There’s nothing as hectic as a travelling day. We all know the drill: from the moment your alarm sounds in the morning, your mind swims with last-minute errands to run, items to pack, and affairs to set in order before your flight. You misplace your phone every two minutes. And your wallet. And your keys. When you finally manage to hail a cab, you find yourself, predictably, in a traffic jam. Eventually, you arrive at the airport and reach your gate breathless, bitter, and boarding. Though you do make your flight, it’s too late to escape the effects of the chaotic day; in all your frenzy, you accidentally leave something on the plane.

At this point, you might feel like the world and the airline companies have joined forces to play a cruel prank on you—and you definitely need these travel secrets to minimize your stress. Rest assured, however, we’ve all been there, and there is a way to get your item back from the plane. Here’s what to do:

Go back to the gate

Julie McCool, travel expert and writer for Fun in Fairfax VA, suggests that “if you are still in the terminal near the plane you departed, and time allows, return to the gate and find an agent. Show your boarding pass to the agent and be as precise as possible about what and where you left the item (under the seat, in the seatback pocket, etc.)” Since gate agents can contact the cleaning crew or flight attendants who are still on the plane, this is the most direct way to retrieve your lost item. Plus, handling the situation at the gate means that you can walk off with your item—rather than waiting for it to be returned in the mail.

Get help at your connecting gate

If you have a connecting flight and no layover time to return to the gate you deplaned from, go speak with an agent at your next gate. Again, make sure to show the agent your boarding pass, describe where you left the item, and provide your contact information so the airline can mail your item to your home or final destination. Most people don’t realize the gate agent for their connecting flight can be extremely helpful in these situations—just like people don’t know about these hidden airplane features. That being said, McCool says it’s important to “keep in mind they might be too busy boarding your next flight to make calls for you.”

Go to baggage claim

You may be wondering what you should do if you have already left security by the time you realize your item is still on the plane. Don’t worry, you can still recover your belonging. In this instance, Cassandra Brooklyn, travel expert and owner of EscapingNY, suggests that you “head over to your airline’s baggage department, where you can fill out a claim form. You can also ask the baggage department staff to call your gate to see if your item has been returned to the gate podium by the crew or cleaning staff.” If your plane is still at the airport, chances are the flight attendants or cleaning crew onboard will be able to help. (Just make sure you never say these things to a flight attendant.)

Call the airline

In your frazzled flying state, you may not even realize that you’ve left something on the plane until you return home and find yourself needing the one missing item. If this is the case, the first thing to do is get on the phone. Cassandra Brooklyn suggests calling “the airport’s baggage department to see if the item has been turned in to the airport’s Lost and Found. Next, call your airline to file a missing item report.” Hopefully, one of these two calls will lead to success, and you’ll be reunited with your belonging in no time. However, if the item has not been turned in to baggage claim and the airline representative cannot help you file a report over the phone, Brooklyn suggests submitting an online claim for your lost belonging. (Be sure to follow this airplane etiquette while flying.)

Send out an S.O.S. on social media

It may surprise you to learn that one of the most efficient ways to contact airline representatives is through social media. According to McCool, “most airlines have support staff who monitor social media accounts and they are often quick to respond to a polite request for help.” If you have already left the airport and can’t get an airline representative on the phone, McCool suggests tweeting first and posting on the airline’s Facebook page second. “Make your initial social media request more general, since it is going to be public,” instructs McCool. “Say something like: ‘I left an item on a flight at Dulles Airport today. Can you help?’ The support person will usually respond with the correct contact info or ask you to send a direct message (which is private) with more details,” McCool explains.

Next, find out what not to wear when travelling by plane, according to flight attendants.

Have you ever noticed that the smartest characters in movies usually wear glasses? Take Doc, the brainy dwarf from Disney’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, for example. Or Spider-Man’s alter-ego, the science whiz Peter Parker. Even Dumbledore, the wise Hogwarts Headmaster who led Harry Potter in his fight to save the wizarding world, wore a pair of glasses. In real life, children often worry that wearing glasses will make them seem like “nerds” in the eyes of their peers. See a pattern? As you might have guessed, the correlation between glasses and knowledge is not just a coincidence. While we may not even realize it, humans tend to associate glasses with intelligence. Wondering where this stereotype came from and how it has managed to persist? Here’s the real reason people with glasses look smart.

Why do people with glasses look smart?

According to a study from the University of Cologne in Köln, Germany and the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, the stereotype that people with glasses look smart “dates back to the Middle Ages, when monks used glasses to study despite declining vision. Glasses have since been commonly worn by people who perform intellectual or other highly skilled work. As a result, people associate glasses with a variety of competence-related characteristics, such as success, dependability, and industriousness, and most strongly intelligence.” Sliding on a pair of glasses to seem competent is certainly easier than adopting these habits of naturally charming people. While this explanation may explain why society used to believe that people with glasses look smart, it does not explain how this stereotype is still around today.

Why do children across every generation worry that wearing glasses will make them stand out as nerds in school? Why do movies always convey intelligence with spectacles? Why are we more likely to trust a doctor or politician’s competence when they wear glasses? To understand why we automatically perceive people with glasses as smart, it’s important to consider why we form stereotypes at all.

Why do we form stereotypes?

Surprisingly, stereotyping dates back to the days of natural selection. According to Elizabeth G. Loran PhD, Assistant Professor of Psychology in Psychiatry at Columbia University Medical Centre, “Human brains tend to favour making quick decisions for the purposes of survival and efficiency.” When we’re presented with large quantities of information, one way that humans can quickly process information and make decisions is by taking “mental shortcuts,” known as biases, Dr. Loran explains. In the past, humans relied on these biases to quickly adapt to dangerous or competitive situations. Although natural selection is less of a threat in today’s society, we still use the “old survival part of our brains” to process information and speed up our reaction times, says Dr. Loran. Essentially, we use biases to think quickly on our feet.

Wondering whether all biases are formed the same way? Actually, they are not. As we have seen, some stereotypes are “survival-based, like humans being primed for fear of bugs and snakes.” Other biases “may be a combination of survival and learned responses, such as preferences for women with larger hips as more attractive and thus fertile,” says Dr. Loran. However, many biases have nothing to do with survival at all. These stereotypes are “learned socially and culturally, like racism, gender stereotypes, and political viewpoints,” Dr. Loran asserts. Using that last category of biases, we can understand how the stereotype that people with glasses look smart has managed to transcend generations—getting passed down from parent-to-child just like these quirky traits you didn’t know you inherited.

Why does everyone accept this stereotype?

Although there are differing theories about why people with glasses are perceived as smart, “many scientists believe that this is a mental shortcut that is learned,” says Dr. Loran. “Social psychology has consistently demonstrated that when people are shown images of people with glasses, they find them to be more intelligent, hardworking, and successful, but less active, outgoing, or attractive than people with similar characteristics who do not wear glasses.” Since this stereotype is likely “learned,” Dr. Loran says that the link between glasses and intelligence “may be a product of cultural stereotypes and messages that are present for humans throughout their development.” It’s probably not surprising that we accept the association between glasses and intelligence because we have been taught that it is true. However, if your parents never explicitly gave you this lesson, you may be wondering how this cultural learning actually happens. Let’s break it down.

As impressionable children, we absorb the values, beliefs, and stigmas that are present in the world around us. We listen to our parents speak, we engage with others in classrooms, and we untangle how the world works from our surroundings. When movies and other cultural products consistently give their intelligent characters glasses, as they do in Snow White, Spider-Man, and Harry Potter, we register and store this correlation in our brains. Then, when it comes time to respond to a professor, political candidate, or any new person with glasses, we recall what we have learned about people with glasses and use a bias (mental shortcut) to process the information and make quick decisions about the person. Bottom line? Society conditions us to believe that people who wear glasses are smart, and this bias helps us to quickly evaluate new people with glasses that we meet.

So, while your best friend with glasses may have an outrageously high IQ, the two characteristics are mutually exclusive. In reality, glasses are not actually an indicator of intelligence—society has just conditioned us to believe that they are!

Next, check out these expert tips on how to battle your own biases and overcome prejudice.

The case of Veronika Piela

Short of breath, her face tensed with fear, an elderly woman struggled with her walker on a snowy sidewalk in Montreal’s Côte-des-Neiges neighbourhood. It was February 14, 2014, and, despite the biting cold, she wore no scarf, gloves or coat.

“Help me,” she asked a passerby, who was surprised to see the frail woman so underdressed. The good Samaritan covered her with some of her own clothes and called emergency services.

When the police arrived, the older woman was shaking. She had no ID. With a thick Russian accent, she kept repeating how much she disliked her new apartment. She didn’t want to return because she wasn’t allowed to have visitors or use the telephone.

The officers escorted her back to her nursing home, where they were shown a court order for 89-year-old Veronika Piela to live at the residence.

“If I stay, I’ll kill myself,” Piela told the police. She had run away by sneaking out an emergency exit.

Reliving traumas

Piela knew what it was like to be held against her will. During the Second World War, as an 18-year-old orphan, she was interned with thousands of other Ukrainians at a labour camp in Germany, unsure if she would make it out alive. There she met a Polish man named Joseph Piela. Together they survived imprisonment and, in August 1945, married in the camp before being released at the end of the war.

In 1948, the couple emigrated to Quebec’s Mauricie region and then on to Montreal, where Joseph worked as a cook and Veronika as a maid and labourer. They had no children. With their savings, they eventually purchased two homes. When Joseph died in 1987, Piela was alone. She lived on a small retirement pension and, later, on the money from their properties, which she sold in 2007.

Now, once again, Piela was trapped. But providence intervened, as it had during the war. Back at the station, the officers submitted their statement to Elizabeth Kraska, an elder-abuse case investigator for the city’s police department.

“I immediately connected it to another incident that had occurred two weeks earlier,” she said.

On January 28, Alissa Kerner, a social worker in private practice, had called the police to report an Alzheimer’s patient named Veronika Piela. Kerner claimed that Piela was living in squalid conditions and the social worker was seeking urgent help from the police to remove her from her apartment.

The call was transferred to Kraska. Kerner explained that she had been hired by Anita Obodzinski, described as Piela’s niece and legal representative, to conduct a psychosocial assessment of the elderly woman. Her conclusion was that Piela could no longer manage on her own and needed to be sent to a care facility.

“I told her to come down to the station with the protection mandate and evaluation reports,” said Kraska. But when Kerner showed up, she didn’t have any of the documents to prove the subject’s incapacity or Obodzinski’s legal authority to make decisions on her behalf. Without them, the police could only transfer Piela to hospital if they felt she needed help. Yet Kerner insisted that Piela should not be sent to a hospital.

For Kraska, something felt off. At that time, she was moving her own 91-year-old father to a care centre for Alzheimer’s patients, so she was familiar with the process. “He went through several medical assessments, and I was there every step of the way. It was clear to me that Ms. Kerner was trying to hide something,” she said.

On February 5, Kraska raised the alert with Quebec’s human rights commission and public curator. Then she set to work on the investigation. Kraska turned her attention to Piela’s police file, where she found evidence of more suspicious incidents.

On February 2, less than a week after Kerner’s call to the station, police had been summoned to Piela’s apartment. According to the report, Kerner and Obodzinski had knocked on the door, but Piela had refused to let them in. The women soon returned with Obodzinski’s husband, Arthur Trzciakowski, and forced their way in to the apartment.

“I thought they were going to kill me,” Piela had told the officers, in tears. She had alerted the police to the intrusion before her phone was unplugged. Kerner, Obodzinski and Trzciakowski were arrested but released without charges when they showed a protection mandate and claimed the incident was a misunderstanding.

Kraska also found a report from February 12, two days before Piela was discovered in the street, when officers had been called to help a bailiff with a Superior Court order to evict Piela from her apartment and bring her to a nursing home.

The court order had been granted in December 2013. Piela—described as an Alzheimer’s patient incapable of living alone—was not present during these proceedings. The judge ruled in favour of eviction, and Piela was sent by ambulance to a nursing home. The lawyer representing Obodzinski for the hearing was Charles Gelber, Kerner’s husband.

“Help me.”

Kraska had seen enough. On February 17, she and four officers went to Piela’s nursing home. There they discovered that the elderly woman had been placed in a small, stark basement room. Her only possessions were the clothes on her back.

Kraska walked toward Piela slowly, as she did with her own father, and spoke to her in Polish, a language she had learned from her parents. “Her face lit up,” said Kraska.

During their exchange, Piela appeared mentally sound and exhibited no signs of Alzheimer’s disease. The only medication Kraska found in the room was a prescription to treat Piela’s rheumatism.

“Help me,” said Piela, “or I’ll commit suicide.” Kraska put her arm around the elderly woman and promised to get her out.

“She’s only interested in the money from the two homes I sold,” Piela said of Anita Obodzinski.

Defrauded

Thanks to Kraska’s intervention, Piela was quickly placed in another care centre, the location of which was kept secret for her own safety. But she had another urgent problem: she’d been stripped of all her money. When Piela checked her bank accounts, she discovered that $474,000 had been transferred to a trust registered to Charles Gelber, on behalf of Obodzinski. In order to get her money back, she had to regain her legal autonomy. Piela hired a lawyer.

The proceedings to invalidate the protection mandate—which provides someone control of another person’s physical and financial care in case of their incapacity—began at the end of February 2014 and continued for two years. During that time, Piela had to go to court 20 times. The anxiety she experienced caused her to develop heart problems and high blood pressure, for which she was hospitalized. Despite her poor health, Piela was determined to provide her testimony.

“I met Anita Obodzinski in 2007,” she explained to Superior Court judge Hélène Langlois in November 2015. “She showed up at my house with her mother, an acquaintance of mine, and wanted to buy one of my duplexes.”

The sale fell through, but Obodzinski offered to take Piela to her medical appointments and help her with chores for $100 a week. Their arrangement came to an end in June 2013, when Piela said she accused Obodzinski of stealing from her purse.

In her defence, Obodzinski claimed she was officially mandated to care for Piela and manage her property. But the protection mandate, dating from March 2013, when Piela had undergone knee surgery, was shown to have been forged. An expert witness from the forensic-science laboratory testified that the signature on the document wasn’t Piela’s.

Under Quebec law, the protection mandate requires both a medical assessment and a psychosocial report to be put into effect. Kerner had supplied the latter. And she had asked Dr. Lindsay Goldsmith, a Montreal family doctor, to conduct the medical evaluation. Goldsmith claimed that she had carried out her evaluation in November 2013, in Piela’s kitchen, with Obodzinski translating the questions and answers to and from Russian. Goldsmith concluded that Piela wasn’t able to take care of herself or her property and that she suffered from Alzheimer’s disease. Piela, however, maintained that she had never met with a doctor.

In court, geriatric physician Dr. Catherine Ferrier disputed Goldsmith’s findings. After completing her own medical tests, she found that Piela was capable of making decisions and administering her affairs. Ferrier told the court that it was unlikely that Piela was suffering from Alzheimer’s in November 2013, since the disease may stabilize, but it doesn’t improve.

The court ruled that the reports by Goldsmith and Kerner were unreliable. The mandate was revoked in November 2015, and Piela was declared able to take care of herself and her property and exercise her civil rights. She was free, and her money was returned to her.

Not an isolated incident

Meanwhile, Piela’s attorney contacted Quebec’s order of social work, urging them to investigate Alissa Kerner. In September 2014, they suspended her. Given the allegations, the order initiated a review of the social worker’s assessments of other seniors. Thanks to that inquiry, three more stories were brought to their attention and investigated.

One of those cases involved Rose Stein Brownstein. In 2011, when the Montrealer was 76, her son had encouraged her to sign a protection mandate in case of incapacity. The following year, social worker Alissa Kerner had performed an assessment that determined Brownstein had trouble managing her finances and making rational decisions. In October 2012, despite inconclusive medical reports, the protection mandate was put into effect, with her son as mandatary.

But just two months later, Brownstein’s son died of cancer. The replacement named on his mother’s protection mandate was his close friend: Charles Gelber. Over the course of the following year, Brownstein stopped receiving her financial statements, which had been rerouted to Gelber. When she requested copies, she noticed that money was disappearing from her accounts. In December 2013, Gelber had paid himself $17,000 for “administrative services rendered.” Additionally, regular payments, amounting to thousands of dollars, were being transferred to an account belonging to Alissa Kerner.

Brownstein reported the incident to the police and took legal action to prove she wasn’t suffering from Alzheimer’s. She hired a lawyer to demonstrate that the protection mandate should be nullified, and a new medical assessment proved that her cognition was just fine. In March 2015, over Gelber’s objections, a judge found in Brownstein’s favour and she regained her autonomy. The court has yet to rule on the amounts in dispute, but no criminal charges were brought.

Justice is served

For her misconduct, Alissa Kerner faced 11 ethical violations before her professional order—six of them for her involvement in Piela’s case. Another seven disciplinary charges were filed against her in July 2015, and in August 2016, Kerner was suspended for three years and ordered to pay $2,000. She has admitted fault on most counts but expressed no remorse.

“This is the first time we’ve seen collusion and such serious transgressions against seniors by one of our own members,” said Marcel Bonneau, trustee of Quebec’s order of social workers.

In criminal court in September 2017, Kerner pleaded guilty to mischief and breaking and entering into Piela’s home. She was given six months’ probation and ordered to pay $2,000 to the Crime Victims Assistance Centre.

In January 2018, Obodzinski pleaded guilty to a number of charges, including mischief and obstruction of justice. Her husband, Arthur Trzciakowski, also pleaded guilty to one count of unlawful entry and mischief. Obodzinski was sentenced to two years’ house arrest, three years’ probation and 240 hours of community service. Trzciakowski received a conditional discharge and 170 hours of community service.

Before rendering his decision, Justice Pierre Labelle read from a statement: “You latched on to an elderly victim and altered her life. You falsely used the court’s authority to have the victim declared incapable of taking care of herself. You took her life savings, and then you had her forcibly thrown out of her own home. I have no words to express the disgust I feel.”

In October 2018, Charles Gelber was suspended for 18 months by the Quebec bar after he pleaded guilty to seven infractions. The disciplinary committee ruled that his actions “were a direct infringement of Mrs. Piela’s fundamental rights.” Gelber did not appeal the decision.

In March 2014, Piela’s lawyer submitted a complaint against Dr. Lindsay Goldsmith to the province’s order of physicians. No charges were laid. However, Goldsmith, Kerner, Gelber, Obodzinski and Trzciakowski are all named in a civil suit that has been filed by Piela’s estate. The court documents indicate that each party will defend the claims against them. The case is scheduled for November 2019.

With her until the very end

Unfortunately, Veronika Piela can no longer testify.

Exhausted by the proceedings, she died following a stroke in December 2016, at the age of 92. She spent her final months in a Montreal residence for Ukrainian seniors. But she couldn’t shake her suspicion of others.

“She was afraid of becoming a victim of fraud again,” explained Kraska. “When she had to renew her lease or sign documents, she’d call me to make sure everything was in order.”

Piela would tell the officer that she had saved her life.

“I just did my duty,” said Kraska. She was with Piela until the very end.

A global network of scammers is targeting older people. Here’s how to avoid becoming a victim of romance scams.

Never Do This to Your Frying Pans

If you invite me over for dinner and place your hot pans in the sink as you finish cooking, you’ll probably see me physically cringe. I’m not trying to judge; I’ve done it before, too. It’s tempting to use the sink as a way to make space on the stovetop, or maybe you have an especially disastrous pan that looks like it could benefit from a long soak.

But that sizzling sound is in an indication that something nefarious is going on. Putting a hot pan in cold water causes something called thermal shock. It can ruin your pans—even the expensive ones.

What Is Thermal Shock?

There’s a lot of science here, but basically, metal expands as it’s heated. Most pots and pans are made from multiple layers of metal, like stainless steel and aluminum. They may also have an enameled or nonstick coating. Each of these materials expands and contracts at different temperatures, which you never notice when the change happens gradually. For example, when you slowly warm a pan on the stovetop or let it come down to room temperature naturally, the layers of metal expand together.

The problem arises when you introduce a sudden change in temperature, like putting a hot pan in cold water. The metals cool too quickly and the pan actually starts to pull against itself. The bigger the temperature difference, the greater the shock, but even a small amount of cold water in the bottom of your sink can cause a pan to warp, shatter, crack or chip.

Warped pans are a major problem because they won’t cook evenly. They allow oil to pool on one side or the other, and they certainly won’t sit flat against an induction or electric cooktop. Even if your pan doesn’t warp, the finish can come off, and that chipped enamel or nonstick coating may find its way into your food. No, thank you!

How to Properly Care for Your Pans

The best way to avoid this type of damage is to let your pans cool down gradually on the stovetop. If you need to make space, place the pan on a trivet or another heat-proof surface. If you’re using your granite countertops, be sure to wipe them clean first so the pan doesn’t accidentally sit in a puddle of water.

You should be especially careful when it comes to thin nonstick pans and cookware made with glass or stoneware, as these are the most susceptible to thermal shock. You’ll have better luck with thicker, well-constructed pans, but that doesn’t mean you should put your All-Clad stainless steel or cast-iron skillets straight into the sink. After letting these types of pans cool briefly, you can speed up the cooling process by adding small amounts of tepid water.

Next, find out 21 surprising ways you’re shortening the life of your dishwasher.

Meat and seafood are frequently thought of as the sole culprits of foodborne illnesses. Indeed, undercooked meat, poultry, and fish can carry bacteria that will make you sick. But recent nationwide food recalls shine light on just how many fruits and vegetables can be dangerous, even deadly. Romaine lettuce, melons, and cucumbers have all been tied to outbreaks of foodborne illnesses caused by E.coli and Salmonella.

You can take steps to make your food safer for you and anyone who dines with you. Washing and scrubbing produce—and at the right times—can remove particles and bacteria, and it may prevent potentially dangerous rot. Read on to learn what happens when you eat produce without washing and when you should wash for the most benefit.

Your hands aren’t the only hands that touched that food

When produce is plucked from the ground or off a bush, vine, or tree, you and the farmers aren’t the only people touching it. “Not only does produce have to travel to the store, but it also has lots of hands touching it once it’s in the store,” says Samantha Presicci, RD, lead registered dietitian at Snap Kitchen. “Think about when you pick produce. Most of us pick up the produce, feel it, and make sure it’s ripe, after all, you can quickly pick the perfect melon by knowing if it’s ripe or not. That’s a lot of contact, and there’s no way to know if those that have touched it before you were sick or even if they washed their hands after using the bathroom.” (You won’t believe what things are covered in fecal matter!)

Produce can carry dangerous bacteria

Bacteria from the farm can survive transportation and storage, which could spell trouble for your tummy. “Produce has many opportunities in which it can be contaminated, through the transportation process, from feces from the ground, or during food preparation. Sometimes dirty produce can result in foodborne sickness. We have seen recent outbreaks of veggies with E. coli, Salmonella, and more,” Janette Nesheiwat, MD, says. “This can result in nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach cramps, and fever, along with dehydration.”

You may eat some bugs

Most fresh food is grown outdoors, so all the elements of nature can come into contact with your food before you do. “Often produce contains tiny insects or slugs which should be cleaned off before eating as they may taste bad,” says Elizabeth Girouard, certified holistic health coach and founder of Zing Meals, a gourmet meals business. “Generally, your stomach acid will handle them, but it may change the flavour of what you are eating.”

You can remove some herbicides and pesticides

Both conventionally-grown and organic produce are treated with herbicides and pesticides. The type that’s used varies based on how the farmer is growing it. These chemicals can linger on fruit and vegetable skin. Washing will remove some of them and prevent them from ending up in your body.

“Most produce is sprayed with herbicides and pesticides to keep the bugs away. Some of the residual pesticides that remain on the outside of the produce can be washed away with water, or a mixture of water and baking soda or vinegar,” Girouard says. “Many pesticides can be harmful if ingested in large quantities, so washing helps to remove the surface chemicals.” (Here are more uses for vinegar all around the house.)

Washing removes dirt and debris

Fresh fruits and vegetables are grown in dirt or on bushes, vines, or trees. That means they come into contact with soil, sand, grit, and other many natural products that might not be harmful but certainly won’t taste great. “Although some of this dirt isn’t necessarily harmful, it leaves your salads or meals with a horrible, gritty taste,” Girouard says. You should also wash pre-washed veggies—yes, really.

Consider the inside, too

When it’s time to wash, don’t just rinse the outside. Dirt and bugs can find their way inside leaves or between stalks. Green onions, for example, are essentially long straws that can trap bugs and dirt. If you just rinse the bulbs, you’ll bypass some of the areas that need to be washed. The same is true for leafy greens like heads of lettuce and kale. Dirt and bugs can sneak in between the leaves, so you’ll want to be sure to rinse around each leaf. Go ahead and remove the outer most leaves on each head, too. Those leaves are likely toughest and may have cuts and bruises from transportation anyway.

Dirt and bugs aren’t the worst things you might find in your fruit and veg. Just check out these outrageous produce stories!

Removing the skins won’t be sufficient either

If you plan to not eat the skins, you should still wash them before you cut into the food. This goes for foods like avocados, watermelons, and even root vegetables. “For those who think, ‘But, I’m not eating the skin,’ I’ve got two words for you: cross-contamination,” says Candess Zona-Mendola, a food safety advocate and editor of MakeFoodSafe.com. “With every cut of the peeling knife [through the unwashed skin into the edible portion], you are creating a pathway for bacteria and pesticides.” Don’t wash too soon or you may invite bugs and bacteria

Moisture on the skins of fruits and vegetables is rarely a good thing. Even the produce know that, as their skins are often designed to help repel water while they’re growing. But if the food gets wet—perhaps from washing when you get home from the store—you could be inviting bacteria. Moist spots can quickly soften fruit or vegetable skin. That attracts bacteria and bugs, both of which can be problematic for food safety. Rot can ultimately ruin the food too soon.

Bruising makes the job harder

Bruises and tiny surface cuts are just another way that bacteria get into the food. A porous surface or a crack is like an open wound for bacteria. You can cut away the damaged part, but you’ll need to make sure you wash the surface before you do. If there are a lot of bruises and cuts or nicks, a surface rinse is unlikely to help at all.

Wash the right way or it’s worthless

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommends you wash all produce under cold, running water for one to two minutes just before you intend to eat it. And before you rinse your food, go ahead and wash your hands with soap and water, too. This helps remove any bacteria or viruses you have on your hands that could be transferred to the food.

If the food has a harder surface, you can use a brush or gently rub the produce with your hand. Produce washes, soaps, and bleach aren’t necessary. A study from the University of Maine found that three commercial produce washes were equally effective as distilled water at removing pesticides and microbes; in some cases, the distilled water was actually more effective. Dry the produce thoroughly with a clean dish towel or paper towel. Then eat or cook right away.

Washing is better than not washing

For all your washing, of course, the truth is you probably won’t be able to remove everything that’s potentially harmful. In fact, a 2017 study in the journal Food Science & Nutrition found that E. coli remained on romaine lettuce and a ready-to-eat mixed salad blend, despite washing. Washing did reduce the number of bacteria, but it was still detectable and could have been enough to make people sick.

“Even though you can get ill from eating properly washed produce, it’s still a much safer option to do it than eating produce that wasn’t washed,” Lina Velikova, MD, PhD, says. “Make smart choices and take time to build a safety net when it comes to your health!”

Next, find out which fruits and vegetables you should never peel.

In the summer of 2010, Deborah Barrett and her son, Anthony, walked out of a restaurant near the Edmonton high school from which he’d graduated two years earlier. They had volunteered to wash dishes there to give Anthony something to do, but when they emerged, soaked, the sun sliced through the clouds and Deborah had a realization: my kid is not spending his life in a dish pit.

Cleaning plates isn’t the only option for the bulk of high-school graduates. But Anthony has autism and is mostly non-verbal, aside from short words in answer to yes-or-no questions and the Eeeee sounds he makes when he’s excited, happy or frustrated. Once a person with intellectual disabilities ages out of school, “There’s no life for them,” Deborah says. Programs end, and job options are usually menial.

As her son entered his 20s, Deborah contemplated what he could do and what he enjoyed. Among his likes: being driven around and carrying things, as well as seeing new places but not staying long. Maybe he could be a courier? The catch: Anthony doesn’t move fast, and courier gigs would require his support staff to be his driver and co-worker.

That wasn’t an issue for Mike Hamm. In 2012, he became Anthony’s new assistant and embraced the plan of spending part of their days delivering packages as a team. The pair called their venture Anthony at Your Service, signed a few customers (a balloon store, an orthodontics company) and set out in Hamm’s gold sedan.

In a bid to drum up more business, Hamm soon uploaded a video to YouTube that showcased Anthony’s love of the educational game Math Blaster, swimming and headbanging to dubstep. “He’s one of the happiest guys I know,” Hamm says, narrating. Anthony’s new project, he continued, is his company. “We’ll deliver anything we can carry—well, that Anthony can carry.” Within a couple days, the video hit 100,000 views. Anthony at Your Service was in demand.

Seven years later, boxes awaiting distribution are piled on the porch of the home Anthony, 30, shares with Deborah and her husband, David, a lawyer. The company now has two-dozen delivery teams—each comprising a contractor with an intellectual disability and their support-worker contractor—in Edmonton and Calgary.

Thirty-year-old Jesse Andrew, who has cerebral palsy, has delivered with the company since 2017. “Anthony at Your Service gives me a chance to do work I know I can excel at,” he says.

As for customers, what they receive from Anthony at Your Service—which charges from $30 per delivery and pays its drivers minimum wage plus mileage—is something that FedEx can’t deliver. “They’re as connected to my company as any employee,” says Laine Cherkewick, co-owner of the Edmonton sandwich shop Farrow, which uses the service up to 10 times a week for catering orders.

Launching a company that employs 24 contractors with intellectual disabilities, and all the logistics that come along with that, wasn’t the original plan, Deborah says. But the realities of delivery work—the peaks and valleys in demand, the long hours—meant that Anthony and Hamm couldn’t shoulder the load alone. And the feedback she received from Alberta’s autistic and intellectually disabled commun­ities suggested they wanted to work for a company that understood them.

Running Anthony at Your Service has become Deborah’s full-time, if unpaid, gig—she gave up her psychotherapy practice and the presidency of Autism Society Alberta a couple years ago. “What I’m doing for Anthony now has made more difference in his life than any of that other work,” she says. “We want to create jobs for people with all kinds of abilities and disabilities.”

On a typical delivery, Hamm and Anthony walk the package into the business together, but after seven years, that’s evolving, too. These days, there are a few spots where Anthony enters the shop on his own.

Next, read the inspiring story of one man’s mission to make martial arts accessible to all.

Pet lovers debate whether cats are smarter than dogs, and vice versa. One thing that people do agree on, however, is that cat behaviour is tough to decode. Veterinarians and cat experts do know one thing all cats love—boxes. Here’s why cats like boxes so much.

Why do cats like boxes?

Cats crave security

Although there are several theories about why cats like boxes, Mark D. Freeman, DVM, an assistant professor at the VA-MD College of Veterinary Medicine, says the most widely accepted explanation is the security factor. “Cats are, by nature, cryptic animals, meaning they prefer to have a safe hiding spot from which they can observe the world around them,” says Dr. Freeman. “Cats are both hunter and prey, so having a secure space from which they can monitor for threats from predators as well as well as for appealing prey is ideal.” Cardboard boxes, or any small, confined space, provide the perfect “safe” spot for cats to avoid predators and catch a meal, according to Dr. Freeman. I mean, cats are even afraid of cucumbers.

Cats require warmth

Cats also like boxes because they find them physically comforting, according to Daniel Rotman, CEO of PrettyLitter. “Boxes can greatly reduce a cat’s stress and help cats regulate their body temperatures,” says Rotman. The optimal ambient temperature for cats to maintain their body temperature is upwards of 29 degrees Celsius. Small enclosed spaces, like cardboard boxes, provide insulation that keeps your feline family member warm and safe, according to Rotman.

Why do cats like boxes more than others? Cats with long hair, thyroid conditions, and some specific breeds like the temperature cooler, notes Emily Parker, a cat behaviour expert at Catological. If you have a kitten, a slender cat, or a cat with short hair, however, you might find them curled up in a box when they aren’t lounging in the sun or snuggled in your fresh laundry. (Can you guess the cat breed based on its kitten picture?)

Is it safe for your cat to be near cardboard?

Cardboard boxes have a textural element that cats really enjoy. “You’ll often find them scratching, chewing, and otherwise mangling the cardboard, which is a great source of entertainment and pleasure for the cat,” says Dr. Freeman. The cardboard is a good place for cats to scratch and bite, too. The scent glands on their toe pads leave a unique signature to the box, marking their territory, as well, according to Dr. Freeman. Cardboard is just plain fun for cats and provides hours of entertainment for your fur baby, says Dr. Freeman.

Giving your cat cardboard and cardboard boxes might even help their anxiety. “When a cat is over-stimulated, tired, or just in need of a break, a box gives them the ability to recharge until they’re ready to come out and play again,” Rotman says. It acts as a sort of meditation zone. Cats, especially recently adopted cats, often feel stressed and overwhelmed. A box provides them with some tranquility from all the commotion, adds Parker. So giving your cat some cardboard is something they’ll appreciate.

Boxes are also pretty safe as long as they are on a sturdy surface away from heaters or high foot-traffic areas. Make sure no staples or tape in the box could hurt your cat, warns Rotman. “Make sure to examine any box before you give it to your cat to explore, especially since cats have a tendency to rub up against things,” says Rotman. While you’re at it, make sure you also avoid these mistakes cat owners make.

When fentanyl works

The first thing I do each day is look at my phone. That’s how I keep track of medication. I use an alarm to ensure that I take my pills—some with food, some without—at consistent times every day. For my fentanyl patch, however, which I change every other day, I use a calendar reminder.

Timing is important because I can’t allow the baseline-level dose of fentanyl to vary or my pain returns. My patches are a thin, clear plastic with discreet blue lettering. They’re individually packaged and come with a stiff plastic backing that makes their application easy. There are five in each box. I’m not supposed to change patches immediately after showering; the drug can be absorbed too quickly when applied to freshly cleaned skin. And to ensure fentanyl is evenly distributed, as well as to avoid contact dermatitis—there’s something about the adhesive in the patches that irritates skin—I can’t put a patch in the same place twice in a row. I move them around the flat parts on my upper body: just under my bra line, on my pelvis, my back, my arm or my chest.

This wasn’t always my life. I can remember when I didn’t know my way around all the downtown Toronto hospitals. I can remember turning down ibuprofen because I wanted to feel my pain, to track my body’s healing through its diminishing noise. That was then, and this is now.

A crushing diagnosis

In 2011, at the age of 35, I was working at the Nature Conservancy of Canada. My husband and I had just bought our first home. I was training for a half-marathon. And I had pain—excruciating pain that I managed by taking Advil and Tylenol as often as the packaging allowed. It didn’t really help. The ache was deep in my bones, like the worst toothache you’ve ever had, writ large. It throbbed and spasmed and shot throughout my body. It grew so intense that I went to the emergency department, but doctors just gave me more painkillers and sent me along. Sitting hurt too much, so I stood and leaned through meetings at work.

The pain finally made sense when I was diagnosed in 2013 with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). It wasn’t stress from overtraining causing me pain, as I had initially thought; it was cancer in my bones—cancer that had metastasized to remote parts of the body to form new tumours. Even though I have cancer in my liver, my lungs and elsewhere, it’s all breast cancer—and it’s terminal. But MBC can be treated for an indeterminate amount of time. The median survival time is still two or three years, but a small number of people live longer—some, even, for more than a decade.

Trial and error

Fentanyl wasn’t the first tool my doctors and I tried for managing my pain. Initially, my oncologist prescribed short-acting hydromorphone (an opioid taken as a pill), and it gave me tremendous relief. The trouble was when it wore off. It felt like the pain came back stronger, and it took more hydromorphone to give me relief. I tried, not always successfully, to keep to a strict schedule—taking the pills every four hours—but even then they’d wear off in my sleep and I would wake in agony. So my oncologist moved me from short-acting to controlled-release hydromorphone. This improved my pain management, but I struggled with side effects. I developed a partially impacted bowel and was unable to keep food down—for good reason: it had nowhere to go.

Next, my oncologist referred me to a palliative-care specialist who suggested I instead try fentanyl patches. Because the drug-delivery method is epidermal—through the skin rather than the stomach—the patch seemed to have less of an impact on my digest­ive tract. And because fentanyl is so potent, it took a very low dose to achieve equivalency with the hydromorphone I’d been taking before.

By making the change, I was able to achieve the same level of pain management with a much smaller amount of drugs and many fewer side effects. I still worried that taking a stronger medication could increase the risk of an overdose. I could hear the kindness in my palliative nurse’s voice when she explained that fentanyl is never prescribed as a first-line treatment to what is called an “opioid-naive” patient. But I was on its lowest dose, equivalent to slightly less than the time-release hydromorphone I had been taking.

Fentanyl patches have not only given me relief from pain for three years now; they have given me my life back. I can usually sleep through the night. I can sit at a table for a meal or at a desk to write. I still can’t run, but I can walk. And fentanyl doesn’t slow down my bowels to the point of near-failure. I never have to experience the agony of feeling my medication completely wear off—that raw and naked pain, all-consuming. Pain and its management no longer dominate my thoughts every minute of the day. And because I’m acclimated to narcotics and using just enough, neither discomfort nor opioids cloud my mind any longer.

The fentanyl patch has radically changed my experience of my pain. We hear so much in the news about the dangers of fentanyl, real dangers that we need to get in hand; but this drug has been around for years, quietly helping people with cancer, like me, to get pieces of our lives back.

A fresh perspective

With all the chatter around the opioid crisis, and fentanyl in particular, I’m hearing a lot of voices. I’m hearing bereft loved ones raw in their loss. I’m hearing police chiefs and politicians. I’m hearing harm-reduction specialists and doctors. There’s a fever pitch to it, and it stirs up legitimate public fear. Medical professionals don’t call something a crisis lightly. But what I am not hearing enough of are the voices of patients. Voices like mine. The voices of people living with debili­tating discomfort made tolerable by the mercy of opioids like my fentanyl patches. I’m deeply grateful for this drug’s effective palliation of my pain. Without it, I would struggle even more than I do.

When people hear me say I take fentanyl, they often recoil. “Aren’t you scared?” they ask. We hear a lot about how powerful an opioid fentanyl is. Most opioids, like codeine, meperidine or even OxyContin, are measured in milligrams per day, whereas fentanyl is measured in micrograms per hour, as released by the patch. Where the short-acting hydromorphone, which I still use as needed to handle breakthrough pain, is the equivalent of about five times the strength of morphine, fentanyl is roughly 100 times more powerful. Some of the overdoses we hear about in the news are linked to carfentanil, a fentanyl derivative that is 100 times stronger yet. However, we don’t hear enough about how opioids, and especially fentanyl, fit into a doctor’s plan to help a patient manage their pain.

But no, I reply, I’m not scared. I’m grateful to the doctor who prescribed fentanyl to me. The patches have saved me misery. The drug has radically improved my quality of life; it makes me nervous to hear people express fear and panic in discourse about deaths related to fentanyl. I once heard a grief-stricken man on the radio advocating for the removal of fentanyl from pharmacies. It’s not that I’m unsympathetic to the overdose crisis, but it scares me to think of losing my most effective pain-management.

A life-saving medicine

Nobody in Canada manufactures a single patch in the dose I’ve been prescribed. I use two: one 25-microgram-per-hour patch and another of 12.5 micrograms per hour. These are the two lowest doses available here, but they’re still high enough to hurt you if you’re opioid-naive—if you don’t have experience using lower-dose opioids like hydromorphone or OxyContin—so I’ve been cautioned to be careful with the patches around children or pets and to wash my hands after each time I change one. But I’m only one patient. I wanted to know how I fit into the greater palliative picture, and how my experience compares with that of people with cancer and without.

I spoke with Dr. Jenny Lau, a palliative-care physician at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto. By way of disclosure, this is where I am treated for my cancer, but Lau is not my doctor; I am treated by one of her colleagues. Pain management in cancer care is often based on the World Health Organization’s 1986 cancer pain ladder for adults. First, they give a patient a non-opioid, like Tylenol or Advil. If pain persists, they offer a mild opioid, like tramadol. If that doesn’t help the patient to be free of cancer pain, stronger opioids, like hydromorphone, are used until a level is reached where a patient finds relief.

Lau told me that, in addition to a patient’s drug history, they need to consider comorbidities such as kidney or liver function and whether the patient can process the narcotics prescribed. Some medical professionals only use the pain ladder as a basic guide for care, preferring a completely individualized approach to pain management. Luckily, there are a variety of options for a doctor like Lau to choose from—some narcotic, some not—to find the right solution for any patient.

While every opioid prescription is different, it’s possible to both increase and decrease a dosage. I’ll use myself as an example. Last year, my cancer was growing rapidly. Tumours were pressing on nerves and tendons, restricting motion and causing neuropathy. My mobility was affected. I was in a lot of pain—even for me—so my fentanyl dose was increased to 50 micrograms. After chemotherapy shrank the tumour in my neck and the pain diminished, I was able to reduce my patch from 50 micrograms to 37.5. I think it’s important to note that, unlike the unregulated use of a recreational user, when prescribed use goes up or down it’s titrated gradually between dosages and kept at the lowest effective level. This minimizes the pain of withdrawal and reduces the risk to the patient. The idea is to use the lowest dosage possible. Best-case scenario, the pain recedes and the side effects are minimal.

When I was first prescribed fentanyl patches, the guidance I received from my pharmacist was to fold each used patch in half and toss it in the toilet. This was to protect non-users from accidental exposure by contact, and to prevent drug seekers from rooting through my trash for used patches. A properly used patch still retains some of the original drug. There are lots of ways to abuse these patches. A palliative nurse once told me that an addict might smoke the used patches, plastic and all; apply several used patches at once; make a tea from the patches; chew on them; or scrape the entire used gel from a patch and ingest it. I didn’t like throwing my used patches in the toilet—I had worked too long in land and water conservation not to understand what happens when drugs go into the water supply—so I saved them up and returned them to the pharmacy for safe disposal.

Abuse prevention

It’s difficult to know how widespread fentanyl abuse is today. There are simply too many avenues of access. Users can buy it directly—patches, new and used, are sold on the streets—or without knowing it, when it’s cut into and sold as other drugs. That’s one of the things that makes the opioid crisis so scary. However, there are controls in the medical system that are effect­ively taking the used-patch avenue off the market.

On October 1, 2016, the Ontario Public Drug Programs Division of the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care launched the province-wide Patch-for-Patch Fentanyl Return Program. Now, rather than expecting patients to safely dispose of patches, the onus for tracking and disposal falls to pharmacists. When I remove a used patch, I stick it on a piece of paper encased in plastic. In order to refill my prescription, I must return an equal number of used patches. Initially, the system felt paternalistic and untrusting. But I recognize that a society needs to protect its most vulnerable members.

If I know I’ll be travelling at the time of a prescription renewal, I can do one of two things: I can get special permission from my doctor for extra patches or, depending on the duration of the trip, I can turn in a partial month’s used prescription early so I have enough patches for the trip. When I return, the number of patches always reverts back to a one-month prescription, regardless of the number turned in used. Everything is counted and accounted for.

At the pharmacists’ end, Health Canada recommends that the name of the drug, along with its quantity and strength, be recorded for every return. The returns should be stored safely in a single-use, one-way entry container and then destroyed by a licensed collection service.

I think about my life before fentanyl. The all-consuming pain I struggled to live with; the rapid erosion of my independence. My husband would go to work and when he’d come home, I’d have a list of simple things that needed to be done that I couldn’t do— moving a cast-iron pan or carrying the laundry down to the basement. I was barely a person. I was pain incarnate. A drug is neither good nor bad in its own right. Fentanyl is neither evil nor benign. It just is. And for many people, people like me, it is a crucial tool that allows us to live.

Next, read the inspiring story of one Vancouver activist helping to curb drug overdoses.

Teva Harrison passed away on April 27, 2019 at the age of 42.

Silk, chiffon, tencel, oh my! The plethora of fabrics to choose from can be overwhelming—and then, you have to factor in how to care for each article of clothing you have. Each type of fabric needs certain care and it’s best to read the fine print on your clothing tag with instructions, especially when it comes to getting wrinkles out. It’s just one of the ways to make your favourite clothes last longer. But, is it better to use an iron, or a steamer to get those pesky lines out? When you’re deciding on how to smooth your rumpled clothes, consider these factors: fabric material and if you have the time and necessary accessories. Here, we iron out the facts on whether to use a steamer or an iron.

Steamer

When it comes to removing wrinkles from all kinds of fabrics, steamers are superior, said Nathan Ripley from Maid Just Right. The old trick of hanging up a garment while taking a hot shower works, but an actual steamer is superior. “The easy-to-use steamer can be helpful in the care of very delicate fabrics, as it will make them smooth. The steamer is also very easy to turn on again during the day, and that’s something you won’t find with time-consuming irons,” Ripley explained.

Personal stylist and fashion expert Vanessa Valiente from V-Style said steaming is better when you have a delicate fabric like silk or chiffon and you have some time. “A steamer can still work on an item like cotton,” Valiente explains. “But it takes forever and it will never get wrinkles out of a cotton garment like an iron. A steamer can freshen a rayon or linen garment.”

What are the benefits and disadvantages of using a steamer?

The interaction between the steam and the clothing garment actually kills bacteria, as mentioned on The Laundress. Steaming not only freshens clothes and removes odours, but it saves you time and money from one less trip to the dry cleaners. Also, the lightweight functionality of steaming eliminates the potential to burn clothes or add unwanted creases that can be tricky to get out. It’s also super convenient—you don’t need any extra accessories like an ironing board. The one downside? It. Takes. Forever. But that’s basically it!

How do you steam clothes the right way?

First, make sure you have a handy place to hang the garment for best use. Pull the fabric taut with one hand and slowly move the steamer up and down the garment, holding it one inch away from the fabric.

Ironing

Approaching an iron for the first time can be daunting, but it’s a task that must be done for crisp clothing. It’s best suited for stiffer and stronger materials, like cotton, denim, and canvas, Valiente said. Ironing is a time-tested method, and here’s everything you need to know about it.

What are the benefits and disadvantages of ironing?

According to Valiente, the most iron-friendly fabrics are cotton, denim, canvas, rayon, and linen. These fabrics respond almost exclusively to an iron. But, there is no such thing as ironing without an ironing board. This requires both space and time spent waiting for it to heat up, Ripley said. And if you’re not careful, using an iron can easily ruin silk or chiffon. “If you don’t have the silk perfectly flat, you can risk creating a fold in the silk that is extremely difficult to get out,” Valiente said.

How do you iron clothes the right way?

You know the drill and have seen it done a million times before. The balance of pressure and movement is tedious, though. The trick to having smooth and burn-free clothing is to match the iron heat to what’s instructed on the fabric care label. From there, the rest is crease-free history. 

Next, check out brilliant laundry hacks that make fabric care less of a hassle.

This is Why You’re Suffering Hearing Loss—And What You Can Do About It

All sounds louder than roughly 85 decibels—from lawnmowers to heavy traffic to blaring music—are a threat to your hearing, especially if your expos­ure is long or repeated. That’s because they can injure or kill hair cells in your inner ear that are involved in sending sound signals to your brain.

The louder the noise, the less time you can be near to its source before it causes damage. Since most of us don’t carry decibel meters around, you can rely instead on this rule of thumb: if you are required to raise your voice to be heard by someone standing an arm’s length away then there’s potential for harm. Ideally, either reduce the noise, leave for a quieter environment or wear protection such as earplugs or safety earmuffs.

Listening to music through earphones is a common cause of hearing loss. Many smart phones and personal players can produce sounds of 100 decibels or more. Some will warn you when you exceed safe levels. If yours doesn’t, keep it set to less than the maximum volume.

Deafening noise isn’t to blame for all hearing loss, though. Occasionally, the root of the problem is an underlying condition such as a ruptured eardrum. In addition, the inner ear can also simply deterior­ate as you get older, and unfortunately, there’s no real way to prevent this.

If you suspect you’ve lost some hearing, see a GP or audiologist. A hearing aid could improve your abilities noticeably, particularly when it’s a question of picking up people’s speech. (Can you pass this online hearing test?)

The technology itself “can take a while to get used to, because your brain needs to readjust,” says Dr. Gemma Twitchen, senior audiologist for Action on Hearing Loss, a British charitable organization based in London. “Research shows this is much easier if you take action on getting your hearing assessed early on, when you first notice it reducing.” Hearing aids are improving in terms of comfort, sound quality and appearance—there are now tiny, barely noticeable models available.

Another possible consequence of noise exposure or aging is tinnitus. This phantom ringing, buzzing, hissing or roaring is often caused by the brain compensating for missing sound input or by damaged ear hair cells sending random signals to it. Tinnitus may go away, but some people deal with it constantly or intermittently for life. Although the condition affects each sufferer differently, sleep loss, irrit­ability, stress and trouble concentrating are among the potential repercussions.

If your tinnitus comes with hearing loss—and they do often show up together—then a hearing aid could ease it by giving your brain external sounds to focus on. Other potentially helpful devices include sound generators that emit gentle white noise that suppresses the tinnitus.

Though there’s no way to fully cure age- or noise-related hearing loss or tinnitus, studies show that addressing these conditions prevents problems like social isolation, depression or dementia from developing, most likely by improving your mood, independence and ability to interact with others. 

Make sure you’re not damaging your hearing by cleaning your ears the wrong way.