A simple way to make egg hunts less stressful for everyone, courtesy of the Netherlands

Ah, the community Easter egg hunt. Is there more of a mixed bag than this adorable spring tradition?

While cute kiddos with festive baskets hunting for colorful eggs is the stuff of Instagram fever dreams, the reality can sometimes be less than picture-perfect. We've all witnessed overzealous parents racing to make sure their kid gets as many eggs as possible, bigger kids swooping in and swiping the prize before a wee one can get to it, less competitive and more reserved kids feeling overwhelmed by the free-for-all chaos, and some children inevitably ending up in tears.

But it doesn't have to be that way. A Netherlands neighborhood egg hunt shared on Facebook highlights how kids can enjoy the thrill of the hunt without the sometimes brutal competitiveness.

Janelle Hanchett moved from California to Haarlem, Netherlands with her husband and four kids two summers ago. Hanchett, who writes about parenting and life at Renegade Mothering, shared that they attended a neighborhood egg hunt this weekend and were happily surprised by how it went down.


"We just had the neighborhood egg hunt and they did it quite differently," she wrote. "The kids run and find eggs but put them in a big communal basket, then they're divided evenly among all the kids. They even include siblings in the neighborhood who weren't even there (being, you know, too 'big' for such things (or having hidden the eggs)). And the little girl too shy to participate. And they all got the exact same number of eggs."

"This is so smart and lovely I have no idea how/why I never thought of it," she continued. "I always hated the competitiveness of egg hunts — the faster or selfish kids grabbing up what they could at any costs. The milder, younger, slower kids left behind. Seriously that shit gave me so much anxiety I could hardly watch egg hunts. I can't understand why I never thought of this."

A fun, cooperative egg hunt? How remarkably civil.

I asked a Dutch-American friend if this is the way it's done in general in the Netherlands, and his friends who live in various parts of the country concurred that yes, this is how they do it.

"Equally shared at the end of the day, no stress at all," wrote one person.

"Otherwise it would end in tears for sure," wrote another.

Well yes, actually. Tears and/or violence. (Google "egg hunt turns violent" for Easter egg kerfuffles that got so bad they made the news. Good times.)

Some people on Hanchett's post mentioned that they do egg hunts similar to the Dutch way. Because my own kids vary in age so much, our family egg hunts have always looked somewhat similar to it as well. We hide a number of eggs that can be evenly divided by the number of kids, and then tell the kids how many eggs they're supposed to find. Once they reach that limit, they can keep searching, but they aren't to give away where any others are hidden unless someone who's still looking asks for help. The kids love it. It's just as much fun, and so much less stress than the every-kid-for-themselves, keep-everything-you-can-find method. But I've never seen it done that way in any community egg hunts.

It's actually not all that surprising that such a reasonable idea comes from the Netherlands, where egalitarian principles are simply a way of life and kids are taught the value of taking care of the whole from a young age.

"If this isn't the most perfect metaphor for how the two countries approach social resources," wrote Hanchett. "Whew. And no, no kid complained or said 'But I found more!' Because that, too, is taught. As easily as we can teach our kids that there isn't enough so they better plow down the little guy to GET THEIRS—rewarding them for being the biggest asshole in the garden—we can teach them that there is absolutely enough if everyone does what they can, throws it in a basket, and passes it around."

Some will undoubtedly look at this idea and say, "Well, that sounds like communism!" but that's a pretty long stretch. This is not a government mandate—it's a society cooperating to make sure that everyone can enjoy the fun and festivity of a kids' holiday activity. This approach tacitly acknowledges that some kids will have a natural advantage, some kids will be overly competitive, some kids don't have the ability (or desire) to grab eggs quickly, etc., and that those realities will lead to a pretty crappy outcome for some kids. The seeking and finding activity itself still allows for those differences, but when you're hunting for the benefit of the whole, the selfish element takes a back seat.

Making an egg hunt a cooperative team event rather than an individual competition may seem like a revolutionary idea, but it's a brilliant one. Thanks for the inspiration, Netherlands!

People often think of government bureaucrats as being boring stuffed shirts, but whoever runs social media at the National Park Service is proving that at least some of them have a sense of humor.

In a Facebook post, the NPS shared some seasonal advice for park-goers about what to do if they happen to encounter a bear, and it's both helpful and hilarious. Not that a confrontation with a bear in real life is a laughing matter—bears can be dangerous—but humor is a good way to get people to pay attention to important advice.

They wrote:

Keep Reading Show less

People often think of government bureaucrats as being boring stuffed shirts, but whoever runs social media at the National Park Service is proving that at least some of them have a sense of humor.

In a Facebook post, the NPS shared some seasonal advice for park-goers about what to do if they happen to encounter a bear, and it's both helpful and hilarious. Not that a confrontation with a bear in real life is a laughing matter—bears can be dangerous—but humor is a good way to get people to pay attention to important advice.

They wrote:

Keep Reading Show less
True

Each year, an estimated 1.8 million people in the United States are affected by cancer — most commonly cancers of the breast, lung, prostate, and blood cancers such as leukemia. While not everyone overcomes the disease, thanks to science, more people are surviving — and for longer — than ever before in history.

We asked three people whose lives have been impacted by cancer to share their stories – how their lives were changed by the disease, and how they're using that experience to change the future of cancer treatments with the hope that ultimately, in the fight against cancer, science will win. Here's what they had to say.

Celine Ryan, 55, engineer database programmer and mother of five from Detroit, MI

Photo courtesy of Celine Ryan

In September 2013, Celine Ryan woke up from a colonoscopy to some traumatic news. Her gastroenterologist showed her a picture of the cancerous mass they found during the procedure.

Ryan and her husband, Patrick, had scheduled a colonoscopy after discovering some unusual bleeding, so the suspicion she could have cancer was already there. Neither of them, however, were quite prepared for the results to be positive -- or for the treatment to begin so soon. Just two days after learning the news, Ryan had surgery to remove the tumor, part of her bladder, and 17 cancerous lymph nodes. Chemotherapy and radiation soon followed.

Ryan's treatment was rigorous – but in December 2014, she got the devastating news that the cancer, once confined to her colon, had spread to her lungs. Her prognosis, they said, was likely terminal.

But rather than give up hope, Ryan sought support from online research, fellow cancer patients and survivors, and her medical team. When she brought up immunotherapy to her oncologist, he quickly agreed it was the best course of action. Ryan's cancer, like a majority of colon and pancreatic cancers, had been caused by a defect on the gene KRAS, which can result in a very aggressive cancer that is virtually "undruggable." According to the medical literature, the relatively smooth protein structure of the KRAS gene meant that designing inhibitors to bind to surface grooves and treat the cancer has been historically difficult. Through her support systems, Ryan discovered an experimental immunotherapy trial at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, MD., and called them immediately to see if she was eligible. After months of trying to determine whether she was a suitable candidate for the experimental treatment, Ryan was finally accepted.

The treatment, known as tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy, or TIL, is a testament to how far modern science has evolved. With this therapy, doctors remove a tumor and harvest special immune cells that are found naturally in the tumor. Doctors then grow the cells in a lab over the next several weeks with a protein that promotes rapid TIL growth – and once the cells number into the billions, they are infused back into the patient's body to fight the cancer. On April 1, 2015, Ryan had her tumor removed at the NIH. Two months later, she went inpatient for four weeks to have the team "wash out" her immune system with chemotherapy and infuse the cells – all 148 billion of them – back into her body.

Six weeks after the infusion, Ryan and Patrick went back for a follow-up appointment – and the news they got was stunning: Not only had no new tumors developed, but the six existing tumors in her lungs had shrunk significantly. Less than a year after her cell infusion, in April 2016, the doctors told Ryan news that would have been impossible just a decade earlier: Thanks to the cell infusion, Ryan was now considered NED – no evaluable disease. Her body was cancer-free.

Ryan is still NED today and continuing annual follow-up appointments at the NIH, experiencing things she never dreamed she'd be able to live to see, such as her children's high school and college graduations. She's also donating her blood and cells to the NIH to help them research other potential cancer treatments. "It was an honor to do so," Ryan said of her experience. "I'm just thrilled, and I hope my experience can help a lot more people."

Patrice Lee, PhD, VP of Pharmacology, Toxicology and Exploratory Development at Pfizer

Photo courtesy of Patrice Lee

Patrice Lee got into scientific research in an unconventional way – through the late ocean explorer Jacques Cousteau.

Lee never met Cousteau but her dreams of working with him one day led her to pursue a career in science. Initially, Lee completed an undergraduate degree in marine biology; eventually, her interests changed and she decided to get a dual doctoral degree in physiology and toxicology at Duke University. She now works at Pfizer's R&D site in Boulder, CO (formerly Array BioPharma), leading a group of scientists who determine the safety and efficacy of new oncology drugs.

"Scientists focused on drug discovery and development in the pharmaceutical industry are deeply committed to inventing new therapies to meet unmet needs," Lee says, describing her field of work. "We're driven to achieve new medicines and vaccines as quickly as possible without sacrificing safety."

Among the drugs Lee has helped develop during her career, including cancer therapies, she says around a dozen are currently in development, while nine have received FDA approval — an incredible accomplishment as many scientists spend their careers without seeing their drug make it to market. Lee's team is particularly interested in therapies for brain metastases — something that Lee says is a largely unmet need in cancer research, and something her team is working on from a variety of angles. "Now that we've had rapid success with mRNA vaccine technology, we hope to explore what the future holds when applying this technology to cancers," Lee says.

But while evaluating potential cancer therapies is a professional passion of Lee's, it's also a mission that's deeply personal. "I'm also a breast cancer survivor," she says. "So I've been on the other side of things and have participated in a clinical trial."

However, seeing how melanoma therapies that she helped develop have affected other real-life cancer patients, she says, has been a highlight of her career. "We had one therapy that was approved for patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma," Lee recalls. "Our team in Boulder was graced by a visit from a patient that had benefited from these drugs that we developed. It was a very special moment for the entire team."

None of these therapies would be available, Lee says without rigorous science behind it: "Facts come from good science. Facts will drive the development of new drugs, and that's what will help patients."

Chiuying "Cynthia" Kuk (they/them) MS, 34, third-year medical student at Michigan State University College of Human Medicine

Photo courtesy of Cynthia Kuk

Cynthia Kuk was just 10 years old when they had a conversation that would change their life forever.

"My mother, who worked as a translator for the government at the time, had been diagnosed with breast cancer, and after her chemotherapy treatments she would get really sick," Kuk, who uses they/them pronouns, recalls. "When I asked my dad why mom was puking so much, he said it was because of the medicine she was taking that would help her get better."

Kuk's response was immediate: "That's so stupid! Why would a medicine make you feel worse instead of better? When I'm older, I want to create medicine that won't make people sick like that."

Nine years later, Kuk traveled from their native Hong Kong to the United States to do exactly that. Kuk enrolled in a small, liberal arts college for their Bachelor's degree, and then four years later started a PhD program in cancer research. Although Kuk's mother was in remission from her cancer at the time, Kuk's goal was the same as it had been as a 10-year-old watching her suffer through chemotherapy: to design a better cancer treatment, and change the landscape of cancer research forever.

Since then, Kuk's mission has changed slightly.

"My mom's cancer relapsed in 2008, and she ended up passing away about five years after that," Kuk says. "After my mom died, I started having this sense of urgency. Cancer research is such that you work for twenty years, and at the end of it you might have a fancy medication that could help people, but I wanted to help people now." With their mother still at the forefront of their mind, Kuk decided to quit their PhD program and enter medical school.

Now, Kuk plans to pursue a career in emergency medicine – not only because they are drawn to the excitement of the emergency room, but because the ER is a place where the most marginalized people tend to seek care.

"I have a special interest in the LGBTQ+ population, as I identify as queer and nonbinary," says Kuk. "A lot of people in this community and other marginalized communities access care through the ER and also tend to avoid medical care since there is a history of mistreatment and judgement from healthcare workers. How you carry yourself as a doctor, your compassion, that can make a huge difference in someone's care."

In addition to making a difference in the lives of LGBTQ+ patients, Kuk wants to make a difference in the lives of patients with cancer as well, like their mother had.

"We've diagnosed patients in the Emergency Department with cancer before," Kuk says. "I can't make cancer good news but how you deliver bad news and the compassion you show could make a world of difference to that patient and their family."

During their training, Kuk advocates for patients by delivering compassionate and inclusive care, whether they happen to have cancer or not. In addition to emphasizing their patient's pronouns and chosen names, they ask for inclusive social and sexual histories as well as using gender neutral language. In doing this, they hope to make medicine as a whole more accessible for people who have been historically pushed aside.

"I'm just one person, and I can't force everyone to respect you, if you're marginalized," Kuk says. "But I do want to push for a culture where people appreciate others who are different from them."