"If you obey all the rules you miss all the fun." - Katharine Hepburn
Question #53832 posted on 10/02/2009 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

In response to Board Question #53747 on Teriyaki Stix menu and bowl changes.

I have worked at the BYU Teriyaki Stix as a cook and line worker for over a year now, and I have seen three bowl changes and four menu changes. Part of the reason for the number of changes is that the Cougareat T-Stix is the number one selling T-Stix in the country (Our Subway is also number one in the western hemisphere) and when "Corporate" has ideas that they want to test, they test them here.

Like any legitimate business they are trying to make a profit while offering the best product available at a price you are willing to pay. That is why they have made a lot of the pricing and menu changes.

I think they have finally settled on what the menu is going to be (although I am just a humble employee and have no final say in the matter). The good news is that most of the old menu is back, along with fried rice and noodles at the same price as white and brown rice.

Concerning the size of the bowls, we actually weigh and measure what we put in every bowl, and those amounts haven't changed in the last 9 months, just the depth and shape of the bowl. They changed the quality of the bowls to a flimsier one in exchange for our new chicken (which is marinated overnight and char-grilled now) and that was totally worth it.

Besides the chicken being a better quality than we had before, all of the prices on our bowls have been reduced (the curry bowl is now cheaper than the other bowls again! yay). And we have a new steak bowl as well. The only sad loss was the delicious pork bowl (but it took forever to pull that pork, and I would burn my fingers all the time).

Well, I think that turned out as a commercial, but the food is good, and now it is cheaper :)

Hope that helps,
- Master Jay

A: Dear Master Jay,

...the Cougareat T-Stix is the number one selling T-Stix in the country...

Seriously? Like, for reals?

Wow. There's a claim to fame for ya.

Question #53757 posted on 10/02/2009 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I went to a sacrament meeting today in which a severely disabled man blessed the sacrament. Consequently, nobody in the audience understood anything he said. How come when someone without a speech disorder blesses the sacrament and accidentally misses something to be read or slurs, he has to resay the whole thing? But this disabled man didn't have to reread anything?

-Brother Munch (yes my last name is Munch, dont laugh).

A: Dear Brother Munch,

The difference is not whether or not the sacrament prayer is heard and understood by everyone, but whether or not the words are accurate. If the disabled man read it all correctly then there is no reason for him to reread it. While you and the people around you may not have understood each individual word, the bishopric may have, and other members of the ward may have.

I found an interesting thread on a forum all about sacrament prayer do-overs. One comment in particular is about a young man who had a severe speech disorder: "And you cannot tell me that because he failed to be perfect in his recital of the sacrament prayer that even for one instant the Savior found the prayer he offered offensive or unnacceptable." Different people have different trials, and maybe that disabled man in your ward did the best he could. If it really was not perfectly recited word for word, just putting in a pure whole-hearted effort is more important in his own situation.

A: Dear Jephthah,

Exodus 4:10-11:

And Moses said unto the Lord, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue.

And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man’s mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord?
Mosiah 4:27:

It is not requisite that a man should run faster than he has strength.
Also, the Church Handbook of Instructions instructs the bishop to avoid causing embarrassment in asking the person blessing the sacrament to repeat the prayer. It was your bishop's decision.

Waldorf and Sauron
Question #53756 posted on 10/02/2009 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

This is a question about internet bandwidth usage and such. I talk to my family once a week on Sundays via webcam. This takes up a lot of bandwidth I assume. Today my microphone cut out when my roommate logged on to the internet and my webcam session cut out entirely when she began streaming Pandora. Because I'm offcampus, using the same comcast router facilitated connection as her, is it unreasonable to assume that because she was using Pandora at the same time that my webcam session was going on, that the connection couldn't handle both and crashed my session? She was not using it when I started. Does Pandora take up a lot of bandwidth, comparable to a webcam session?

- name

A: Dear nameless,

According to its FAQ, Pandora requires "a broadband connection (e.g. DSL or Cable) which consisently [sic] provides bandwidth of at least 150 Kbps to run Pandora. (Dial-up is not supported.)" If you have Comcast cable, you're probably allotted 6-8 Mbps, which is more than enough to stream both music and video, provided conditions are optimal. I would instead investigate whether or not you have anyone else on the router using bandwidth. If you call your Comcast tech support you can get help with logging into the router settings and making sure everything is OK. Also, wired is usually better than wireless if you're worried about slow internet. Oh, and your overall speed on cable internet will also depend on how many of your neighbors are on as well as the time of day.

The short answer is probably not, but maybe so for different reasons, and a support tech can better tell you why. Hope that's not too vague.

Question #53755 posted on 10/02/2009 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I was watching the movie "Legacy" today and my husband wondered if the angel Moroni scene at the beginning was real or staged. I told him that yes, the angel Moroni was actually removed and replaced for the filming of the movie. And then I couldn't remember where I heard that and my google searches were fairly fruitless. Do you know whether the angel Moroni on the Salt Lake Temple was actually removed and replaced for the filming of Legacy?

- New Mom

A: Dear New Mom,

The Angel Moroni capstone scene in Legacy was completely staged. The angel statue used in the scene was a clay replica made in 1964 for the New York World's Fair. It was also used in the movie Mountain of the Lord and is owned by LDS Motion Picture Studio. You can read more about that and other Angel Moroni statues in this Ensign article.

- Rating Pending (who notes that the scene was also staged in that it was filmed in the 1990's and not in 1892)
Question #53754 posted on 10/02/2009 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I've been researching brushing one's teeth with baking soda and seeing conflicting accounts of how it is both terrible and terrific for the health of your teeth. I'm looking for the final word from a source I can trust. But since I don't currently have a dentist and probably won't until we get dental insurance some time in the future, I'm coming to you. What do you think? Is brushing your teeth with baking soda really as great or as awful as everybody says?

-mmm salty

A: Dear Salty,

From personal experience, I can say that using baking soda is definitely effective; it will make your teeth feel very, very clean. However, the taste is revolting.

I've only ever used baking soda on rare occasions, kind of as a "deep cleaning" experience, so I doubt that I would have had the chance to notice any other drawbacks. I would really recommend asking someone with some dental background first if you plan on using baking soda as a regular toothpaste substitute.

A: Dear salty,

I did my best to dig up some reliable resources for you. From everything that I was able to find, there really isn't anything besides personal testimony that baking soda is bad for you. A common complaint is that it is fluorinated, but then, so are many commercial toothpastes, not to mention most drinking water as well.

There is some solid evidence that baking soda is beneficial as well. A study comparing commercial teeth cleaning products (which, in official literature, are called "dentifrices") showed that baking soda is less abrasive than many commercial tooth products. I should note that the study is decades old, so most of the more abrasive dentifrices probably don't exist anymore.

Another study showed that baking soda does not interfere with the actions of commonly used anti-tartar agents.

This study shows that baking soda, when added to commercial toothpaste, positively enhances the anti-plaque, antibiotic, and pH-regulatory attributes of toothpaste. However, the study finds that the baking soda additive, while helpful, is not more helpful than those with other additives, such as carbonate or silica.

Adults and children who suffer from cancer, and are immunosuppressed due to their treatment, are very commonly instructed to gently brush their teeth with a baking soda and salt paste and to periodically rinse their mouths with a solution of water and baking soda to avoid contracting infections in the mouth. I found this advice in many places; here is one example.

Finally, this study had test subjects brush their teeth with either baking soda, antimicrobial enzymes, or an antibiotic. This was done to evaluate the effectiveness of a toothpaste that had all three of those ingredients. The study showed that brushing with baking soda, even when compared with an antibiotic or enzymes, was effective at eliminating bacteria in the mouth as compared to a group that brushed with a commercial product that did not contain one of these three products.

So, I guess the conclusion is there's nothing really wrong or dangerous about brushing your teeth with baking soda. At the same time, there don't seem to be any verifiable studies that say baking soda is better than commercial toothpaste, or that it should be used exclusively. You really should get the advice of a dentist if you can. But as far as I'm concerned, if you can deal with the taste, feel free to go for it.

- Rating Pending (who feels a little won over by all these pro-baking soda studies)
Question #53750 posted on 10/02/2009 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I will soon be applying for a study abroad program for next year. I was feeling fine until I actually went to apply, and now I'm feeling overwhelmed because I don't have a clue about many of the steps. I've never written a letter of intent or made an official resumé and don't know what faculty members to put as references (do I need to check with them first?) Can someone who has applied to the study abroad program before guide me through the process or at least give me some helpful hints? I am actually not at BYU at the moment, so I can't ask people in person (and I hate calling on the phone! but will do if all other options are exhausted).


--Lemon jelly

A: Dear Lemon Jelly,

When I applied for study abroad last fall, I did not have a clue. I really hope I can help you, so you are not as frantic as I was.

Your letter of intent does not need to be terribly formal. The idea is to express what your previous experience with your choice of language and culture is, and why you want to study abroad. It is a lot like applying to college and saying why you want to attend the college, except this is much more specific. Even if you are not sure exactly why you want to go, pick one or two reasons you were attracted to the program and run with it. I chose the historical aspect of my country, and the political culture, because they are so polar opposite of the U.S. Your reasons and perspective will help you stand out as an applicant.

When looking for faculty members to put as references, think of what teachers have influenced you. A teacher who helped you in deciding that you wanted to go on study abroad would be a fine choice. No matter what, definitely tell whomever you choose that they have been chosen. If you do not know your teachers well, you may want to e-mail or call them and explain to them first why you are applying to the program. Then tell them why you want them as references; this way if they are called they will actually know who you are and your situation. When I applied I was a freshman, and had only taken one language class. So I only had one teacher I could ask, and he did not know me terribly well. Luckily, he was also one of the study abroad directors for the following year, so he acted as my reference but did not have to write a letter.

Your resumé is simple enough: include work and volunteer experiences you have had, to show that you will be dedicated; include special interests or hobbies that would make you a more interesting student to have abroad; and do not leave out any special opportunities that have brought you closer to the language or culture you wish to be a part of. When I had my interview with the program director, he told me that one of the reasons I was a good applicant was because of some things I had put in my letter of intent and resumé which made me different and a more interesting applicant. It is a lot like a job application, but more personal.

Depending on the study abroad program you have chosen you may have more competition between applicants. Mine had about thirty people apply and be accepted, but by the time this semester began only twenty actually came. But if you are applying for a more popular study abroad, such as London, or Spain, then you should take a few precautions. Apply ahead of time; if your deadline is in November, you should already send in your things by early October at the latest. It may be difficult to get your materials together, but most of these programs have a ton of good applicants, which means they sometimes resort to choosing people who applied earlier.

Study abroad is a really fun experience, but not necessarily an easy adjustment. If you have questions about the culture you are going to step into, definitely ask during your interview. Interviews can be conducted even after the application deadline has passed, but make sure to include in your application that you are not currently at BYU. Anyway, asking questions, just as at a job interview, shows your interest and real desire to go.

Good luck applying, and have fun in (country name here).

Question #53742 posted on 10/02/2009 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I was watching a show and they said in it that it's a scientific fact that women are more attracted to married men over single men. Is this true?

Strawberry Lemonade

A: Dear Strawberry Lemonade,

That is a rather suspicious scientific fact. I wonder where the statistics were gathered. There are people who suppose that women are more attracted to married men because of what is affectionately called the "wedding ring effect." It is just another type of forbidden desire: a woman knows the man is married, and ought to be unattainable, which makes it exciting and unreal. If this is really the reason any woman might be attracted to a married man, then it stands to reason that the same is true for men towards married women.

But are women more attracted to married men over single men? Pretty big claim, my friend. Women, in general, are more attracted to the men they have a chance at dating, and married men tend not to fit that category. Married men are fun to look at and talk to, but since nothing can ever happen, the majority of women leave it at that. Single men, on the other hand...oh the possibilities!

A: Dear Strawberry,

I too am highly suspicious of their claim. There are two possibilities I can think of: first, they were repeating some vague "fact" they'd heard before that isn't actually backed by science, but still tends to spread like wildfire. Or second, there really was a scientific study done that found a small preference, in some women, for men who were already married. This small difference then got blown out of proportion by someone (probably the media), talking about a small statistical difference as if it were an essential characteristic of the entire group.

Back to the first possibility: it's not uncommon that the press "expresses, validates and amplifies popular prejudices." (See "Contagious Misinformation," on the Language Log.) The example that Mark Liberman of the Language Log uses are the spurious (and entirely unfounded) claims that:
[W]omen talk almost three times as much as men, with the average woman chalking up 20,000 words in a day - 13,000 more than the average man.
Studies have shown that while a man will think about sex every 52 seconds, the subject tends to cross women's minds just once a day.
If you're interested in the way this spreads in media, see the link above. I thought it was interesting. However, both "facts" (which were even originally published in a book, in this case) are entirely false and appear to have been simply made up.

The second possibility, where the press overgeneralizes statistical information, also happens all the time when it reports on science. For an interesting discussion of the effect, see the Language Log article "Mandatory treatment for generic plurals?", which I found very enlightening. An example of the right way to do it (and of how subtle these differences can actually be) is given in their post on predicting gender based on the frequency of usage of the, a, and an. (Other examples they cite which get all blown out of proportion but do arise from actual studies are "men are happier than women," or "boys don't respond to sounds as rapidly as do girls," or "Asians have a more collectivist mentality than Europeans do.")

The take-home message? The next time you read some news article about a scientific study that shows that "X are more ____ than Y," realize that some reporter somewhere is probably either over-generalizing (and exaggerating) a small statistical difference, or may be repeating completely false information.

—Laser Jock, who gets tired of the way science is often reported in the press
A: Dear Strawberry Lemonade,

To answer your question, the one research study I found on the "wedding ring effect" did not support it (i.e., married men are not more attractive to women). The article is "Human Mate Choice and the Wedding Ring Effect: Are Married Men More Attractive?" by Obias Uller and L. Christoffer Johansson, and published in 2002 (link; full text is available to BYU students through EBSCO).

-The Supershrink