When it comes to improving your health, fish oil has had a checkered history. Since the 1990s, Vitalix Prime Website research has made it an on again/off again health-improving supplement (read all about the back and forth here). And now, there’s a study of more than 1,600 young men (who averaged just under 19 years of age) published in JAMA Network Open by scientists from Harvard, the University of Copenhagen, and the University of Southern Denmark that found that those who took fish oil supplements had higher semen volume and total sperm count as well as larger testicular size. This suggests better testicular function among the fish-oil-taking guys, which is a good thing, as some scientists hold that men’s semen quality has been tanking in the past 50 to 70 years. And according to data cited by this study, about 40 to 50 percent of fertility issues are due to male factors. Even if you’re not concerned about fertility right now, sperm health can be an indicator of your overall health, so it’s worth paying attention to (see more about that here).

So this is promising. Taking fish oil is an easy and Vitalix Prime Official Website popular thing to do. And we like easy and healthy things to do. But this is definitely not the last word on all of this. First of all, it’s a recall study-so the guys weren’t put on fish oil; they just had to say whether they took it regularly for the past 60 days, so there’s no guarantee they remembered right. And second, the number of guys who actually took these supplements was pretty low. So here’s the thing: If you take fish oil supplements already, then you may be getting this great benefit. If not, it’s hard to say whether this is enough evidence to suggest you jump on them. One step, if you want to try to reap the healthy benefits of fish oil, is to start eating more actual fish (some research has found this to boost sperm count as well). It’s easier-and tastier-than you think. Let us show you how to buy fish, and the easiest way to cook salmon. Marty Munson, currently the health director of Vitalix Prime men's vitality Health, has been a health editor at properties including Marie Claire, Prevention, Shape and RealAge. She's also certified as a swim and triathlon coach.

As some of you may know, I started out as a radio journalist. And when I discovered the web in around 1996, I knew that, to me, radio and TV were not the dominant news media any longer. Nowhere but on the web was it possible to research and cross-reference from dozens or resources with various origins. You could directly access the press agencies for news without having to read the politically or sensationalist tainted derivates in various outlets. The amazing thing was the humble link. And as the cool kids said back then Cool URIs don’t change. In other words, the web was about retention and accumulation of content. An ever growing library that by its very nature was self-indexing and cross-referencing. And this is what is being actively killed these days. But let’s go back a bit before I start focusing on that problem. Let’s take a peek at the slow decline of the web as a news medium.

The great thing about the web was that everyone could become a publisher and let their voice be heard. Finding places to write and create web pages was easy. But many of them were also short-lived and we learned the hard way when - for example - Geocities shut down, "free" didn’t mean "yours forever online". When "web2.0" became a thing, the publishing model got turned on its head. Instead of writing in an own publication, the idea was to comment and do smaller posts on a topic, linking to resources, or adding a funny image without alternative text. Accumulatively adding to threads, so to say. A bit of a reminder of Bulletin Boards or Forums, but with less focus. At that time I worked on various social media ideas in Yahoo, hitherto one of the main sources for people’s daily news, replacing daily papers. The model of Yahoo and others back then was simple: buy news content, spruce it up a bit and show ads around it.

Even then some dark patterns evolved, like splitting up longer content into carousels and pagination not for the sake of the user, but to record yet another click. Clicks and interaction means ad displays, reading was kind of a necessary evil from a monetisation point of view. This is also when the first ideas of creating sticky, viral and - let’s call it by its real name - addictive and lock-in content came up. Something we perfected now, but still wanted to avoid back then. Back then "web 2.0" or user generated content was something we didn’t quite trust and the biggest no-no was to create a product for a community for the sake of having one. This anti-pattern was called the Potemkin Villages, when historically people build fake villages for the emperor to see when driving past so he’d see growth where there wasn’t any. So, instead of growing a community, you build an empty product.