upworthy
Add Upworthy to your Google News feed.
Google News Button
Heroes

See it here: exclusive English translation of powerful viral Chinese documentary 'Under the Dome'

Investigative journalist Chai Jing's self-funded documentary "Under the Dome" about the long-term effects of air pollution in China went massively viral in early March 2015, racking up over 150 million views in its first weekend. Read the English translation here.

Retired investigative journalist Chai Jing's self-funded documentary "Under the Dome" about the long-term effects of air pollution in China went massively viral in early March 2015, racking up over 150 million views in its first weekend.

We at Upworthy felt it was so important to share the documentary with non-Mandarin speakers that we commissioned exclusive translations of the first and last 10 minutes of the documentary.


To fill in the middle, however, we called on Upworthy Head of Product Mike Su, who grew up in Taiwan and speaks fluent Mandarin, to provide a summarized play-by-play.

(Update 7/11/2016: The original documentary has since added complete English-language captioning, and that version now appears below.)

You can watch the documentary (with captions) in its entirety here or scroll down to read our time-stamped highlights:

[10:02-12:30]

The first 10 minutes of the documentary segue into a short animation that breaks down the science behind how harmful "PM2.5" is. PM2.5 means particulate matter (aka pollution!) that is 2.5 micrometers and smaller. People in China have been told that exposure to pollution helps the body adapt to it. But this is scientifically untrue.

Jing's animation shows PM2.5 and its gang of toxins as playing a video game to get into the body, slipping through each layer of defense the body puts up and why they are insufficient to stop the almighty PM2.5.

Exposing the human body to PM2.5 does not help it adapt. Long-term exposure to PM2.5 will ultimately compromise your immune system, and at worst, the particles will enter directly into the bloodstream, which can be fatal.

Scariest. Animation. Evar.

[12:30]


Here Jing shows a chart displaying the close correlation between death rates and elevated PM2.5 levels. The most vulnerable members of the community are children and parents.

[13:20]

Parents allowed Jing to photograph their children who were born with respiratory problems. Just a few months into their young lives, they had already contracted pneumonia. It is suspected that this is the result of not properly protecting them when heavy haze (made up of the dreaded PM2.5) rolled in.

The parents tell Jing that doctors explained to them that they cannot officially tie the pneumonia and respiratory problems to the haze just yet. But! What they can say is that in January 2013, during a period of particularly heavy haze, 27 cities in China reported 10%-150% increases in emergency room visits for children and the elderly.

[13:47]

Around the time that Jing gave birth to her daughter, she found herself speaking to other mothers, asking whether it's true that exposing children to pollution helps them adapt. She introduces a clip of a University of Southern California professor who rebuts that theory.

Dr. Avol points to the massive amounts of evidence showing that children breathing clean air grow faster than children in polluted areas, and that poor lung function early in life is a predictor of poor lung function later in life. In other words, says Dr. Avol, "[When you do] something about the air while the child is still growing, you can make a change in that child's life."

[15:00]

It's heartbreaking, but Jing explains coming to the realization that she cannot protect her child forever. She cannot prevent her daughter from breathing.

[15:30]

(If you're squeamish, scroll past this next image, OK?)

A lung cancer patient allows Jing to tape her having surgery. The patient doesn't smoke, is generally healthy, and is in her 50s. The doctors take out giant freaking chunks of black stuff anyway.


Gross.

[17:00]

A doctor says he cannot officially pin the cancer on pollution, but based on his experience he strongly suspects it to be the cause. But, Jing says, it makes her wonder ... she knows lung cancer needs years to develop, not just the past few years. So she requests aerial pictures of China from NASA for the past 10 years. And holy crap, has China been polluted.

2005

2011

[18:00]

An expert shows the intense pollution that's been spread across China since at least 2004. Jing says she's puzzled because she doesn't remember bad haze being a thing back then.

But then the expert sends her this picture from the Beijing airport and asks her what she sees.

She thinks to herself, "That's haze, right?" It seems so obvious.

But then the expert shows her the newspaper headline from that day. It reads, "Fog causes record delays at Beijing airport" ... and it hits her like a ton of bricks.

She says she immediately felt guilty as a reporter. When she was covering pollution stories, she only thought of pollution as what happens when you see factory smokestacks blowing pollutants in the air, not when you're living in a metropolitan place like Beijing.

"At the time, I was no longer a reporter, but an eyewitness," Jing says.

[19:00]

But what about pollution while Jing was growing up? People in China all grew up on coal stoves to stay warm, so why didn't they all have cancer?

Her friend showed her a survey from 1976-1981 that proved the correlation between coal pollution and death. But this report remained internal.

[21:11]

Here Jing shows a series of pictures of each season. And what she has to say is so powerful that I'm going to literally translate here:

"A person, any living thing should live as such:

When spring comes, the doors are left open, welcoming the cool breeze, the smell of fresh flowers, the colors of spring. Sometimes when you encounter fresh rain, or fog, you find it hard to resist the temptation to breathe deeply and feel the crisp air and refreshing moisture enter your lungs.

In the fall, you want to just find a loved one, and do nothing but laze around all day under the clear autumn sunlight.

Come winter time, you want to run outside and watch your kid stick their tongue out to catch the falling snow, and you'd tell them about the wonder of nature and life.

But today, every day I wake up, first thing I do is look at the Air Quality Index app on my phone. Use it to arrange my day. I wear my mask shopping, buying groceries, meeting with friends. I use tape to cover every window frame. When I take my kid out to get vaccines, I get scared when she so much as giggles for fear she's breathing in more pollution.











Honestly, I am not afraid of dying. I just don't want to live this way anymore.


So whenever someone asks me, 'Why are you doing all of this anyway?' I tell them this is personal beef between me and the haze. I want to know where it's coming from. I want to get to the bottom of this."


Wow.

[23:00-25:00]

Jing turns her attention to finding out where all the pollution comes from. Unsurprisingly, the vast majority comes from human activity. PM2.5 has existed since the dawn of time, but it has accelerated as a result of human activity.

60% of PM2.5 in China comes from burning coal and oil. As nations like Germany and England industrialized, they faced dire consequences from the pollution they produced. Eventually, the United States and Japan faced similar crises. And today, developing countries such as India, Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan are all wrestling with it.

China, with its massive scale and rapid development, has created massive consumption of oil and coal. Worse still, the combination of burning BOTH oil and coal has created unprecedented levels of toxicity.

[25:00-28:00]

If the whole world has to burn coal, Jing asks, why is China's particular pollution problem special? It turns out China has burned AS MUCH COAL AS THE REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED.

The last time a nation burned this much coal, it was England. Here Jing goes through the history of the prosperity England enjoyed as it industrialized on the back of its coal consumption. But, she reminds her audience, the English paid a heavy, heavy price for doing so. In 1952, a short 63 years ago, a confluence of events created London's Great Smog, which ultimately killed 12,000 people and sickened about 100,000 others. The images of England from that time are not unlike China today.

[27:46]

After the crisis in 1952, Jing explains, Western countries cut back on their coal consumption significantly and were able to begin improving the air. But this happened just as China began the gradual process of opening itself up again. China had closed itself off for so long and had become so poor, it desperately needed something to catapult itself back into the global economy. China chose coal.

Where is all this coal being used? The vast majority is in Hebei province, a leading producer of steel in China.

Jing went to visit Tangshan, a large industrial city in Hebei, in October of last year. She went first with representatives from the Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) and tried to get some drone footage to catch illegal activity ... but the haze was too heavy to get an actual view:

So they resorted to making some surprise visits. What they got on tape was shocking, to say the least:

Seriously, those flames are just straight-up burning, with fumes trapped under the ceiling.

[31:00]

After Jing got all this footage and evidence of illegal activity, none of these factories faced any discipline whatsoever. When she asked the MEP representative why, he referred her to their boss. She sits down with him for an interview where she asks him why nothing was done.

The reason he gives her? The factories have gotten too big to fail. He asks her if she could make the decision to shut them down and eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs, essentially destroying the economy of the entire province in the process.

[33:00]

While this was happening in northern China, Jing would often talk to her friend in the south who would claim to be relatively unscathed from the crisis. But Jing quickly points out that while the south didn't have to deal with coal, per se, if you look at a map of all of the steel plants (red), power plants (green), and concrete plants (blue) in the eastern coastal region of China, you see a different story. In Jiangsu province, for example, there's a power plant every 30 km.

[33:42]

Then she shows this map of which factories were emitting pollution above the legal limit.


Yiiiiiiiiiikes.

[34:00]

What are some other consequences of this massive coal consumption? What happens when you use up all of the cleaner coal? You burn the cheap stuff. And what does that cheap stuff, known as "lignite," look like? Check this out:


Getting coal in your stocking is bad enough. Imagine if you got a lump of this crap.

Lignite doesn't look anything like coal. But the real problem with it is that it burns so inefficiently that almost 50% of it burns up into ashes without producing any usable energy.

So what's the big deal with crappy coal? Well, in 2013, a factory opened in Harbin. On its first day of operation, the PM2.5 index hit 1,000.

This was a scene from Harbin that day:



At the time, there were no limits and no regulations. Factories just burned that crappy coal and set the fumes into the air. The 12 million people of Harbin were blanketed in haze, like a big concrete ceiling locking them in.

[35:39]

Jing points out that China isn't alone in using lignite. Germany is also a big user of it. The big difference is that coal, unlike lignite, can be cleaned. England washes 95% of its coal, while in China, less than half of the coal burned is washed, which produces all kinds of inefficient crap (to use a technical term). And it's killing people.

A lot of the coal in China is burned by individuals. In Beijing, the PM2.5 index is 25 times higher during the winter because of coal burning. She talks about a woman suffering from lung cancer who was coughing up blood. The woman was so weak she could not even shoo the flies that flew around her. So she asked people to put fly paper on her stomach.

Here Jing shares a photo of a man standing with pictures of all the family members he's lost to lung cancer:

And a photo showing that many houses simply have nobody left to live in them:

Cobwebs. Cobwebs everywhere.

We often hear that China is a developing country and protecting the environment is a luxury it can't afford right now. But those in China who are the most vulnerable are the poor and voiceless, and they need the rest of the country to stand up for them and protect them.

[37:00]

She then speaks with some experts who tell her that if China can reduce its coal consumption or clean its coal, that will massively reduce its pollution problem. If China simply properly enforced EXISTING standards, there would be a massive 60% drop in carbon emissions. The respect of the laws and regulations always comes down to execution.

[39:00]

If the coal pollution is taken care of, what else is exacerbating the problem? Oil.

The vast majority of oil usage is in automobiles. In 2010, Beijing added 800,000 cars in a SINGLE YEAR. So it makes sense that Beijing's #1 pollutant is emissions from automobiles.

Is it simply a matter of lots of cars equals lots of pollution? Not necessarily, Jing says. Tokyo has just as many cars but doesn't suffer from the same pollution. That's because Tokyo has great public transportation and only 6% of people drive. Compare that to 40% of people in Beijing ... and sitting in that traffic makes the 405 in L.A. look like the autobahn.

[41:30]

Chai Jing and her family agreed to only drive their car in a limited number of situations. Her husband commutes to work on his bike. But this is what the bike lane in their neighborhood looks like:

She makes a good point here, though: This is not an issue about Chinese people being particularly law-breaking — this is an issue of enforcement. Human nature is all pretty similar, she says; it's just whether the actions have consequences.

Next, she shows a picture of London before and after it regulated parking:

The left is before regulations, the middle is after introducing metered parking with penalties, and the image on the right? That's when they increased fees.

[42:27]

But car lovers have another question. If cars really drive the most pollution, why is it still so polluted in the middle of the night? Chai says she had the same question until officials gave her data that showed consistent spikes in pollution around midnight each night. Curious, she set out with a camera crew to get some answers.

As she joined the police in inspections, truck after 18-wheeler truck had stickers certifying approved levels of emissions filtering for diesel fuel, but none of them actually had the filters.



A single diesel truck with no filtering pollutes 500 times as much as trucks that meet regulatory standards. While diesel trucks account for only 17% of overall oil consumption, they produce about 70% of the pollution. And the exhaust from diesel pipes is even more toxic.

There are no greater victims here than the truck drivers themselves, who have among the highest rates of cancer. It seems cruel and unusual to go after the drivers for not having the filters, considering they used their hard-earned money to buy the trucks — trucks that have officially certified filtering stickers on them.

Jing concludes: Perhaps it's more reasonable to go after the car manufacturers.

[45:00]

Jing calls up one of these car manufacturers and presents her evidence that there are filter-certified stickers on trucks that don't have filters. He fumbles around without explanation until she finally gets him to outright admit that he's saying they put on the wrong stickers, and if someone wants the car, well, ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯.

Industries always have their own excuses, Jing says, but if everyone knows this and we have the laws, why can't we go after them? She cites several laws and explains various technical loopholes that, unfortunately, allow this behavior to continue.

Her next step is figuring out which enforcing body should close the loopholes. And, again, each of the ministries passes the buck.

Everyone she talked to basically said, ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯.

She interviews a guy from the Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) and goes hard after him to get an explanation for why they don't prosecute people under these regulations.

He dances around the answer a bit, explaining that each group basically does its duty but the real enforcement falls in the middle. Jing is totally flabbergasted and tells him straight, "So all these years you guys have not used teeth at all in enforcing the law!" This is a Chinese phrase used to describe tough talk but no ability to follow through. His comeback? "Forget not using teeth. I don't want to even open my mouth for fear that people will see I don't have any teeth at all!"

Her face kinda says it all.

She then calls the truck manufacturer back, and he explains: "If the MEP were to enforce the laws, I guarantee you I'd meet regulations by tomorrow. But if they aren't coming after me, I would never meet requirements. Otherwise, if I were the only one meeting regulations, and the next guy is selling fraudulent cars, then I'd go out of business!" After that, when she asked the MEP if this was reasonable, he agreed.

Worse still, she says, they tested the quality of the diesel fuel at the truck stops. Chinese oil measured 25 times worse than European counterparts. Her friends sent her a complicated chart that basically said China's oil is routinely 3-4 times lower in quality. If China could bring it up even one level, it would drop emissions by 10%.

So what's the big deal with crappy oil? Fumes from evaporation. Evaporation? Is that a big deal? Well, her friend sent her this infrared video:

According to her, there's more pollution in Beijing from evaporated fumes than there is from car exhaust pipes. Worse still, the fumes are a big contributor of PM2.5 pollutants.

So why doesn't China raise its oil quality?

When Jing asked people in the oil industry, they told her it's because the government standards are so low that there's no incentive to improve.

When Jing went after the government, what answer did she get back? Over 67% of one of the standards committees is OIL INDUSTRY EMPLOYEES. One of the other committees is over 90%.

This is dizzying. No wonder things haven't gotten better. Nobody is taking responsibility, and there are so many loopholes in this thing.

[53:22]

Being the investigative reporter that she is, Jing went to China's director of oil standards, who, oh by the way, also used to be the chief engineer for the state-owned oil monopoly Sinopec:

Jing gets right to it and asks him why there are so many oil industry insiders setting the standards.

He claims that standards shouldn't be set by industry outsiders who don't understand the details.

Incredulous, she asks, "You're saying the Ministry of Environmental Protection doesn't understand?!" No, he says, he doesn't think they do.

Again, her face really says it all:

Who should set the standards? Jing tells him: "If you guys set the standards, and then when it comes time to talk about raising the quality, you guys say the national standards (that you set) are too low, and then you give all these excuses. People will no longer believe you."

She goes on to explain how other countries have transparent debate, thorough interaction between governing bodies and the oil industry, and bring these decisions to a vote. She wants to know if he would be open to that sort of a process. He claims to be.

Jing challenges him further — she asks if he would be more transparent with China's process. This is where he says something truly ridiculous: He thinks that the public already mistrusts the oil industry, so if he were to be more transparent, they would only see what they would want to see. So they're better off not having the discussion in the first place.

Why not go ahead and raise standards then? He claims there may be too many unknown ramifications and too much potential economic impact. He isn't ready to bear such responsibility.

Jing's reaction is spot-on:

Then she lists the incredible revenue and profits of Sinopec and asks him, "For such a large and profitable state-owned enterprise, why can't it step up to take more responsibility to society?"

(Are you sitting down?) He says: "Sinopec is big. Really big. Just like a person, it's very fat. Excessively fat."

(What does that even mean?!?!?!)

Jing concludes that all businesses optimize for their self-interests. That makes sense. That's the nature of industry, after all.

[56:25]

Jing was still curious about how other countries set their standards.

Environmental regulatory bodies set most countries' standards (although, yes, perhaps with input and conversation with industry).

So why are China's so heavily controlled by industry? Jing points to some historical reasons.

In the 1960s, gas was so rare that you'd see buses with giant bags of propane tied to the top:

When oil was first imported to China, the MEP didn't even exist, so standards were set by a subsidiary of Sinopec. Over the years, as things evolved, the heavy influence of Sinopec always remained.

But as the public awareness for environmental issues has grown, more and more pressure has been put on Sinopec and the MEP to raise standards. In the past couple of years, the mix has gotten better. Every country declares their values by which they strike that balance. Jing strikes a hopeful note, pointing out that the trends are starting to move in the right direction.

[58:32]

Another shocking thing Jing didn't realize when she started her research was that harbors and waterways were completely unregulated:

Boats like this one use the worst-of-the-worst oil — completely unfiltered. In the worst places in the harbors, you can actually reach your hand into the water and scoop out pollutants. Yuck.

Even if you're not near waterways or airports, another threat exists: construction vehicles. Jing and her crew followed a billowing truck. The truck stopped by a gas station, if you could call it that:

Jing went in after the driver, and when they encountered the manager, he refused to produce any permits. They kept arguing with him, she explains, and he kept giving ridiculous excuses. She kept countering before finally declaring that they were with MEP officials, and therefore had the right to demand this of him.

He counters, "You have the obligation, but you don't have the right." Jing and her crew were so stunned, they had no comeback for him.

From coal to oil, there is massive consumption. The quality is low. China doesn't clean it. When Chinese citizens emit, she says, they don't have the proper controls in place. She doesn't understand why. But, she says, the manager's crazy response suddenly brought it home.

[1:02:00]

(Mike's note: This part of the documentary features a bunch of interview scenes in which Jing calls all these guys out. They're all mansplaining and trying to talk down to this "little girl" with their political talking points, and she basically cuts through all their B.S., catches them way off guard, and connects all the ludicrous dots of what they say. They have weird, embarrassed faces the whole time. It's a really fun segment.)

When Jing interviewed this guy, she asked him if he would dare do construction without the proper permit. "No way," he says.

"If you had no operating license or tax ID, would you dare operate?" She asks. "No way. No way," he answers.

"Then why do you proceed with emissions without the proper permitting from the MEP?" she asks.

"Um, well, we're working on it. We'll have it eventually."

In perhaps the crowning interview, she shows a bunch of scenes of the utterly disgusting crap outside and talks about the reeking odors before sitting down with another guy, who she asks about the horrendous odors from outside.

Gross.

His answer?

To which the audience is all LOLZ:

She then breaks down how much you can save by not getting up to standards on steel, coal, diesel, and imported oil:


The graphic shows that it costs 100 yuan per ton to produce steel that meets standards. It costs 156 yuan to wash coal and 20,000 yuan to get trucks that are actually filtered.

10 years ago, Jing says, she'd wonder what that smell was floating through the air ... now she knows it's the smell of money.

[1:05:08]

Everyone's talking about environmental protection, but who wants to destroy our economy?

This chart shows GDP growth in China since 1980.

Jing returned to the steel plants that she first visited 10 years ago and was shocked to find that piles of steel that had been there for a long time were rusty.

She asked a worker how business was. He pointed around and asked her whether she saw anyone coming in to pick up goods. Nope. These businesses are selling the lowest end of products and competing entirely on volume.

[1:05:51]

Here, Jing shows what goes into producing one ton of steel:

It requires 600 kg of coal and 3-6 tons of water. The process produces 1.53 kg of sulfur dioxide and 1 kg of soot. Yiiiiiiiikes.

The profit from that one ton of steel? It's not even enough to buy an egg from a street vendor.

Yet all of these industries are still massively subsidized by the government. One company was receiving 2 billion yuan (~$318 million USD) every other year. So these zombie businesses are voraciously consuming resources while creating massive risk for the economy. Still, they continue to expand.

[1:07:49]

Jing recently received a letter from a young girl asking for her help. The nearby plant was threatening to tear down her home in order to expand. Her dad refused and was beat up.

That girl? She's the little girl Jing interviewed 10 years ago (as seen in the first 10 minutes of the documentary) who had never seen stars or clouds.

Jing asked her how her health was. She said: "I don't have the time to care about my health right now. I just want me and my family to have a place to live." Luckily, when Jing checked back with her, the boss of the plant had gotten arrested. So that particular disaster was averted.

But these industries continue to expand and receive support. The reason? Growth. Simply put, when urbanization increases by just 1%, it justifies all the production.

But a Tsinghua University professor told her that cities in China have also reached a tipping point. She thought of to her personal life and the continued urbanization around her. That expansion must be continuing...

Her friend encouraged her to return home and take a look.

[1:09:57]

What she found when she returned to Shanxi was construction site after construction site, real estate ad after real estate ad, and lots of empty buildings.


She stayed in what was billed as a five-star hotel — in the presidential suite, no less. But when she arrived, she was greeted by a flashlight in the unlit garage and led throughout the hallways of an unlit hotel to her room. It was so deserted that the hotel did not even have power.

When she returned to Beijing and discussed this, she learned that Shanxi was a microcosm of what was going on around the country.

China has 1.3 billion people, but if you added up all of the occupancies of all of these buildings, it would equal 3.4 billion.

Jing speaks romantically about the positive impact urbanization has had in her own life — she was able to leave small-town Shanxi and come to Beijing to study and start a career. If it weren't for urbanization, she says, she'd probably still be in Shanxi flipping an abacus and eking out a life.

Cities gave us freedom and gave China 30 years of incredible prosperity. But if we don't change our model, she says, experts predict China will be consuming such large amounts of resources and producing so much pollution that it will run out of capacity to absorb the emissions before it runs out of the resources.

The haze is just getting started. Traffic is just getting started.

[1:14:49]

During the APEC summit (during which the government underwent massive efforts to clean the air), Jing's husband brought her to a place where, in his youth, his father often took him to go ice skating, swimming, and fishing.

He felt the beauty and elegance of this proud, historic city. They sat there soaking it in like young kids looking at the last piece of candy, she says, knowing that if they didn't eat it, it would melt ... but if they ate it, it would be no more. It's that mixed feeling of excitement, hesitation, and wistfulness.

She shows a powerful, nostalgic sequence of people recalling the Beijing of old, the Beijing where they grew up:


Beautiful.

[1:15:53]

She asked an expert, "What would it take to maintain the blue skies we enjoyed during the APEC summit?" He said that relative to 2013, China would need to reduce sulfur dioxide by 47%, nitrogen oxides by 52%, and PM2.5 by 44% — basically, remove over 50% of the pollutants.

[1:17:30]

As dire as the situation in China seems, Jing turns to history to find hope. With all of its traffic and its geographical layout, she realizes that the Beijing of today is not dissimilar to the Los Angeles of old.

She shows a picture of a gag gift from back in the day that jokingly captures its former reality:

But, she points out, while the number of cars in L.A. has tripled since 1970, emissions have dropped by 75%.

Jing went to L.A. to find out how this was possible. She observed the lack of public transportation, much like Beijing, and the heavy reliance on cars. And, of course, the L.A. traffic:

But look at those clear skies!

Then she witnessed checkpoint inspections, much like back in China. All the trucks are required to install filters that reduce particle emissions by 99%.

Jing witnessed them catching a driver who did not have the filter installed — he was fined $1,000. She found out the driver takes home about $4,000 per month. He was fined a quarter of his income for not having the filter installed. If a driver has multiple offenses, the driver is not able to renew the truck's tags, eliminating his or her income. The miracle of law enforcement!

A California official tells her that 45% of the people want to be good citizens and comply, 45% do it because they don't want to get caught and fined, and 10% say: "I don't care. Catch me if you can."

She cites the high number of citations and fines for non-compliance:

Jing reiterates that human nature is the same everywhere. No matter where you go, there are going to be those who want to cut corners. But if proper enforcement can bring 90% of the people into line, there is hope. And just like they said at the car factories in China, if there's no enforcement, 90% of the cars coming off the factory line will be out of compliance.

[1:22:40]

Jing explains that back when the U.S. was raising emission standards, the old industry complained. Car manufacturers said it would destroy their business and threaten the economy. They sued the EPA and fought the change.

But! In the meantime, foreign manufacturers raised their hands and said they could meet those higher standards. Once the U.S. companies heard this, they quickly got in line with the changes, even though they ceded a large chunk of the market share along the way.

Jing went to the EPA and asked if it faced accusations and pressure for destroying domestic industries. The EPA rep's answer: "Environmental protection is not a burden, but an opportunity for innovation. If you're merely trying to protect your losses, you will not be able to innovate. Government's role is to set the standard and a level playing field. If you create competition, it will win the market."

[1:23:28]

Next, Jing asks, "If China is such a mass consumer of coal, how will we ever wean ourselves off it?"

People say it took London 40-50 years to recover from the Great Smog of '52. So will it take China as long? Jing says she points those people to this chart showing that ACTUALLY the most significant drop in pollution came immediately after the crisis:

She went to London to find out more.

With strict regulations and aggressive enforcement, London was able to turn a massive tragedy around.

Jing shows provocative footage of coal plants being blown up and destroyed, plants that once offered the same tens of thousands of jobs that the plants in China offer today.

The percentage of GDP that the coal industry was responsible for shrunk massively as well. She talks to officials who explain that 100 years ago, London was a place that had a million miners, compared to tens of thousands in China. An industry on its way out was replaced by new industries coming in. And in doing so, London reclaimed its blue skies.

[1:26:14]

Interestingly, on her trip to London, the most compelling artifact she found was a video made by the Gas Council called "Guilty Chimneys."

Amazing what a little competition will do.

In London, Jing was told that one of the keys to turning the corner is for the government to not subsidize those old, crumbling industries that are on their way out, but to instead invest in innovation in new opportunities and a competitive playing field that will create the next wave of jobs and industries.

Jing also wondered why China wasn't more aggressively pursuing natural gas as an energy source. In her research, she found that there's high potential for natural gas, but it's not being drilled for.

Curious, she asked an expert why that is. He explained that the largest natural gas producing country, the United States, has 6,300 natural gas and petroleum companies. China has only three, and 70% of production comes from one company. The U.S. has 160 natural gas pipeline companies. China, again, only has three, and 70% of natural gas production lives in, you guessed it, a single company: Sinapec.

If China opens those markets, it could create competition and flip the script.

[1:30:22]

As Jing reflects on her investigative process, she says that China's reform and opening back up after being choked off from the global economy for so long wasn't what she originally envisioned as a solution. She pictured it as a small bird hatching from an egg, immediately becoming a marvelous new life.

But through her research, she learned it's more like a cicada shedding its old skin, inching out bit by bit, and energy is the last bit of skin to shed, the last part being particularly difficult.

She says energy is an area that's been rife with corruption. She shows this chart of recently deposed corrupt officials in the energy sector:

That is ... a lot of corruption.

To change it, she says, requires a shift in how the government views the environment and potential energy opportunities, as well as the systemic changes needed to make a difference.

But the government can't turn this thing around all on its own.It relies on each and every one of us. Our choices. Our will.

[1:31:38]

Jing says she has learned the power of transparency and has been encouraged in recent years with the government's investment and transparency in reporting air quality indexes. But, she says, we should not waste that money.

She brings up a downloadable app that shows factories that are exceeding emissions standards and encourages people to report these by calling a hotline or calling them out on social media.

Last year, Jing joined some community meetings where they challenged officials to require these companies to self-report emissions levels. Finally, officials conceded and companies were required to self-report or face a fine. And citizens had the right to submit an information request to compel them to report.

Tides are shifting, momentum is building.

[1:33:40]

Jing then shares an animation that demonstrates what everyday citizens can do to live greener lives and report offensive behavior through hotlines, or even @-replying to the department directly.

Jing shares a recent story of when she walked by a construction site in her neighborhood and noticed a giant pile of unsecured dirt.

She knew that as the wind blew, it would kick up particles in the air. So she approached the construction workers and spoke to the boss, and they immediately covered it up. From start to finish, just a few minutes.

The worker later told her that his boss saw she had a camera phone and feared getting exposed online, so he reacted quickly.

Chai Jing finishes her story on a really strong and bold note, rallying people into action. This truly is a remarkable piece of filmmaking by a remarkable woman.

Sponsored

5 ways people are going "All In" this week

From the silly to the sentimental, there are so many ways people like to go “all in” on something. Here are our five favorite examples this week.

True

When you hear the words “all in,” what do you think? You might picture a color-coordinated, fairy-themed surprise proposal that took months to create, or maybe you think of a singer who went on stage and nailed the perfect high note in front of everyone (like this girl). Whatever you picture, the idea is the same: Going “all in” means doing something with total commitment—literally giving it your “all” and going completely over the top. No second guessing, no holding back—just full-throttle enthusiasm with some creativity and flair thrown in. That’s how we get those viral internet moments we can’t stop watching.

When people decide to go “all in,” something special usually happens as a result, and we’re here to show you how. This week, we’ve found the very best examples of people going “all in” across the Internet—moments where passion, creativity, and commitment take center stage. Follow along and feel inspired.

Hamilton superfans 

@itz.unique POV: You seen Hamilton the first night in theaters #hamiltonmusical #fyp #relatable #hamilton ♬ original sound - Uniii 😜

You already know we love a good Hamilton reenactment. This past weekend, though, Hamilton fans took their love for the musical to a whole other level. As theatres released the filmed stage production in honor of the musical’s tenth anniversary on Broadway, theatre kids everywhere showed up in costume and belted out every single word (it’s okay to sing in the theatre this time, by the way! Hamilton creator and star Lin-Manuel Miranda totally said we could). Some theatres sang along quietly, some chimed in loudly at the emotional parts, and some theatres truly went all in, staging elaborate reproductions of the scenes in the aisles, in time with the music. A bunch of theatre kids totally nerding out together, having fun, and celebrating good art? We love to see it.

Everyone's love of Pumpkin Spice Lattes

@deangelodbyrd It’s hereeee 😂🍂 #pumpkinspicelatte #fall2025 #funnyvideo #silly #funnydance @Starbucks ♬ original sound - DeAngelo

You know it's fall when you start seeing those plastic cups everywhere. That's right—it's Pumpkin Spice Latte season. Everyone is drinking them. Everyone is posting about them. Everyone is figuring out the perfect PSL pairing, whether that's pumpkin spice matcha lattes or just drinking a PSL curled up on the couch watching some spooky movies. (How about all of the above?)

Here's our recommendation: Pumpkin spice lattes pair perfectly with All In snack bars—specifically the Madagascar Vanilla + Almond option. It's got honey, it's got pumpkin seeds, and it's even got tons of fiber so you're getting some nutrition along with all the deliciousness. Don't take our word for it, though: Click here to try it yourself (for free).

This rendition of the Happy Birthday song

@kamoramakaylee Happy 84th birthday to our dad #tbt ♬ original sound - Kamora

There’s singing the Happy Birthday song, and then there’s singing the Happy Birthday song. This group of sisters did the latter. For their father’s birthday, they presented him with a cake (aww) and then launched into an embellished musical production of the last two lines that would put Whitney Houston to shame. The girls truly went all in, but perhaps the best part of this entire video is their dad,sitting wide-eyed at the table and gritting his teeth until the performance is over. (“He’s fine,” someone said in the comments section. “He lost his hearing ten birthdays ago.”)

Llama costumes

@kristeninmn Some of the costumes from the Minnesota State Fair’s 4-H Llama-Alpaca Costume Contest! #minnesotastatefair #mnstatefair #exploremn #onlyinmn #stpaulminnesota ♬ Mr. Blue Sky - Electric Light Orchestra

Every year at the Minnesota State Fair, the 4-H Llama-Alpaca Costume Contest steals the show. In it, participants dress their llamas in wildly imaginative costumes—everything from a sea anemone to a bucket of popcorn to Buzz Lightyear from the movie Toy Story—and transform the livestock barn into a whimsical runway. Every glittery cape, hand-painted prop, or themed outfit is a testament to their creativity, their time and effort, and most importantly their love for animals. All of it is on full display and it’s seriously impressive work. You can tell when it comes to their animals (and creativity), Minnesotans don’t hold back.

This dog who's totally faking it. 

@binkythechichi2

The king of drama

♬ original sound - cass

Okay, you have to give this guy some respect—he really doesn’t want his owner to go to work and he’s found an absolutely genius way of showing it. As soon as her alarm goes off in the morning, TikTok creator Cassidy Butler shared that her chihuahua Binky runs to the front door and actually starts faking injuries to get her to stay home with him (and sometimes, she admits, it works). Binky is absolutely committed, holding up his paw as though it were injured, plus shivering and even squinting one eye to show just how injured he is. He’s almost perfectly convincing—until Cassidy offers to take him outside to play and he momentarily breaks character. Oops! Still, we respect his dedication to the craft.

Snag your free (!!) snack bars here while this deal lasts. Just pick up a box at Sprouts and text a pic of your receipt to get it for free. Enoy!

Culture

A hundred years ago, everyone wore hats. In 1960, they suddenly stopped. Here's why.

Old footage from the '50s shows men, women, and children wearing hats everywhere they go.

When did everyone stop wearing hats?

It was everywhere. Men, women, and even children did it every time they left the house. If you see old newsreel footage of men in the office or on commuter trains from the advent of the motion picture camera to the early ‘60s, nearly everyone is wearing a hat. Hats were just as common for women in that era. For a woman to go out without a hat in the first half of the 20th century was akin to going out without clothes.

The funny thing is that everyone’s headgear is so similar in the old-timey footage that it makes previous generations look like big-time conformists. Then, in the early ‘60s, everything changed, and men and women started to go out in public with their hair exposed. Why did such a big aspect of fashion seem to change overnight?

Warmbru Curiosity investigated the question recently in a popular YouTube video. Warmbru’s channel is a lighthearted look at some of the more unusual people and events from our history and how they have influenced the world in which we live.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Why did people stop wearing hats?

Warmbru says fashion changed dramatically after World War II, when people in developed countries began to care less about expressing their social status. “This was especially true among the younger generation the rise of youth culture in the 1950s and 1960s emphasized rebellion against traditional norms, including formal dress codes,” the YouTuber says.

Mad Men, Don Draper, Jon Hamm, hats, mens fashion, men's hats, 1950s Don Draper from AMC's "Mad Men" Image via "Mad Men" AMC

Another big reason for the change in fashion was technology. Cars became the preferred mode of transportation for many after World War II and indoor environments became more hospitable. “People spent far less time exposed to the elements as people increasingly moved to urban areas and started using cars,” Warmbru says. “The practicality of wearing hats diminishes. Hats can be cumbersome in cars and on public transport, improvements in heating and air conditioning reduce the need for hats to provide warmth.”

Warmbru adds that President John F. Kennedy, elected in 1960, rarely wore a hat and his decision to go bareheaded became associated with modernity. Further, in 1963, the mop-topped Beatles proudly flaunted their hatless heads as they shook them while singing, “Wooooo.” Hat-wearing among women began to decline around the same time as the restrictive and complex headgear clashed with the burgeoning women’s liberation movement.

Kennedy, John F. Kennedy, Jackie Kennedy, hats, men, men's fashion, 1960's, 1950's John F. Kennedy with his family Image via Wikicommons

The decline in hat purchases meant that manufacturers closed and the headgear became harder to come by. This reduced availability further contributed to the decline in hat-wearing. As fewer people wore hats, there became a greater demand for high-quality hair products and services. “Why spend a fortune at the hairdressers or the barbers just to cover the end result with a hat?” Warmbru asks.

Ultimately, there were many reasons why people stopped wearing hats. It appears that it was a combination of technology, influential people such as Kennedy and The Beatles, and the overwhelming mood of change that swept most of the Western world in the 1960s. But if one thing is true about fashion, it goes in cycles. So, it seems that hats may be ready for their big comeback.

This article originally appeared last year. It has been updated.

Sandra visiting E’s family in Georgia (2023)

True
Levi Strauss Foundation

Sandra McAnany isn’t one to sit on the sidelines. A 58-year-old grandmother from Wisconsin, McAnany spends her days teaching soft skills classes to adults and spending time with her family. Outside the classroom, however, she’s taken on a role that’s helping people in a big way: serving as a humanitarian parole sponsor and personally taking on the financial responsibility of supporting families fleeing from persecution, violence, and instability.

Since 2023, McAnany has welcomed 17 migrants—11 adults and six children through the CHNV humanitarian parole program, which allows individuals and families from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela to live and work temporarily in the United States with the support of an approved sponsor.

“Everyone has their own views and perspectives, but every person I sponsored is thriving and doing well here,” McAnany said.

McAnany didn’t know any of the parolees before sponsoring them, but she had a commitment to helping families from Venezuela specifically, hoping to reunite them with their families who were already living in the United States. After “praying a lot along the way” and communicating with the applicants through WhatsApp, she decided to apply as a sponsor and help them settle into the United States.

“I have a bedroom and a bathroom in my basement,” McAnany says. “My door is open and will always be open for any of the people I sponsored, if they ever have a need for housing.”

Sandra’s granddaughter, E’s daughter, and another friend at an indoor park (July 2025)

At the time, McAnany decided to volunteer as a sponsor to make friends and help other people through hardship. Now, her mission has grown: Seeing how humanitarian parole programs have changed her parole beneficiaries’ lives—as well as her own—for the better.

Humanitarian parole: A long history

Humanitarian parole programs are nothing new. Since 1952, both Democratic and Republican administrations have used humanitarian parole to provide a safer, lawful pathway for noncitizens to enter and live temporarily in the United States. In recent years, through different programs, people from Afghanistan, Ukraine, Cuba, Haiti, and other countries have been able to come to the U.S. to escape urgent crises in their own countries, such as political instability or war.

Coming to the United States through humanitarian parole is no easy feat. The process has its own strict criteria and involves extensive applications and vetting for both beneficiaries and their sponsors. Parolees don’t need to qualify for any other immigration benefit like asylum, but they need to meet the standard for humanitarian parole and successfully pass vetting requirements.

According to Refugees International, 532,000 people have been granted parole through the CHNV program.

A life-changing experience

From the moment she met her first parole beneficiaries at the airport—two families —McAnany already knew it would be a life-changing experience. “It immediately felt like family, like we were lifelong friends,” she said. But she could also sense that it was a culture shock for the parolees. On the way home from the airport, McAnany pulled into a nearby McDonald's and encouraged them to order dinner. Hearing the word “Big Mac,” the families smiled in recognition.

Despite the culture shock, McAnany’s parole beneficiaries had to adapt quickly to life in the United States. Once they were settled, McAnany worked “nonstop” to help the families acclimate to their new lives, answering questions about school and vaccinations while also helping them create resumes, search for jobs, and find English classes online.

It was through this process that McAnany realized just how resilient people could be, and was amazed “not only how hard it was for individuals to leave their loved ones behind, but the amount of work they did to come to the country and remain here.” McAnany also realized how fortunate she was to have her own family living nearby. “I can’t imagine any one of us leaving a country and being apart for an unknown length of time,” she said.

Eventually, and as circumstances changed—one of the parolees found a new job in another city, for example, and was able to move out. But no matter the length of time they spent with each other, McAnany says that with every parolee they formed a bond built for life. One woman, who she refers to as ‘E,’ has even become “like an adopted daughter.” McAnany has traveled to Georgia, where E now lives, three times to visit her.

Uncertain ground: What’s next for humanitarian parole programs

Despite being a critical part of immigration policy in the United States for the last 73 years, humanitarian parole programs are under threat. Immigrant justice nonprofits Justice Action Center and Human Rights First are currently suing the federal government to protect humanitarian parole programs and allow parole beneficiaries to remain in the country for the duration of their parole. McAnany is a plaintiff in the lawsuit.

One of the ladies Sandra sponsored from Venezuela and her partner during Sandra’s first visit to meet her (December 2023)

Participating in the lawsuit has only further bolstered McAnany’s belief in and support for humanitarian parole programs. She hopes the lawsuit will be successful, she says, so that parole beneficiaries and their families can finally have some stability.

“We don’t know what the future is,” she says, “but I want to be optimistic and hopeful that every person I sponsored will be able to stay here safely in the U.S. and continue to thrive.”

This article is part of Upworthy’s “The Threads Between U.S.” series that highlights what we have in common thanks to the generous support from the Levi Strauss Foundation, whose grantmaking is committed to creating a culture of belonging.


Politics

Folks on 'left' and 'right' share one thing they respect about one another. It's giving hope.

As one person wrote, "This is the most mature comment section I’ve seen."

Courtesy of Ashley Rankin @gynaminte_/TikTok

Looking at the positives of the other side makes it a lot harder to hate.

The United States feels on edge right now, with passions running high and partisanized rhetoric ramping up in the days following Charlie Kirk's assassination in Utah. For non-extremists, it's disheartening to see people on both "the left" and "the right" being painted in sweeping brush strokes filled with vitriol.

Most of us don't live like this in our everyday lives. Most of us don't live at extremes and are capable of nuanced thought. We acknowledge that the world's problems are complex and know that we aren't always going to agree on every solution. While we may disagree, sometimes vehemently, we don't paint half of our fellow Americans as the enemy.

america, united states, polarization, political division, partisanship Political polarization is out of control. It doesn't have to be this way. Photo credit: Canva

A woman in Utah, Ashley Rankin, was feeling overwhelmed and confused about the state of the country when she decided to make a video plea for compassion and understanding. "While recording, I zoned out for a second and my face perfectly captured how I felt in that moment," she tells Upworthy. "I dropped the words and thought, rather than telling people to spread love, hope, and compassion, I want to see what they will do, when presented with the opportunity."

So she overlayed her few-second video with "If you lean left, tell me something you respect about the right. If you lean right, tell me something you respect about the left," adding, "Let's spread hope." She asked viewers to fill her comments with positivity, and in a miraculous flip of the script we so often see online, people delivered exactly what she asked for.

@gynamite_

Please fill my comments with positivity! I live in Utah and things feel heavy here. #bridgingthedivide #HopeInHumanity #BetterTogether #UtahCommunity #positive

The comments filled up with people leaning one way or the other—sometimes even pretty far to the left or right—expressing their respect and admiration for various characteristics and beliefs of the "other side." It's truly a beautiful outpouring that demonstrates how much closer we are than we think:

"I am conservative, but I appreciate the left's fight for free lunches and universal healthcare. I don't believe anyone should starve or be denied medical care because they can't afford it."

"Left here: I respect how the right heavily advocates for the farm and rural communities. We really do need to send more resources out to them and respect our farmers more."

"Lean right - love the passion of the left and how they always want to speak up for the smallest person in the room."

"Straight blue voter here. I do appreciate the conservative principle of fiscal responsibility for the govt. We may disagree how our tax dollars are spent, but I don’t disagree that govt is wasteful."

Season 19 Episode 10 GIF by The Simpsons Giphy

"More conservative, but I love how the left advocates for preserving our earth, mental health, and resources for those who NEED them."

"As a Democrat I appreciate republicans patriotism and love for country and support for our troops and veterans. I just wish their representatives would vote to support those things that most of their constituents want to support."

"I’m more right than left, but I respect the left for their belief that you don’t have to be a traditional family to have family values. I actually agree with that."

"Leftist here 🤘🏼 I live in a deeply conservative, rural area. Whenever I’m in need, there’s help. Fresh baked bread randomly, the mechanic giving me free advice/discounts, fresh farm eggs cheaper than the store🥹"

"I’m mostly conservative. I appreciated the level of anger and ongoing fight regarding the undoing of roe v wade."

"Extremely left here, I appreciate how fiercely the right stands up for the working people; farmers, etc. I also am with them on getting violent criminals off the streets."

farmer, conservatives, liberals, right and left, politics People on the right tend to support rural life.Photo credit: Canva

"I’m conservative. I do truly respect that the people on the left wanting gun control have good hearts and genuinely want the gun violence to end."

"Dear Left-leaning people, Thank you for your fight for immigration rights. I may not 100% agree with how we get there, but, everyone deserves the right to come into the country and to have a chance for a better life."

"By far the BEST comment section I've ever seen. I lean left heavily but I've always admired how persistent Republicans are at pushing legislation and the change they want to see."

Perhaps surprisingly, perhaps not, there was a ton of love for John McCain and Barack Obama coming from opposite sides of the aisle in the comments.

"My family was always conservative, but everyone voted for Obama twice. Sometimes we have to accept that labels are for soup cans and vote for the person better qualified to lead."

"I’m a lifelong Democrat. I really loved John McCain! I thought he was such a well-rounded example of a true American patriot!"

"I lean more right, but Obama was the last president I felt like we all respected."

"I don’t 'lean' left: I am left. However, I think John McCain also conducted himself with so much integrity. I think he tried to do a good job and actually cared about the people in this country."

- YouTube www.youtube.com

"I am very Liberal and Canadian BUT when John McCain defended Obama against Muslim/ Arab attacks at his town halls…. I literally cried."

"I lean right, but I think the last time we had any dignity in politics, and I felt secure as a nation was when President Obama was in office. I think he’s an incredible leader, and he was the last time I trusted the person in power."

"I respect how John McCain stood up for Obama at one of his rallies and how he silenced the boos during his concession speech. Truly miss that kind of politics. Where we could disagree on issues but didn’t tear other down."

Mostly, though, people were just relieved and delighted to see how genuinely kind and heartfelt the comments were.

"This comment section glued a tiny piece of my heart back together."

"These comments are not what I expected to see. It gives me hope that we are not as divided as politicians and media wants us to believe."

"Reading all these comments makes me realize that we should be fighting extremists (both left and right) instead of each other."

"This is the most mature comment section I’ve seen. This is the dialogue I want to see. It’s easy to speak to each other when we do it in a respectful way rather than resorting to name-calling and oppressing others."

We really do have more in common than the online discourse and political rhetoric from many politicians would have us believe. Social media algorithms may reward extremism, but videos like this and the responses they're receiving are far more indicative of the reality most of us live in. Rankin's video has accumulated over 10,000 comments and they are overwhelmingly positive.

"I posted the short video hoping a few people would have genuine and respectful words, but was not expecting much," Rankin says. "I had NO idea the impact it would have on me and so many others. The comments were exactly what my weary heart needed. I'm finally proud to be an American again."

Elya/Wikimedia Commons

Should you hang the toilet paper roll over or under?

Humans have debated things large and small over the millennia, from democracy to breastfeeding in public to how often people ought to wash their sheets. But perhaps the most silly-yet-surprisingly heated household debate is the one in which we argue over which way to hang the toilet paper roll.

The "over or under" question has plagued marriages and casual acquaintances alike for over 100 years, with both sides convinced they have the soundest reasoning for putting their toilet paper loose end out or loose end under. Some people feel so strongly about right vs. wrong TP hanging that they will even flip the roll over when they go to the bathroom in the homes of strangers.

Contrary to popular belief, it's not merely an inconsequential preference. According to health experts and the man who invented the toilet paper roll, there is actually a "correct" way to hang toilet paper.

What is the correct way to hang a roll of toilet paper?

First, let's be clear about what we're even talking about here with a visual. In the image below, left is "over" and right is "under."

toilet paper, bathrooms, over or under, toilet roll, bathroom etiquette Toilet paper hung "over" (left) and "under" (right)Elya/Wikimedia Commons


So which one is the right way? According to health experts, "over" is the way to go.

"One key to maintaining a hygienic washroom is minimising contact between people and surfaces," Dr. Christian Moro, associate professor of health sciences and medicine at Bond University on Australia's Gold Coast, told Australian Broadcasting Corporation. "Depending on the type of roll holder, [hanging the toilet paper "over"] often lowers the chance that a user will touch the wall behind when fishing for paper, leaving germs behind on that surface which can be spread to the next user."

Picture it: Grabbing the end of the toilet paper when it's hung "over" means you only touch the part of the toilet paper you're going to use. When it's "under," you sometimes have to fish for it or scrape your fingers on the wall in order to grab the loose end. In addition to whatever might be on people's hands already, think about all the people who wipe twice, potentially transferring fresh fecal matter or other bacteria to the wall on the second pass, which then get picked up by other people who inadvertently touch that wall when trying to grab their TP.

Theoretically, we all should have become better hand washers during the pandemic, scrubbing with soap for the full 20 seconds it takes to remove bacteria. But I wouldn't be willing to bet on it.

toilet paper, empty toilet paper roll, batthroom, bathroom etiquette, over or under Empty toilet paper roll.via Canva/Photos

And touching any surface in a bathroom is pretty nasty, according to a study from the University of Colorado. As Inc. reported: "Using a high-tech genetic sequencing tool, researchers identified 19 groups of bacteria on the doors, floors, faucet handles, soap dispensers, and toilets of 12 public restrooms in Colorado — six men’s restrooms and six women’s restrooms. Many of the bacteria strains identified could be transmitted by touching contaminated surfaces."

Bacteria means things like e.coli, which is a common source of food poisoning and one of the most common bacteria found on bathroom surfaces in the study. If you've ever had a bout of food poisoning, I'm sure you'll agree that a toilet paper roll hanging preference isn't worth risking it.

But sanitary health concerns aren't the only argument for the "over" camp. After all, the original patent for the toilet paper roll, issued in 1891, clearly shows the TP in the "over" position. Thank you for the clarity right from the get go, Mr. Wheeler.

toilet paper, bathrooms, over or under, toilet roll, bathroom etiquette The toilet paper roll was patented by Seth Wheeler in 1891.Public Domain


In Wheeler's patent, the perforated toilet paper hangs on a roll in the "over" position. In the words of the patent, the sheets of TP are “partially separated, having their points of attachment arranged in a novel manner, whereby each sheet will easily separate from the series as it is drawn from the roll, there being no litter occasioned, and any waste of paper is thereby prevented.”

Now, before the "under" folks come running with their pitchforks, there are some understandable exceptions to the "over" rule. Namely: cats and kids.

If you have a furry friend or a tiny toddler who likes to unroll the toilet paper roll, "over" makes it super fun for them, while "under" stops them in their tracks. For many people, cats and kids are the primary motivator of their TP hanging habits.

That doesn't change the fact that "over" is actually the "correct" way to hang toilet paper according to health science and the inventor's intention, of course, but "under" is certainly preferable to having a pile of TP on the floor.

Now go forth, do that with information as you will, and try to make peace with your over vs. under rivals.

This article originally appeared last year.

Nobody wants to relive this.

When adults compare themselves to “kids today,” two somewhat opposing views tend to happen at once. There's both rose-colored nostalgia (“the '90s were a simpler time!” “let’s go back to before we had screens!”) and a sense of superiority when it comes to facing challenges (“kids today are soft!” “I had to walk to school uphill in the snow both ways!").

Regarding the latter, perhaps a lot of that can be attributed to a cultural shift that’s more child-centered. This has led to a quantifiable increase in the number of “sheltered” kids, according to a new Harris Poll. Kids who never walked along in a grocery aisle, talked with a neighbor without their parents, walked/biked somewhere (without a chaperone…certainly nothing like the childhood many of us '70s/'80s/'90s kids grew up in.

This sparked a conversation among Gen Xers and Millennials on TikTok when someone asked, “What’s something we survived as kids that would absolutely emotionally destroy today’s kids?” Woo boy, did folks deliver. Dodgeballs flying at their face, handwriting words in cursive for hours on end, waiting weeks to get back terrible pictures…no one today could handle that. And those are just some of the examples. Keep reading for more.

1. "Going all day at school without a water bottle. We might get a small drink of water from the water fountain at recess, that’s it. Take away a younger person’s water bottle today for five minutes, and they act like they’ve been in the desert for three days without a drop of water and will die of dehydration."

2. "Having to talk to people to get your questions answered. For everything." — meanwhile, I've seen today's kids have full-blown panic attacks simply about having to ask a waiter, "May I please get a cheeseburger?"

3. "No binge mode. If you wanted to watch The X-Files, you had to be in the house every Friday night while everyone partied. For four years."

"If you missed your episode, you might never see it."

3. "Having to encounter everything 'by chance.' Favorite song on the radio, favorite movie on TV… made it so much more rewarding, but we’ll never experience that emotion again. Like running into a friend out in the wild."

4. "Munching on snacks at 1 am watching Faces of Death."

For those unfamiliar, Faces of Death is a 1978 American horror film that shows scenes of gruesome deaths from around the world, both real and re-enacted. Fun, right?

gen x, millennials, gen z, gen alpha, boomers generational humor, tiktok, generational differences This movie earned 45% on Rotten Tomatoes. Amazon.com

5. "Dodgeball. I just played gaga ball with a bunch of Generation Alphas and omg, these kids are not gonna be okay."

What is gaga ball, you ask? A variation that's gentler, faster-paced, and more accessible. It’s Dodgeball Lite, essentially. And honestly, it's a legitimate improvement from the needlessly savage original.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

6. "Having to write everything in cursive from third grade on in pen. Writing by hand the rough draft, then the 2nd rough draft, then the final draft."

Man, lots of thoughts about handwriting, actually…

"Having to write a research paper while properly citing sources in the required format using only books, newspapers or microfiche from the library. And having to find all that by using the Dewey Decimal System. Also, no spell or grammar check to find our mistakes for us."

"Having to write a rough draft, having a classmate mark it up with errors, re-write it for the teacher to review with more mark-ups, and then having to write the final draft in pen, sometimes in cursive lol."

"That bump on the side of your middle finger from handwriting everything."

7. "Being bored. Kids today don’t know what real boredom is."

More specifically…

8. "Driving with your parent with NO FORM of entertainment. Just look out the window."

Even worse…

9. "Being trapped in the car with your smoker parents… with windows up. And of course, zero functioning seat belts."

10. "Babysitting infants and other small children when you yourself were only 12."

11. "Not being able to see the photographs before they get developed when using disposable cameras/rolls of film in the little black tubes."

12. "Dial-up internet and how it disconnected when someone else made a phone call."

13. "Driving without using GPS."

"Or when MapQuest was a thing and we had to print out directions to follow! I drove cross country with twenty pages of directions hahahaha."

14. "Trying to follow makeup tutorials that were just blocks of text in Cosmo magazine. No visuals. 🤣"

15. "Forgetting your key and having to wait from 3:45 pm until 6:00 pm when your mom finally gets home. No snacks, no water."

16. "Eating whatever is served, regardless of whether you like it or hate it. There was no asking what we wanted to eat for dinner or what sounded good to us. Nasty pot pie with peas? Eat it. Liver and onions that smell like absolute death? Eat it. And you ain't getting down from the table until your plate is clean — and they meant it. It could be all the way until bedtime. You not getting down. Period. My sister fell asleep face-first into her plate once."

17. "Having to find a library book through the card catalog to know its location."

18. "Calling your friend’s house and talking to their parents first when they pick up the phone. Small talk and communication skills in general have taken a huge hit."

19. "Pooping without a phone."

20. "The TV used to cut to nothing at night. literally the TV would just show the flag 'til the next day… Good night, America."

21. "You only got three lives in a video game, and when you died, you had to start from the very beginning!!"

22. "Blowing and smacking Nintendo games to make them work or not glitch."

23. "Having homework from all classes due the next day! 😂"

24. "Having to rewind a cassette tape with a pencil after being unraveled inside the cassette player, hoping it doesn’t twist while rewinding."

- YouTube www.youtube.com

25. “Those metal pedals on our bikes, hitting your shin cause you missed the pedal or riding with no shoes on."

26. "Having to cover all textbooks with paper bags from the local grocery store. The paper bags had outlines on how to cover your textbooks. Hated this for years. It eventually stopped in high school, possibly 11th grade."

27. "Actually going to a potential employer to ask if they’re hiring and for an application."

28. "The loud ticking of the massive analog clock on the wall during a test. The whole room silent. But the ticking of clock as loud as a rock concert. Every second click click click. I can still hear it in my nightmares. You know y’all younginz can’t tell time unless it’s digital."

29. "When I was in elementary school, lunch was still paid for with cash UNLESS you were a poor kid with free lunch. Then, they gave you a bright yellow laminated card and everyone in your class knew you were poor. 😏"

30. "Blackouts. They will NEVER survive blackouts the way we did back then."

31. "Chickenpox!"

32. "Not knowing if The Blair Witch Project was real or not."

33. "Roman candle fights."

Ah yes, pointing fireworks at each other. What could possibly go wrong?

- YouTube www.youtube.com

34. “Climbing and falling off six-foot monkey bars onto plain concrete."

35. "The merry-go-round...pure steel in the summer."

36. "The threat of pulling 20 to life for my LimeWire bootlegs. The media had me feeling like young Capone."

37. "Thinking the world will end when Y2K comes."

38. "Computer crashing while just putting the finishing touches on your school report and you didn’t hit save."

39. "Having to manually change the channel on the TV and if the knob broke looking frantically for pliers!!! Don’t get me started on the aluminum foil on the TV antennas!"

40. "I was home alone in the morning and got myself fed, dressed and walked myself to afternoon Kindergarten."

41. "Non-stop bullying was normal. 😩"


42. "Riding in the back of a pickup truck down the highway."

43. "A dentist that doesn’t numb your gums before jabbing you with a needle."

44. "Having that ONE copy of the video you and your friends made, greatest memories ever, and then your dad tapes over it for a 90-second Tyson fight."

…and lastly…

45. "The Challenger Explosion, and no trauma counseling after. We were expected to just move on to the next class and go about our day."

That said, we can probably all agree that in reality, kids today endure plenty—we didn't exactly have to contend with active shooter drills, cyberbullying, etc.—and are incredibly resilient in their own way. This was more lighthearted than anything else. Or, at the very least, a fun and traumatic romp down memory lane for us olds.

Girls cheering.

When 64% of UK girls abandon sports before their 16th birthday, the ripple effects extend far beyond empty stadiums and playing fields. This staggering dropout rate represents more than a million teenage girls in the UK who will carry the physical and mental health consequences of inactivity into adulthood—and shockingly, one of the most overlooked culprits is something seemingly simple: what they’re required to wear.


- YouTube www.youtube.com

ASICS, in partnership with Inclusive Sportswear and mental health charity Mind, has revealed the “Undropped Kit,” a groundbreaking reimagination of school PE uniforms designed specifically with teenage girls’ comfort, confidence, and participation in mind. This shift represents more than just athletic wear or style; it addresses a public health crisis hiding in plain sight.


The hidden barrier: how PE kits become a participation killer

The numbers paint an anguished—and preventable—picture. Research commissioned by ASICS revealed that only 12% of UK girls are “completely satisfied” with their current school PE kit, while 70% of girls aged 14-16 said they would be more likely to participate in PE if their kit made them feel more comfortable. Perhaps most telling: only one in four girls aged 11-13 feels confident in their PE kit, a dramatic drop from 65% of girls aged 7-8.


girls, sports, gym, uniform, revolutionary Girl sitting by herself in the gym.CREDIT: ASICS

The specific complaints from girls show a clear picture of systematic design failures. As teenage participants in the research explained, "Our kit is itchy, see-through, and makes you really sweaty.” Others cited concerns about "period leaks showing," "baggy and shapeless" designs that "feel like they were made for boys," and the inability to adjust for different weather conditions or body types.

These aren't superficial concerns—they represent fundamental barriers to participation. The Youth Sport Trust's 2024 Girls Active survey found that 58% of girls want more PE kit options compared to just 29% of boys, highlighting how current uniform policies fail to address gender-specific needs.

Redesigning for real bodies, real concerns

The Undropped Kit represents a radical departure from traditional PE uniforms, incorporating features directly requested by teenage girls during extensive focus groups and testing at Burnley High School—specifically chosen because it's located in one of the UK regions with the lowest PE participation rates, according to Sport England.

The innovative design tackles each barrier systematically. For weather concerns, the kit includes a jacket with a detachable inner liner and padded panels for warmth retention, plus water-repellent fabric and a packable hood for wet conditions. To address comfort concerns, designers incorporated softer, darker, sweat-wicking fabrics that prevent visibility issues while providing better moisture management.


girls, sports, gym, uniform, revolutionary One of the revolutionary Undropped Kit outfits. CREDIT: ASICS

Perhaps most importantly, the kit addresses period-related anxieties—cited as the most significant barrier by 47% of girls aged 11-13 and 52% of girls aged 14-15. The solution includes dark-colored materials with discreet pockets for storing sanitary products, providing both practical storage and psychological comfort.

The versatility component centers on biker shorts as a base layer, which can be worn alone or paired with a detachable skirt or shorts for a stylistic choice between fitted and looser styles. This addresses the frequent complaint that current uniforms offer no accommodation for different body shapes or confidence levels. Small details matter too—the kit even includes an emergency hair tie built into the design.

The dropout crisis: more than just numbers

The scale of girls' disengagement from physical activity represents one of the most significant public health challenges of our time. By age 17-18, a whopping 55% of girls will have disengaged from sports entirely, with 43% of girls who classified themselves as sporty in primary school no longer identifying that way. This compares to just 24% of boys experiencing similar disengagement.


girls, sports, gym, uniform, revolutionary Girls warming up. CREDIT: ASICS

The timing is particularly devastating. Girls drop out at twice the rate of boys by age 14, precisely when the physical and mental health benefits of regular exercise become most crucial for development. The Youth Sport Trust's research reveals a significant decline in enjoyment: 86% of girls aged 7-8 enjoy PE, but this drops to just 56% among girls aged 14-15.

Globally, the crisis is even more stark: 85% of adolescent girls worldwide don't meet World Health Organization physical activity recommendations (an average of 60 minutes per day of moderate-to vigorous-intensity, mostly aerobic, physical activity, across the week), compared to 78% of boys. In England specifically, only 8% of girls are now classified as highly active, a dramatic decrease from 30% in 2017-18.

The intersection of puberty, body image concerns, and inadequate athletic wear creates a perfect storm: 50% of girls feel paralyzed by fear of failure during puberty, while 42% of girls aged 14-16 say their period stops them from taking part in PE. When combined with a kit that makes them feel exposed, uncomfortable, or "different," participation becomes psychologically untenable.

The broader societal stakes

The implications of mass female disengagement from physical activity extend far beyond individual health outcomes. Research from the Women's Sports Foundation demonstrates that girls who play sports experience 1.5 to 2.5 times fewer mental health disorders than girls who never played. Specifically, only 17% of girls who play sports experience moderate to high levels of depression, compared to 29% for girls who never played.


girls, sports, gym, uniform, revolutionary Girls wearing the Undropped Kit.CREDIT: ASICS

The protective effects are comprehensive. Sports participation provides 1.5 times higher scores for peer relationships and 1.5 times higher reported levels of meaning and purpose. These benefits extend across racial, economic, and disability lines, suggesting that sports access could serve as a powerful equalizer during critical developmental years.

The economic implications are equally significant. When girls abandon physical activity during adolescence, they're more likely to develop chronic health conditions, experience mental health challenges, and miss out on the leadership and teamwork skills that sports uniquely provide. Girls active in sports during adolescence and young adulthood are 20% less likely to get breast cancer later in life, while also showing improved academic performance and career outcomes, research shows.

Beyond the kit: systemic change

While the Undropped Kit represents an innovative solution to a specific barrier, ASICS and its partners recognize that sustainable change requires broader systemic intervention. The initiative includes the Inclusive Sportswear Community Platform, which provides schools, teachers, and parents with free access to expert training, toolkits, and guidance developed with the Youth Sport Trust.

The platform advocates for inclusive PE kit policies that prioritize choice and comfort over uniformity. As Tess Howard, founder of Inclusive Sportswear and Team Great Britain hockey player, explains: "A PE kit is the most underrated reason girls drop out of PE, but the good news is we can fix it—and fast. By listening to girls and evolving [sports] kits to support their needs, we can lift this barrier.”


girls, sports, gym, uniform, revolutionary Girls wearing the Undropped Kit. CREDIT: ASICS

The Undropped Kit prototype serves as both a practical solution and a powerful statement: that girls' comfort, confidence, and participation matter enough to reimagine fundamental assumptions about school uniforms completely. While the kit itself isn't available for commercial purchase, its impact lies in demonstrating what becomes possible when design truly centers user needs.

The crisis of girls dropping out of sports isn't inevitable. It's the result of systems, policies, and products that weren't designed with their needs in mind. ASICS' Undropped Kit proves that when we genuinely listen to girls and design for their experiences, we can begin to reverse decades of exclusion and build a generation of confident, active young women.