Category Archives: Editorials/Student Voice

Editor’s Note: The Plaid Line publishes editorials that contain opinions that are those of the student authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the the Plaid Line, HPSH, or its staff.

The truth about Acesulfame Potassium 

By: Haroon Yonis

Acesulfame Potassium, also commonly referred to as Ace-K, is a artificial sweetener, used in drinks such as diet soda, and low calorie candies. For the average person, it may seem as the perfect sugar substitute, as it cuts your calories, while giving you the sweet taste you love. 

Many health agencies, such as the FDA, claim that Ace-K is perfectly safe, and may actually be beneficial to you if you swap it with sugar in many of your favorite foods.

But that is unfortunately not true, and it could be dangerous if you take their advice, and continue consuming Ace-K. Not only is it not natural, it also has been found, in multiple authentic studies, to increase your chances of getting cancer. According to Medpage, artificial sweeteners had an undeniable correlation to cancers such as breast, colon, and liver. 

What was most surprising was that even in low dosages, this particular substance was linked to a higher risk of cancer. Not only does it cause cancer, but it is also 200 times sweeter than sugar!

Our bodies are not built to consume such toxic and sweet things, and the studies prove that. Fortunately, there are many great natural alternatives to Ace-K. Some of these other alternatives include: nectar, honey, and maple syrup. These are tasty sweeteners that do not include the risks associated with Ace-K. 

Ace-K is found usually in desserts such as soda, ice cream, candies, and pastries. They are very common in other household brands such as Monster and Red Bull.

The most surprising thing about Ace-K is the FDA’s opinion on it. In 1980, the FDA banned an artificial sweetener that had very similar components to that of Ace-K, called cyclamate. 

It banned cyclamate over a study that associated it with cancer, yet despite Ace-K’s obvious association with a multitude of lethal cancers, the FDA continues to irresponsibly call it safe for human consumption.

The best advice is just to generally stay away from artificial sweeteners, and to replace them with safe, natural sweeteners that are commonly found in nature.

For more information, please visit:

Titanium dioxide and its concerning effects on the human body

By: Haroon Yonis

Titanium dioxide is used as food coloring for many foods, and items, such as paint, toothpaste, and many popular food products. It is used in paint, which in itself is concerning. Why are we humans consuming a substance that is present in paint, and plastic?

Titanium dioxide is a very harmful substance and can negatively affect your organs, and physiological state. It is currently banned by the European Commission, due to the lack of evidence proving that titanium dioxide is safe for human consumption.

What actually should concern you, is the fact that titanium dioxide negatively harms your gut, and could directly cause colon cancer. It is also typically associated with inflammation which is never a good sign in our bodies.

Titanium dioxide can irritate your eyes, nostrils, and actually has been linked to causing lung cancer in animals, which possibly warrants it as a carcinogenic.

Not only does it cause cancer, it can also damage your cells and your DNA!

Unsurprisingly, the FDA hasn’t banned this dangerous substance yet, and it is continued to be used in popular food products such as coffee, gum, chocolate, and sweets.

How can one feel safe knowing they are consuming something that is actively harming them?

There are many steps one can take to prevent themselves from consuming titanium dioxide. These include checking the ingredient label of foods you commonly buy/use. And making sure you avoid all foods that contain it.

There are also many safe alternatives to titanium dioxide; this includes calcium carbonate. Many countries have resorted to banning the substance due to the uncertainty surrounding it, and the possible harm that it may cause to humans.

The FDA must do their job and ban this ingredient once and for all. The FDA continues to allow ingredients that have been proven to cause cancer to roam in our grocery stores and supermarkets.

We must hold them accountable and demand they join the European Commission in banning titanium dioxide!

Why I think the death penalty shouldn’t be abolished

By: Abdirahman Ege

I believe that the death penalty should not be abolished worldwide because some people just deserve it.

The death penalty is completely justified if someone commits a crime like murder, however, I believe that if someone does a little crime such as robbery, I believe prison time is reasonable.

The death penalty can ensure that justice is being served.

The death penalty can also be tricky because some people could be completely innocent but still face the death penalty. Since 1973, 186 death row prisoners have been wrongfully convicted which put them on death row in the United States.

According to deathpenaltyinfo.org, Carlos DeLuna was convicted in 1983, and was executed in 1989. A ‘Chicago Tribune’ investigation released evidence in 2006, that Texas may have executed an innocent man. The evidence that the ‘Chicago Tribune’ released pointed towards another man, Carlos Hernandez.

This is why I think there should be increased measures to regulate and restrict the sentencing of the death penalty. The decision should be made on hard concrete evidence and a confession.

The death penalty can also act as a sense of fear into potential criminals. They might not want to do the crime after they know they can receive the death penalty for their actions.

Some people argue that giving the death penalty as a punishment, isn’t a punishment at all, but instead, it is giving them a sense of escape with no time to reflect. Since I’m a person of religion, I believe that they will not escape, but will also pay in the afterlife.

The detrimental effects of the FDA’s leniency on dangerous substances and ingredients

By: Haroon Yonis

The FDA is a federal organization that focuses on food safety and health. It regulates our foods/drugs and makes sure what we consume doesn’t harm us. 

As US citizens, we are right to assume this organization will do their best to prevent harm from coming to us through seemingly harmless foods. 

Yet, there are many controversies surrounding the FDA and its peculiar leniency in banning cancer causing agents; ingredients that have been banned in the EU, and practically every country in the world, yet the FDA continues to delay banning these harmful ingredients, many of which have been proven to cause cancer and many other terrible diseases.

A great example of this, is the group of food dyes commonly found in many household foods: Yellow 6, Yellow 5, and Red 40.

These food dyes have been scientifically proven to cause cancer. The specific cancer causing chemicals in these foods are: 4-aminobiphenyl, 4-aminoazobenzene, and benzidine.

Not only do these food dyes cause cancer, they also cause vomiting and an uncontrollable itch when they are given to certain individuals. Also, young adolescents are more susceptible to these conditions when consuming the dye.

These dyes wouldn’t be an issue if they weren’t prevalent in popular and household foods such as Froot Loops, Doritos, and Jello.

Millions eat these foods every year, and the FDA continues to claim the chemicals in these dyes are safe. Yellow 5, 6, and Red 40, have been banned in the United Kingdom, France, and many other countries. The dye is even illegal in countries such as Norway and Finland.

This is only a single example of the FDA’s failure at keeping US citizens safe. There are thousands of other chemicals that are still allowed in the US, despite the obvious risks and effects associated with them.

Now, the questions that arises are:

  • Why does the FDA continue to allow such foods to be sold in the market, when their sole purpose is to regulate these foods?
  • And: How can we as a country prevent these foods from reaching our children and communities?

For more information, please visit:

How depression affects school

By: Kayla Madison

Depression affects school differently for everyone. Usually, lower grades are one the first noticeable signs. Sometimes though, unfortunately, it’s easier for parents/teachers/family members to miss this sign of mental illness. It’s a common thing to think that “It’s just a teenager thing/ it’s just a phase”, but a drop of grades can be a clear sign that there’s more that meets the eye.

The some possible symptoms of how depression can affect school are: difficulty concentrating – resulting in poor work on assignments and exams, trouble with organizing and time management, hypersensitivity – that could lead to emotions out of whack and not good interactions socially, forgetfulness, and decreased self esteem. These are just quick little signs that show how difficult school can be when depressed, because of these things they could significantly affect your school life.

Depression at school can affect your perception of yourself at school, failing an assignment could worsen the thought that you’re dumb, or can’t do anything right, and it becomes a self perpetuating cycle. Memory is also impaired, which becomes especially hard when taking tests or exams, affecting grades.

As someone who struggles with depression, my position is a lot like this: I become unmotivated to do anything and I end up having bad grades or attendance. I don’t want to do anything involving school, and I usually just wait it out because there are no methods out of that kind of thinking. That almost always sucks for me because then I have to end up making up credits, which is extremely hard when you’re depressed, and I’m almost a senior and it’s really messing a lot of things up for me. When you feel like this you should mainly talk to your teachers, or counselors, and see if there’s anything you can do to prevent things like credit recovery or summer school.

Is the McDonald’s Quarter Pounder Deluxe the hidden pathway to health?

By: Ashley Harris

Is the McDonald’s “Quarter Pounder Deluxe” the newest health food? Health is defined differently in every country and even in every household. Some people might say “Low carb is the healthiest diet!” While others might argue that “Plant based is the healthiest diet!” Although each of these has great possibilities, they both lack at least one of the five macronutrients needed in a well-balanced and sustainable diet.

What are the five macronutrients, you might ask. Well, according to the Nutrient Department at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts; In a well-balanced meal, you need one of these five macronutrients: Carbohydrates, protein, fat, vitamins (most commonly found in fruits and vegetables), and whole grains.

When someone thinks of a well-balanced meal, their mind will most likely drift to a salad or something of the sort. While this meal is great for getting vitamins and possibly protein; that is only 2 of the 5 necessary macronutrients.

Whereas, If we look at the “Quarter Pounder Deluxe” from McDonald’s, we see a bun, lettuce, tomatoes, cheese, meat patty, and pickles. In this meal, you will find carbohydrates in the bun; protein in the meat patty and cheese; vitamins in the lettuce, tomatoes, and pickles; fat in the cheese, bun, and meat patty; and whole grains in the bun.

Now some might argue that this still isn’t a well-balanced meal due to the grease or artificial ingredients, but no diet is well balanced or sustainable without allowing your body the things they crave. Remember, health isn’t always about improving physical health but improving mental health as well. As well-known nutritionist, Anupama Menon once said, “Make your food routine easy on yourselves, eat what you make in the kitchen, eat enough. Discipline lies in balance, not in deprivation.”

So, is the McDonald’s “Quarter Pounder Deluxe” really the worst food for your health?

How food apartheid affects lower income communities

By: Haroon Yonis

A food apartheid is when a community has no access to healthy food or grocery stores in their area. Food apartheid are an underlying issue in many of our communities. It differs from a normal food desert, in that it specifically relates to race. The lack of healthy, available food is a concern we must address. 

Many of these communities lack access to reliable transportation, so when these lower-income communities are affected by a food apartheid, they are virtually powerless. As a result of this, they tend to resort to lower quality frozen foods that are sold at their local convenience stores. The effects of eating such food, over a long period of time, is extremely detrimental to the human body. This causes health issues to be more prevalent in these areas, and can include obesity, heart disease, cancer, and a plethora of other health issues. 

Food apartheids do not occur coincidentally, as they are racially motivated. Many of these areas have a large minority population, and as result of past discrimination, tend to have a lower overall salary then their higher-income counterparts. Grocery stores notice these statistics, and single out these marginalized communities, purposely not building their stores in these areas. As a result, this causes a lack of healthy and accessible foods in those regions.

An unfortunate local case of a food apartheid, is the Frogtown community that many Minnesota residents are familiar with. Grocery stores are almost non-existent in this area, while there are a multitude of convenience stores in the region. 

According to the Minnesota Compass website, the median income in the Frogtown area is $38,103, with approximately 69.4% of the population being minorities. The percentage of residents who have vehicles is quite low too, which makes it harder for these individuals to have access to the grocery stores in areas such as Midway and Highland. 

Many families realize this, and begin feeding their children foods that are riddled with GMO’s, chemicals, and concerning ingredients. Even if they desired to eat healthier, this simply wouldn’t be possible due to the area having almost no grocery stores.

So, how do we improve the accessibility of healthier foods in these marginalized communities?

The first step to solving this crisis is by acknowledging that it exists. Afterwards, we can find which areas are being purposely targeted, and start improving the flow of healthier foods in those highlighted areas.

Eventually, we can start building grocery stores in these areas, so families who lack reliable transportation can easily make the walk or bus ride to these stores. But in order for this to be possible, we as a community must come together and make this a reality.

Does watching violent media or playing video games cause aggresion?

By: Abdihakim Mohamoud

Despite popular belief, violent media or video games have little to no correlation with aggressive behavior. Various sources have shown that the vast majority of young people do not show changes in anger levels when either viewing or playing violent video games. In fact, an article from Onlinelibrary.wiley.com revealed that these games carry several benefits, from increasing cognitive thinking to stimulating feelings of joy and happiness.

A study was conducted at ISU in which 275 college-aged men were tested by playing different violence levels in the same game. The men’s aggression levels were measured, and the results were overwhelming. The results were described as “15 minutes of violent and difficult gameplay on aggressive behavior may be small and indistinguishable from zero”, essentially proving there is little to no association.

While the thought of violent video games offering positive feelings and thoughts may sound absurd, it’s more than common.

According to an article from Liebertpub.com, evidence exists that these video games offer mood-boosting and stress-reducing effects. They are a pastime that allows a temporary feeling of joy and accomplishment when one completes a difficult task.

Regarding the counter argument, an article from APA.org stated that violent behavior is indeed linked with violent video games. A study also proved that the amount of time spent playing video games was correlated with lower academic grades in college.

So, while most violent media have little effect on aggressive behavior, it has been demonstrated that it has some effect on behavior and academics.

It is being proven time and time again that, contrary to many beliefs, and even some evidence pointing in the other direction, playing or consuming violent games or media does not affect aggression levels.

Article

For more information, please visit:

Does America need more gun control?

By: Isaac Lund

For every 100 people in the U.S., there are approximately 121 guns. This is the highest amount per capita of any country in the world, and it isn’t close with Yemen coming in second at only 52.8. According to NSSF, the U.S.’s guns and ammunition industry created over 60 billion dollars in economic revenue in 2020 alone. So, how come so many life-threatening weapons are allowed to circulate unabaided?

Pro-gun Americans have long repertoires of gun control downsides ready to spout at a moments notice.

Many tend to bring up the second amendment, which states: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” With support from the most central document to the U.S. government, who’s to argue that gun owners don’t have the right to own firearms?

Another common argument is that many gun-related murders are executed by undocumented and illegal weapons. The thought process here is that gun control would only prevent law-abiding citizens from acquiring guns to use in self defense, rather than shutting down black market deals that provide murderers with their weapons. Gun control laws such as background checks and microstamping are often seen as an invasion of privacy as well.

Finally, gun owners frequently look at countries with completely different socio-economic demographics and crime levels like Mexico as “great examples” for areas where strict gun control laws were not effective.

Supporters of gun control are steadfast in their beliefs as well.

First and foremost, most mass shootings come from legal firearms. In a study conducted by ‘Mother Jones’ journalism, it was found that roughly three quarters of the firearms used to take lives were legally purchased.

Also, owning a gun obviously increases the chance of utilizing one for homicide. ‘The New England Journal of Medicine’ published a study by Arthur Kellerman showing that people living in a home with a firearm are 40 times more likely to commit homicide than those without one in the house.

Also, background checks seldom occur during the private sale of a firearm, allowing even those who explicitly are prohibited from owning one to acquire a gun.

Finally, gun control measures don’t necessarily involve confiscation; even something like licensing or required tutorials would be a step in the right direction.

At the end of the day, the second amendment was not designed for a time when easily concealable, multi-shot weapons can be owned by civilians, and we should not treat it as such.

Should the US minimum wage be increased?

By: Isaac Lund

The minimum wage in the US was introduced under President Franklin during the great depression. At the time of its creation, it was 25 cents, but today, Saint Paul’s is $12.50.

1.8 million workers, or 2.3% of the US’s workforce, makes less than the federal nationwide minimum, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Should these minimums be increased?

Proponents of a higher minimum wage say it would increase economic activity and spur job growth. The Economic Policy Institute stated that raising the federal minimum wage by $2.85 would inject 22.1 billion dollars in the economy over a 3 year span, while simultaneously creating 85,000 new jobs.

Also, raising the minimum wage may reduce poverty: the current federal minimum wage is 8% below the national poverty level for single-parent households.

The minimum wage is also not indexed for inflation, so even as consumer prices rise, salaries for the poor do not necessarily increase in kind.

Increasing the minimum wage has also been shown to reduce income, gender, and race inequality. A Human Impact Partners study also showed that such an increase would reduce premature deaths by giving a wider range of people enough to eat.

Opponents of raising the minimum wage argue that raising minimum wage would increase unemployment levels. This would happen because companies would be forced to lay off some employees to stay afloat with the new minimum, and would also likely have to lower hiring levels. Many companies in their entirety may be forced to close.

Of course, consumer goods and housing prices would also increase sequentially.

Finally, many predict that more companies would outsource to countries with lower wages, like Southeast Asia, compacting on to an already-terrible issue.

Both proponents and opponents of this issue have valid points, and several of both sides’ predictions would likely come to pass if the minimum wage was increased. I personally believe an increase would be prudent, but maybe a small one at first, just to see what it brings.