Klingons.
"I always imagined that Vulcans would make good parents because while they may not be the most emotionally forthcoming they are certain to make sure that their kids are raised with a strong foundation in logic and good sense," Whitta told Crave. "So to come at the subject from the perspective that using the potty is healthy and good and normal and thus perfectly logical seemed like a good way to help reluctant children accept the idea, no matter what species they may be."
Some of the logical lessons the Vulcan parents communicate in the book include the fact that accidents can happen when you don't use the bathroom when you need to, and that flushing a toilet is much more hygienic than using diapers.
"My wife (who also works as a professional childcare provider) is currently working on a whole list of great potty-training advice that we're shaping to fit this narrative, which I think also has the added benefit of teaching children about the concept of logic and its value in all areas of life," Whitta told Crave.
The book is illustrated by Penny Arcade artist Michael Krahulik, who also happens to be a parent. "He's tremendous at conveying a child-like sense of whimsy and warm-heartedness whenever his comics touch on those areas," Whitta told Crave.
"A potty-training book based on the tenets of Vulcan philosophy? Yeah, I was interested!" Krahulik said on his blog.
While the book sounds like the perfect addition to a geek parent's bookshelf, Whitta has yet to find a publisher to make it official.
Here's a sample sketch of what you could find inside "Pooping is Logical." Michael Krahulik
"There are so many publishers going after that nerd mom/dad market right now, I think something like this would be very logical for any of them," Whitta told Crave. "It has much of the same novelty appeal as the tie-in books we see on the shelves right now, but with the added bonus of having actual utility as a parenting guide."
If Whitta can find a publisher interested in his "Star Trek" potty-training book, he also has a few other ideas in mind for a geeky parenting book series.
"I have an idea for a follow-up aimed at older kids and based on Klingon philosophy called, 'There is No Honor in Bullying,'" Whitta told Crave. "It's the story of a Klingon child who is having a tough time at school, but who learns to stand up for himself -- without resorting to violence. Meanwhile, the Klingon bullies learn that, while their culture is based on strength and honor, there is nothing strong or honorable about picking on those weaker than you."
"Star Trek" fans who want to make "Pooping Is Logical" a reality can help Whitta by tweeting about his book idea using the hashtag #PoopingIsLogical.
"Every little bit helps," Whitta told Crave. "The market is there, I'm sure of it."
Quiet quitting the work life debate is having another baby quiet quitting the work life debate is having another child quiet quitting the work life debate is having another cup quiet quitting the work life debate is having gas quiet quitting the work life debate is having covid quiet quitting the work life debate is jesus quiet the noise quiet quitting meaning if your coworkers are quiet quitting quiet quitting meme
Quiet Quitting: The Work-Life Debate Is Having Another Viral Moment
Quiet Quitting: The Work-Life Debate Is Having Another Viral Moment
Months after "the Great Resignation" entered the collective vocabulary, the question of what, exactly, a person owes their employer is having yet another viral moment.
At the end of July, @zaidlepppelin posted on TikTok about a phrase called "quiet quitting." It's the idea of meeting the requirements of a job and stopping there. The video has since racked up more than 3.4 million views, while the hashtag has more than 21 million views from other TikTokers chiming in with their views on the broader idea, and even the term itself.
The concept is reigniting another debate over work-life balance, with proponents saying it's just a necessary call for boundaries while critics bemoan a perceived lack of initiative and slacker mentality.
As always, it's not clear cut. Here's what you need to know about quiet quitting.
What is quiet quitting?
Quiet quitting is the idea of doing your job and nothing more. In the original viral TikTok, @zaidlepppelin described it like this: "You're still performing your duties but you're no longer subscribing to the hustle culture mentality that work has to be your life. The reality is it's not, and your worth as a person is not defined by your labor."
@zaidleppelin On quiet quitting #workreform♬ original sound - ruby
Is quiet quitting new?
In a word, no.
"It's popular now because of the hashtag," said Jha'nee Carter, who goes by @_thehrqueen on TikTok where she talks about leadership and employee advocacy.
Although the phrase "quiet quitting" has only gained traction in the last few weeks, the struggle to find a balance between work and personal life is far older. The National Labor Union first (if unsuccessfully) asked Congress to establish the eight-hour work day in 1866.
A century later, American pop group The Vogues sang about the bliss of being off the clock in their 1965 song Five O'Clock World: "It's a five o'clock world when the whistle blows. No one owns a piece of my time."
These days, you're more apt to hear about achieving a healthy "work-life balance."
The trend shows up globally at times, too. In July 2021, Brookings wrote about the "lying-flat" movement in China, where a culture that prioritizes overwork started to clash with a feeling of stagnation among workers, particularly among younger people. In April of that year, the concept went viral.
"For some, 'lying flat' promises release from the crush of life and work in a fast-paced society and technology sector where competition is unrelenting. For China's leadership, however, this movement of passive resistance to the national drive for development is a worrying trend," the article said, also explaining that China has aimed to "end its reliance on imported technology," hence driving a particular pressure in the tech sector.
What's the controversy?
Some of the controversy around quiet quitting surrounds the question of whether this is a healthy approach to your job, or whether you're being a slacker.
"The tether to the workplace … the expectations and exploitation of employers is so extreme now, that just doing your job is considered quitting," said Leigh Henderson. You might have run into Henderson on TikTok as @hrmanifesto, where she uses her more than 15 years of experience in the corporate world to talk about everything from dealing with your toxic job to interviewing for a new one.
She was initially confused by the idea of quiet quitting, thinking how is that "different from just work life balance, creating boundaries, having priorities, and just having a life?" Henderson says it should the be responsibility of employers to keep their employees engaged.
And on TikTok, people have questioned whether anyone should be expected to put in more work than they're being compensated for.
Not everyone sees it that way. Kevin O'Leary from ABC's Shark Tank took to TikTok to say, "Quiet quitting is a really bad idea. If you're a quiet quitter, you're a loser." O'Leary did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In a video on CNBC, he said you're hired at a company to make the business work, and you should go above and beyond because you want to – and that's how to get ahead.
@kevinolearytv What are your thoughts on quiet quitting? #kevinoleary#quietquitting#entrepreneur#career#careeradvice♬ original sound - Mr. Wonderful
TikTokers have pointed out that to the ears of an employer, quiet quitting could sound like suddenly getting less out of their employees, regardless of whether those employees were getting paid to do the extra work anyway.
What's more, the term itself – quitting – has a negative connotation. Henderson thinks of it as "quiet survival," and it's something she's done in her own career. In a follow up TikTok, Henderson said, "I was saving myself from the toxic work environment and protecting myself from the toxic work environment that my employer not only established and facilitated but continually benefited from."
Why are people talking about quiet quitting now?
The easy answer is that this particular TikTok went viral at the end of July. But circumstances have been ripe for this for much longer, according to Matt Walden, managing partner at Infinity Consulting Solutions, who has been working in the recruiting space for more than two decades. He pins some of this moment to burnout.
For one, Walden looks to the pandemic – as employees shifted to remote work, often it could be more difficult to compartmentalize work and home life. It's easy to keep your laptop open and answer a few extra emails while cooking dinner, perhaps.
"Work from home was a blessing for many. And for others, it had people working more than they've ever worked, unknowingly, in isolation," Walden said.
Quiet quitting also comes in the wake of the Great Resignation, the term for the phenomenon of American workers quitting their jobs in record numbers, often to pursue better pay, benefits and flexibility, or even just to dodge going back to an office. A July report from McKinsey called it the "quitting trend that just won't quit." Although open jobs in the US fell to 10.7 million in June from 11.25 in May, the report said it's likely openings won't return to a more normal range for a while.
Another possible facet is a backlash to hustle culture – the mentality that calls for optimizing every minute of your life for productivity and glorifies non-stop work.
Henderson also pointed out that there's a whopping four generations in the workforce now, bringing with them different perspectives, attitudes and experiences which inform their relationship with work.
"Make no mistake that Gen Z employees watched those Gen X parents stick the finger right to corporate America," Henderson said.
Who is quiet quitting?
While there are no numbers on quiet quitting, Walden said he wouldn't characterize this as a tidal wave trend. Though Gen Z is being largely associated with quiet quitting, demographic breakdowns from the Great Resignation show they're not the only generation reappraising work.
And not everyone has the luxury of quiet quitting.
"In order to climb that corporate ladder as a person of color, I believe that it's a necessity to go above and beyond," Carter said, talking about how those in minority groups, like people of color, don't always have the same resources available to them, so upping their skills, getting in the right rooms with the right people to network, and the like takes more work. She also says it takes learning to advocate for yourself in order to not end up burned out and exploited.
@_thehrqueen Can quietly quitting destroy your career? ✨ #hrqueen#quietquitting#iquit#corporateamerica#mentorforu#youngprofessionals#hrlife#hrtok#careertips#careeradvice#careeradvicedaily#leadershipdevelopment#ReTokforNature♬ Level Up - Kwe the Artist
After setting up your new Apple Watch Series 7 that you got this holiday season and pairing it with your iPhone, it's time to check out all the new features and tweak a few settings to make the most of your new Watch. The Apple Watch Series 7 comes with a larger screen, faster charging and a more durable design. That might not sound as exciting as the blood oxygen sensor that debuted in last year's Series 6. (Here's how the Apple Watch 7 compares to the Apple Watch 6.) But the Series 7's new features have the potential to add more convenience to a lot of everyday tasks, from checking the time to resp onding to texts and tracking your sleep.
Apple unveiled the $399 Apple Watch Series 7 during its product launch event on Sept. 14 alongside the iPhone 13 family, a refreshed iPad Mini, and a new entry-level iPad. The new Apple Watch is a light update to the Series 6 that's ideal for people looking to replace a watch that's several years old.
Read more:Apple Watch 7 review: A slight upgrade compared to last year's smartwatch
If you're considering the Apple Watch Series 7 or already bought one, here's a breakdown of what's new and why it matters. You can also check out all the Apple Watch Series 8 rumors we've heard so far.
Apple Watch Series 7 has a QWERTY keyboard
The Apple Watch Series 7 should be easier to type on.
Apple
The Apple Watch has a new QWERTY keyboard that takes advantage of its larger screen, which is about 20% bigger than the Series 6, allowing you to type similarly to how you would on a phone.
What's new: A full-size keyboard means that you aren't limited to sending a canned response to a text, scribbling a quick note or dictating a message, as is the case with the Apple Watch Series 6.
How you'll use it: The Apple Watch Series 7's QWERTY keyboard lets you tap each key to type, or use Apple's QuickPath feature to swipe between letters without lifting your finger. You'll still want to use your phone for messages longer than a short sentence, but it still generally makes it easier to text using the watch.
The bottom line: The Series 7's QWERTY keyboard makes it easier to send longer and more complex messages that are uncomfortable to scribble or too private to dictate. It's another example of how the Apple Watch has evolved to become better at working independently of your phone in the years since its launch.
Third-party Apple Watch apps like FlickType already allow you to type on your Apple Watch, but having it as a native option on the watch results in a smoother experience. It also means watch owners won't have to rely on third parties for this potentially vital tool, which is important considering some keyboard apps have been accused of participating in App Store rating scams.
Read more: Apple Watch 7 upgrade: How to trade in your old watch to get the best deals
Larger screen on the Apple Watch Series 7 amps up reading
The Apple Watch Series 7's larger screen can fit more text.
Apple/Screenshot by Sarah Tew/CNET
The Series 7 is Apple's first major redesign since the Series 4 launched in 2018. The new watch comes in 41-millimeter and 45mm sizes for the first time, representing a shift away from the 40mm and 44mm sizes that were available on the Series 4 through Series 6.
What's new: The Apple Watch Series 7's screen is about 20% larger than the Series 6's and more than 50% bigger than the Series 3's. The borders that frame the screen are also 40% smaller than those of the Series 6, allowing Apple to expand the screen size without making the device much larger. But don't worry, older watch bands are still compatible with the Series 7.
How you'll use it: The Series 7's larger screen makes it better at its most important job: showing information that's easy to see at a glance so that you don't have to grab your phone. The larger screen means the Series 7 is capable of displaying 50% more text without having to scroll, making reading text messages, emails and notifications more convenient.
There's more: Apple also updated the user interface in its apps to make better use of that larger screen. Apps like the stopwatch, activity and timer now have larger buttons, meaning it's easier to hit snooze even when you're still half asleep. You also get specific watch faces that are optimized for the Series 7's bigger display, such as a new version of the Modular face that can fit complications with more information. I've been using this new watch face to see my activity progress, the time and weather forecast at a glance.
And don't forget, WatchOS 8 introduces the ability to set Portrait mode photos as your watch face, and the Series 7's larger screen is better able to show them off.
Read more:Apple Watch Series 7 vs. Series 6: The biggest changes coming in Apple's new smartwatch
A brighter screen in always-on mode
Apple/Screenshot by Sarah Tew/CNET
Apple also updated the Apple Watch's display in a different way by making the screen more visible in always-on mode. It's another addition that makes it even faster to get quick bits of information from your watch.
What's new: The Apple Watch Series 7's screen is up to 70% brighter in always-on mode when your wrist is down, according to Apple. However, Apple specifically says this applies to indoor usage.
How you'll use it: The Series 7's improved brightness means it is even easier to see information like the time, your activity rings and your next meeting without having to wake the watch's screen. It feels like a step toward making the Apple Watch's screen appear the same whether it's asleep or in use, and doing so creates a more seamless look that doesn't feel jarring when switching between awake and idle mode.
To use this feature, you'll want to make sure the always-on display setting is turned on in the Apple Watch's settings menu. On your Apple Watch's app screen, press the settings icon, scroll down to Display & Brightness and tap Always On. From there, make sure the switch next to Always On is toggled on.
What about battery life? You could also choose to keep this feature turned off if you want to maximize battery life, and Apple hasn't said whether the brighter always-on screen will affect the watch's power consumption. I've been wearing the Apple Watch Series 7 daily with the always-on display setting turned on, and it typically lasts for about a day and a half. But battery life will always vary depending on your usage, and activities like using GPS connectivity while running will cause it to drain faster.
Read more: Best Apple Watch accessories
Apple Watch Series 7 charges faster than Series 6
The Apple Watch Series 7 should charge 33% faster than the Series 6.
Apple/Screenshot by Sarah Tew/CNET
The Apple Watch Series 7's battery lasts as long as the Series 6, but the amount of time it takes to charge your watch has dipped.
What's new: The Apple Watch Series 7 can charge up to 33% faster than the Apple Watch Series 6, according to Apple. It takes 45 minutes to charge from zero to 80%, and 8 minutes of charging should enable 8 hours of sleep tracking. In CNET's testing of the new Apple Watch, reviewers found this to be true. Charging the Watch for at least 30 minutes made the battery jump from zero to 54%. In comparison, the Series 6 only replenished 37% in the same amount of time.
How you'll use it: We've been asking for more battery life out of the Apple Watch for years, but that's especially relevant now that Apple has added native sleep tracking to its smartwatches. Rather than extending the watch's battery life, Apple makes it easier to quickly charge the watch during short windows throughout the day, presumably so that you don't have to charge it overnight. The idea is that you'll be able to top off the watch's battery whenever you have a few spare minutes.
The bottom line: The Apple Watch Series 7's faster charging speed is another way in which Apple is trying to make its smartwatch a more capable sleep tracker. In addition to making the Series 7 easier to charge in a pinch, Apple also added the ability to measure respiratory rate during sleep with its WatchOS 8 update. Taken together, these improvements could help Apple catch up to Fitbit, which offers multiday battery life on its watches and more in-depth sleep metrics.
Read more:Best Apple Watch bands for 2021
The Apple Watch Series 7 has a brawnier build
The Apple Watch Series 7 comes with tougher crystal and is dust resistant.
Apple/Screenshot by Sarah Tew/CNET
Exercise tracking has become one of Apple's biggest areas of focus for the Apple Watch. The Series 7 is more suitable for outdoor activity since Apple claims it has a more durable build.
What's new: The Apple Watch Series 7 is rated for IP6X dust resistance (a first) and is coated in a crystal cover that Apple says is 50% thicker than that of the Apple Watch Series 6. That means you'll feel at ease wearing it to the beach or during a hike.
How you'll use it: The Series 7's increased durability pairs nicely with the new cycling features in WatchOS 8. The new software brings an updated version of fall detection that Apple says can tell the difference between falling off a bicycle and a different type of accident. Apple also says WatchOS 8 can automatically detect outdoor cycling workouts. (See Lexy Savvides' test of the new Apple Watch cycling features here.)
The bottom line: We put Apple Watch Series 7's durability to the test. Those who want a truly rugged watch have military-grade options from Garmin and Casio to choose from, or could opt for a rugged Apple Watch case. But these updates suggest Apple is trying to push the Apple Watch beyond basic workouts and appeal to those who might need a more durable watch for activities like rock climbing. That's the premise behind the rumored Explorer Edition, which Bloomberg reports will come with greater impact resistance and could launch in 2022.
TikTok Parents Are Taking Advantage of Their Kids. It Needs to Stop
TikTok Parents Are Taking Advantage of Their Kids. It Needs to Stop
Rachel Barkman's son started accurately identifying different species of mushroom at the age of 2. Together they'd go out into the mossy woods near her home in Vancouver and forage. When it came to occasionally sharing in her TikTok videos her son's enthusiasm and skill for picking mushrooms, she didn't think twice about it -- they captured a few cute moments, and many of her 350,000-plus followers seemed to like it.
That was until last winter, when a female stranger approached them in the forest, bent down and addressed her son, then 3, by name and asked if he could show her some mushrooms.
"I immediately went cold at the realization that I had equipped complete strangers with knowledge of my son that puts him at risk," Barkman said in an interview this past June.
This incident, combined with research into the dangers of sharing too much, made her reevaluate her son's presence online. Starting at the beginning of this year, she vowed not to feature his face in future content.
"My decision was fueled by a desire to protect my son, but also to protect and respect his identity and privacy, because he has a right to choose the way he is shown to the world," she said.
These kinds of dangers have cropped up alongside the rise in child influencers, such as 10-year-old Ryan Kaji of Ryan's World, who has almost 33 million subscribers, with various estimates putting his net worth in the multiple tens of millions of dollars. Increasingly, brands are looking to use smaller, more niche, micro- and nano-influencers, developing popular accounts on Instagram, TikTok and YouTube to reach their audiences. And amid this influencer gold rush there's a strong incentive for parents, many of whom are sharing photos and videos of their kids online anyway, to get in on the action.
The increase in the number of parents who manage accounts for their kids -- child influencers' parents are often referred to as "sharents" -- opens the door to exploitation or other dangers. With almost no industry guardrails in place, these parents find themselves in an unregulated wild west. They're the only arbiters of how much exposure their children get, how much work their kids do, and what happens to money earned through any content they feature in.
Instagram didn't respond to multiple requests for comment about whether it takes any steps to safeguard child influencers. A representative for TikTok said the company has a zero-tolerance approach to sexual exploitation and pointed to policies to protect accounts of users under the age of 16. But these policies don't apply to parents posting with or on behalf of their children. YouTube didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
"When parents share about their children online, they act as both the gatekeeper -- the one tasked with protecting a child's personal information -- and as the gate opener," said Stacey Steinberg, a professor of law at the University of Florida and author of the book Growing Up Shared. As the gate opener, "they benefit, gaining both social and possibly financial capital by their online disclosures."
The reality is that some parents neglect the gatekeeping and leave the gate wide open for any internet stranger to walk through unchecked. And walk through they do.
Meet the sharents
Mollie is an aspiring dancer and model with an Instagram following of 122,000 people. Her age is ambiguous but she could be anywhere from 11-13, meaning it's unlikely she's old enough to meet the social media platform's minimum age requirement. Her account is managed by her father, Chris, whose own account is linked in her bio, bringing things in line with Instagram's policy. (Chris didn't respond to a request for comment.)
You don't have to travel far on Instagram to discover accounts such as Mollie's, where grown men openly leer at preteen girls. Public-facing, parent-run accounts dedicated to dancers and gymnasts -- who are under the age of 13 and too young to have accounts of their own -- number in the thousands. (To protect privacy, we've chosen not to identify Mollie, which isn't her real name, or any other minors who haven't already appeared in the media.)
Parents use these accounts, which can have tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of followers, to raise their daughters' profiles by posting photos of them posing and demonstrating their flexibility in bikinis and leotards. The comment sections are often flooded with sexualized remarks. A single, ugly word appeared under one group shot of several young girls in bikinis: "orgy."
Some parents try to contain the damage by limiting comments on posts that attract too much attention. The parent running one dancer account took a break from regular scheduling to post a pastel-hued graphic reminding other parents to review their followers regularly. "After seeing multiple stories and posts from dance photographers we admire about cleaning up followers, I decided to spend time cleaning," read the caption. "I was shocked at how many creeps got through as followers."
But "cleaning up" means engaging in a never-ending game of whack-a-mole to keep unwanted followers at bay, and it ignores the fact that you don't need to be following a public account to view the posts. Photos of children are regularly reposted on fan or aggregator accounts, over which parents have no control, and they can also be served up through hashtags or through Instagram's discovery algorithms.
The simple truth is that publicly posted content is anyone's for the taking. "Once public engagement happens, it is very hard, if not impossible, to really put meaningful boundaries around it," said Leah Plunkett, author of the book Sharenthood and a member of the faculty at Harvard Law School.
This concern is at the heart of the current drama concerning the TikTok account @wren.eleanor. Wren is an adorable blonde 3-year-old girl, and the account, which has 17.3 million followers, is managed by her mother, Jacquelyn, who posts videos almost exclusively of her child.
Concerned onlookers have pointed Jacquelyn toward comments that appear to be predatory, and have warned her that videos in which Wren is in a bathing suit, pretending to insert a tampon, or eating various foodstuffs have more watches, likes and saves than other content. They claim her reluctance to stop posting in spite of their warnings demonstrates she's prioritizing the income from her account over Wren's safety. Jacquelyn didn't respond to several requests for comment.
Last year, the FBI ran a campaign in which it estimated that there were 500,000 predators online every day -- and that's just in the US. Right now, across social platforms, we're seeing the growth of digital marketplaces that hinge on child exploitation, said Plunkett. She doesn't want to tell other parents what to do, she added, but she wants them to be aware that there's "a very real, very pressing threat that even innocent content that they put up about their children is very likely to be repurposed and find its way into those marketplaces."
Naivete vs. exploitation
When parent influencers started out in the world of blogging over a decade ago, the industry wasn't exploitative in the same way it is today, said Crystal Abidin, an academic from Curtin University who specializes in internet cultures. When you trace the child influencer industry back to its roots, what you find is parents, usually mothers, reaching out to one another to connect. "It first came from a place of care among these parent influencers," she said.
Over time, the industry shifted, centering on children more and more as advertising dollars flowed in and new marketplaces formed.
Education about the risks hasn't caught up, which is why people like Sarah Adams, a Vancouver mom who runs the TikTok account @mom.uncharted, have taken it upon themselves to raise the flag on those risks. "My ultimate goal is just have parents pause and reflect on the state of sharenting right now," she said.
But as Mom Uncharted, Adams is also part of a wider unofficial and informal watchdog group of internet moms and child safety experts shedding light on the often disturbing way in which some parents are, sometimes knowingly, exploiting their children online.
The troubling behavior uncovered by Adams and others suggests there's more than naivete at play -- specifically when parents sign up for and advertise services that let people buy "exclusive" or "VIP" access to content featuring their children.
Some parent-run social media accounts that Adams has found linked out to a site called SelectSets, which lets the parents sell photo sets of their children. One account offered sets with titles such as "2 little princesses." SelectSets has described the service as "a classy and professional" option for influencers to monetize content, allowing them to "avoid the stigma often associated with other platforms."
Over the last few weeks, SelectSets has gone offline and no owner could be traced for comment.
In addition to selling photos, many parent-run dancer accounts, Mollie's included, allow strangers to send the dancers swimwear and underwear from the dancers' Amazon wish lists, or money to "sponsor" them to "realize their dream" or support them on their "journeys."
While there's nothing technically illegal about anything these parents are doing, they're placing their children in a gray area that's not explicitly sexual but that many people would consider to be sexualized. The business model of using an Amazon wish list is one commonly embraced by online sugar babies who accept money and gifts from older men.
"Our Conditions of Use and Sale make clear that users of Amazon Services must be 18 or older or accompanied by a parent or guardian," said an Amazon spokesperson in a statement. "In rare cases where we are made aware that an account has been opened by a minor without permission, we close the account."
Adams says it's unlikely to be other 11-year-olds sending their pocket money to these girls so they attend their next bikini modeling shoot. "Who the fuck do you think is tipping these kids?" she said. "It's predators who are liking the way you exploit your child and giving them all the content they need."
Turning points
Plunkett distinguishes between parents who are casually sharing content that features their kids and parents who are sharing for profit, an activity she describes as "commercial sharenting."
"You are taking your child, or in some cases, your broader family's private or intimate moments, and sharing them digitally, in the hope of having some kind of current or future financial benefit," she said.
No matter the parent's hopes or intentions, any time children appear in public-facing social media content, that content has the potential to go viral, and when it does, parents have a choice to either lean in and monetize it or try to rein it in.
During Abidin's research -- in which she follows the changing activities of the same influencers over time -- she's found that many influencer parents reach a turning point. It can be triggered by something as simple as other children at school being aware of their child's celebrity or their child not enjoying it anymore, or as serious as being involved in a car chase while trying to escape fans (an occurrence recounted to Abidin by one of her research subjects).
One influencer, Katy Rose Pritchard, who has almost 92,000 Instagram followers, decided to stop showing her children's faces on social media this year after she discovered they were being used to create role-playing accounts. People had taken photos of her children that she'd posted and used them to create fictional profiles of children for personal gratification, which she said in a post made her feel "violated."
All these examples highlight the different kinds of threats sharents are exposing their children to. Plunkett describes three "buckets" of risk tied to publicly sharing content online. The first and perhaps most obvious are risks involving criminal and/or dangerous behavior, posing a direct threat to the child.
The second are indirect risks, where content posted featuring children can be taken, reused, analyzed or repurposed by people with nefarious motives. Consequences include anything from bullying to harming future job prospects to millions of people having access to children's medical information -- a common trope on YouTube is a video with a melodramatic title and thumbnail involving a child's trip to the hospital, in which influencer parents with sick kids will document their health journeys in blow-by-blow detail.
The third set of risks are probably the least talked about, but they involve potential harm to a child's sense of self. If you're a child influencer, how you see yourself as a person and your ability to develop into an adult is "going to be shaped and in some instances impeded by the fact that your parents are creating this public performance persona for you," said Plunkett.
Often children won't be aware of what this public persona looks like to the audience and how it's being interpreted. They may not even be aware it exists. But at some point, as happened with Barkman, the private world in which content is created and the public world in which it's consumed will inevitably collide. At that point, the child will be thrust into the position of confronting the persona that's been created for them.
"As kids get older, they naturally want to define themselves on their own terms, and if parents have overshared about them in public spaces, that can be difficult, as many will already have notions about who that child is or what that child may like," said Steinberg. "These notions, of course, may be incorrect. And some children may value privacy and wish their life stories were theirs -- not their parents -- to tell."
Savannah and Cole LaBrant have documented nearly everything about their children's lives.
Jim Spellman/WireImage
This aspect of having their real-life stories made public is a key factor distinguishing children working in social media from children working in the professional entertainment industry, who usually play fictional roles. Many children who will become teens and adults in the next couple of decades will have to reckon with the fact that their parents put their most vulnerable moments on the internet for the world to see -- their meltdowns, their humiliation, their most personal moments.
One influencer family, the LaBrants, were forced to issue a public apology in 2019 after they played an April Fools' Day Joke on their 6-year-old daughter Everleigh. The family pretended they were giving her dog away, eliciting tears throughout the video. As a result, many viewers felt that her parents, Sav and Cole, had inflicted unnecessary distress on her.
In the past few months, parents who film their children during meltdowns to demonstrate how to calm them down have found themselves the subject of ire on parenting Subreddits. Their critics argue that it's unfair to post content of children when they're at their most vulnerable, as it shows a lack of respect for a child's right to privacy.
Privacy-centric parenting
Even the staunchest advocates of child privacy know and understand the parental instinct of wanting to share their children's cuteness and talent with the world. "Our kids are the things usually we're the most proud of, the most excited about," said Adams. "It is normal to want to show them off and be proud of them."
When Adams started her account two years ago, she said her views were seen as more polarizing. But increasingly people seem to relate and share her concerns. Most of these are "average parents," naive to the risks they're exposing their kids to, but some are "commercial sharents" too.
Even though they don't always see eye to eye, the private conversations she's had with parents of children (she doesn't publicly call out anyone) with massive social media presences have been civil and productive. "I hope it opens more parents' eyes to the reality of the situation, because frankly this is all just a large social experiment," she said. "And it's being done on our kids. And that just doesn't seem like a good idea."
For Barkman, it's been "surprisingly easy, and hugely beneficial" to stop sharing content about her son. She's more present, and focuses only on capturing memories she wants to keep for herself.
"When motherhood is all consuming, it sometimes feels like that's all you have to offer, so I completely understand how we have slid into oversharing our children," she said. "It's a huge chunk of our identity and our hearts."
But Barkman recognizes the reality of the situation, which is that she doesn't know who's viewing her content and that she can't rely on tech platforms to protect her son. "We are raising a generation of children who have their entire lives broadcast online, and the newness of social media means we don't have much data on the impacts of that reality on children," she said. "I feel better acting with caution and letting my son have his privacy so that he can decide how he wants to be perceived by the world when he's ready and able."
What States Can and Can't Do When Banning Abortion
What States Can and Can't Do When Banning Abortion
For more information about your reproductive health rights and related federal resources, you can visit the US government's
Reproductive Rights
site.
Whether someone can get an abortion or related medical procedure mostly hinges on which state they live in after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last month and ended the constitutional right to abortion. But the switch from federal protection to state law isn't straightforward and has led to confusion and misinformation on what pregnant patients and physicians can do.
In this still developing landscape, how confident can people be that their treatment is still legal?
"The answer to all your questions is 'Who the heck knows,'" said Dr. Louise Perkins King, a surgeon and bioethicist at Harvard Medical School. "And that's the problem."
The US Department of Health and Human Services issued guidance on July 11 reminding physicians of their responsibilities under the existing Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTLA, which supports the need to treat and stabilize patients in an emergency, including pregnant patients who may require an abortion. Days later, Texas sued the Biden administration over the law, which allows for medical assistance to save the life of the mother, because, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said, it "seeks to transform every emergency room in the country into a walk-in abortion clinic."
On Tuesday, a judge in Texas blocked the EMTLA guidance, so physicians in that state may no longer be protected by federal law if they perform an abortion when they deem it medically necessary but it falls outside of Texas' interpretation of a life-endangering pregnancy. Physicians nationwide who are members of the American Association of Pro-Life Gynecologists and Obstetricians or the Christian Medical and Dental Association are also exempt -- a total of about 18,000 health care providers, according to the court document.
Texas' new trigger law -- which will be in effect on Aug. 25 -- bans all abortions except when the pregnancy puts the mother "at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function." Physicians who perform an illegal abortion will be committing a felony. It doesn't make exceptions for rape, incest or fetal abnormalities, and it also doesn't make an exception for when the pregnant person's risk of death would come from a "claim or diagnosis" that they'll be hurt or might die in the future. (This could be interpreted to mean a doctor can't provide an abortion if a woman threatens to die by suicide because she has depression.) All abortions are currently banned in Texas after the state's Supreme Court ruled that a law from the 1920s could stand.
Legal battles within some states will continue to shape post-Roe America, with the landscape changing by the day. And lawsuits like the one in Texas clarify the country's stance on whether state law preempts federal rule on abortion or reproductive health care. Basically, can federal regulations trump state law?
"There's going to be cases that are going to have to determine this question," I. Glenn Cohen, a professor and bioethicist at Harvard Law School, said.
The argument over medication abortion access -- which is banned or restricted in many states but still available to people if they order it (not without risk) online -- will likely also be one of the first big court cases post-Roe, Cohen said. Questions of whether federal regulations on medication abortion conflict directly enough with state restrictions will continue to be center stage.
Medication abortion, for use in early pregnancy, accounts for more than half of abortions in the US. Restricting the pills is the new frontier of abortion bans.
Robyn Beck/Getty Images
Other federal guidance issued by the Biden administration includes a reminder to pharmacists that they are required to fill medication and birth control prescriptions for patients. Failing to do so is discrimination based on pregnancy status. This was in response to the many reports of women having treatment delayed or prescriptions denied while health care workers try to navigate around new state laws.
Here's what we know today.
Can states ban abortion pills? Not completely, but some are trying.
Any state with a current total ban on abortion -- including Texas, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Missouri and Wisconsin -- also bans medication abortion. Heavy restrictions in other states, including Tennessee and South Carolina, which ban abortion after about six weeks, also extend to medication abortion. This means providers can't prescribe the medication in those states and patients can't fill prescriptions at pharmacies.
"If a state law bans abortion broadly, that includes medication abortions," Elisabeth Smith, director of state policy and advocacy at the Center for Reproductive Rights, told MedPage Today.
But abortion bans and state laws seek to punish abortion providers or people who assist them, not the person seeking the abortion (there's reason to believe this might change in the future). For now, people living in the most restrictive states can still order pills from an overseas pharmacy, including Aid Access. However, the pills could take awhile to arrive and potentially put the person past the point of pregnancy for which the medication is safe and effective (about 10 weeks).
Peter Dazeley/Getty Images
The fate of medication abortion pills in Republican-leaning states centers on mifepristone, the first pill given in the two-dose regimen of medication abortion. Because the US Food and Drug Administration approved mifepristone as a safe and effective way to end a pregnancy over 20 years ago, states shouldn't be able to restrict it, the US attorney general's office argued the same day Roe was overturned. (Misoprostol, the second pill, is used off-label for abortion and miscarriage treatment. It's also used to treat health conditions such as stomach ulcers.)
Whether this federal regulation (and the FDA's stamp of approval) supersedes state laws will need to be decided. Cohen said this is likely to be determined by the Supreme Court as "one of the first post-Dobbs cases."
"It's unclear whether that's going to be a winner of an argument, to be perfectly honest," Cohen said.
Last year, the FDA extended a pandemic-era rule that allowed patients to get medication abortion pills through the mail, instead of requiring them to be prescribed in person. This was seen as a victory for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and other medical groups, which viewed the in-person requirement as unnecessary for a medication that's safe and effective in early pregnancy.
But states have their own requirements for medication abortion, and providers licensed in Montana can't prescribe pills to patients who travel over from a restrictive state like South Dakota, NPR reported.
Read more: Worries About Post-Roe Data Privacy Put Spotlight on Period Apps
Ectopic pregnancies can't result in a delivery and require medical treatment. Symptoms can start with typical pregnancy signs, including a missed period, but can progress to abdominal or pelvic pain, vaginal bleeding, weakness and more.
Svetlana Gustova/Getty Images
Can states ban treatment for high risk pregnancies? The HHS says no, but doctors say state laws are restricting care.
Even though the most restrictive states banning abortions leave room for some degree of medical emergency, practicing physicians need to decide where the medical emergency line is – and risk prosecution if a state sees it differently.
This month, the story of a 10-year-old girl who was raped and pregnant and who traveled to Indiana from Ohio, where abortion is banned around six weeks without exception for rape or incest, made headlines. Not only was the physician publicly questioned by Indiana's attorney general on whether she followed state law, but Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost said in the aftermath that the girl should've been able to legally get an abortion under the state law's medical emergency exemption. Ohio's OB-GYNs disagreed.
"It states specifically 'medically diagnosed condition,' and as far as I can tell, adolescent pregnancy is not a medically diagnosed condition that's listed," Dr. Jason Sayat, a Columbus OB-GYN, told the Ohio Capital Journal.
The Department of Health and Human Services reminded physicians and hospitals that if they want to keep their Medicare agreement and avoid "civil penalties," they must treat pregnant patients and provide abortions if necessary as required under the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. The EMTLA, now blocked in Texas, outlines certain life-endangering pregnancies that doctors must treat regardless of state law, including ectopic pregnancies, preeclampsia and complications of pregnancy loss.
But that narrow line of abortion exceptions for medical emergencies given by states like Wisconsin is what's troubling Dr. Jennifer McIntosh, a maternal-fetal medicine physician practicing in the state. While Wisconsin's attorney general said he wouldn't enforce a ban, physicians there stopped performing abortions because the state has a pre-Roe criminal statute that prohibits most abortions. The "save the life of the mother" abortion exception language in that law can leave out health conditions which may not be an immediate emergency but can become one down the line.
"Some of what we do is to prevent emergencies from happening," McIntosh said. "To have to wait for an emergency to actually appear puts your patient's life at risk."
The treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is termination, because terminating the pregnancy is the only safe outcome when an embryo grows outside of the uterus, typically in a fallopian tube. Without treatment, the fallopian tube is likely to rupture, which can lead to internal bleeding and death. But some laws, like one in Texas, specifically restrict medications including methotrexate, which has led to access problems for people who are pregnant as well as people who are taking methotrexate for another health reason.
Complicating confusion and risk over how abortion bans will affect treatments for ectopic pregnancies is the fact that more rare types of ectopic pregnancies exist, including ones where the pregnancy is growing inside a C-section scar or other area outside the safety of the main cavity of the uterus -- but still technically in the uterus. These rarer kinds of ectopic pregnancies are also life-threatening, and may be more difficult to diagnose and treat as such in a state that bans abortions with an emphasis on the pregnancy being in the uterus.
Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images
States are not prosecuting people who have abortions (yet)
Current state laws -- both those in effect and those in limbo in court -- prosecute other people involved in an abortion, not the person who's pregnant.
But the health impact may be already felt when a doctor is hesitant to treat patients, or pharmacists are reluctant to fill a prescription for mifepristone before interviewing a woman to ascertain whether her pregnancy is already ended and her situation is in line with state law.
"Even in these straightforward cases of basic OB/GYN practice, the laws leave providers questioning and afraid," Dr. Carley Zeal, an OB-GYN in Wisconsin, told The New York Times. "These laws are already hurting my patients."
Aside from hesitancy among health care providers, physicians also fear that worries people have about being prosecuted for having an abortion or miscarriage will stop patients experiencing complications from any kind of pregnancy loss from seeking care.
That's because it was already happening, before Roe was overturned. According to the National Advocates for Pregnant Women, there were over 1,700 arrests or prosecutions of women from 1973 (when Roe became law) to 2020 where their pregnancies were the focus of the case against them.
So will doctors report you if they suspect you had an abortion?
"The vast majority of health care professionals will not do that, because that's not caring for their patients," King said. But, she added, "I'm sure there's a very small, but unfortunately detrimental, minority who might."
Your current access to birth control shouldn't be impacted by the overturn of Roe v. Wade. However, there's reason to believe that could change in the future.
Carol Yepes/Getty Images
Birth control is still protected under the Affordable Care Act
Right now, IUDs, birth control pills and other birth control methods are legal in all 50 states. And they should also be covered at no out-of-pocket cost for those covered under the Affordable Care Act. The right to birth control is protected under two Supreme Court rulings: Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) and Eisenstadt v. Baird. (Another Supreme Court Case, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, chipped away a little of that protection, however, finding that some corporations are exempt for religious reasons.)
Plan B or "morning after pill" brands are also not included in abortion bans, because they will not end an existing pregnancy. Most health plans should also cover them.
Legislators in Missouri last year voted to block taxpayer funding for IUDs and emergency contraception, casting doubt that all birth control devices will be protected indefinitely, at least in some states. The claims of legislators like Paul Wieland, a Republican state senator in Missouri, are that anything that has the potential to disrupt a fertilized egg's implantation into the uterus is an abortifacient.
The medical community has been clear that IUDs and emergency contraception do not cause abortions and will not end an existing pregnancy. Copper IUDs work mostly by causing a chemical change in the sperm and egg before they meet, according to the World Health Organization. Hormonal IUDs like Mirena work mostly by thickening cervical mucus so sperm can't reach the egg, and can also prevent ovulation. Plan B and similar pills likely won't work if a person has already ovulated, meaning the chances of it stopping implantation are currently understood to be slim.
Nevertheless, unlikely occurrences or instances where a fertilized egg may be prevented from implanting into a uterus could be called into question in future court cases.
Read more: Could a Post Roe v. Wade World Impact Your Access to Birth Control?
The information contained in this article is for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended as health or medical advice. Always consult a physician or other qualified health provider regarding any questions you may have about a medical condition or health objectives.
