Self-Care and Mindfulness Tips

There is a difference between being mindful and being mind-ful! Illustration by Devi C.

Self-care and mindfullness go hand-in-hand, are things that we all need, especially in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. Self-care is a way to keep yourself healthy mentally, physically, emotionally, and spiritually. But why is self-care so important? According to Matthew Glowiak, a counselor at Southern New Hampshire University, self-care is often the first thing that we neglect when we find ourselves in difficult situations, whether it be failing a class, financial stress, or family and friend drama (Glowiak, 2020). Mindfulness means maintaining a moment-by-moment awareness of our thoughts, feelings, bodily sensations, and surrounding environment, through a gentle, nurturing lens (Berkeley, 2021). That is why it is important to continuously practice self-care and mindfulness, even in challenging times. By scheduling some time every day or every week to engage in self-care and be mindful, you better equip yourself to handle the things life may throw at you. You will be able to reset yourself into a healthy point so that you can carry on doing the things you need to do and prevent burnout.

By not practicing self-care or being mindful, you are more likely to develop anxiety, depression, irritability, resentment, and whole bunch of other negative effects. Having a self-care routine and being mindful have been scientifically proven to reduce or get rid of anxiety, stress, depression, and frustration and anger, and has been proven to improve happiness, concentration, sleep quality, energy, and many other positive implications (Glowiak, 2020). They have been proven to reduce physical health illnesses such as heart disease, cancer, and stroke.

One of the biggest excuses for people who do not engage in regular self-care or mindfulness is that they do not “have enough time”. Everyone has lots of things going on in their lives, but it is essential to carve out even just a mere 5 minutes of self-care – it does not have to cost a thing! Instead of scrolling on Instagram or TikTok, here are some simple & quick ways to implement self-care into your daily regime and practice more mindfulness.

Five easy ways to practice minfulness. Illustration by Devi C.
  1. Practice affirmations
      • Affirmations serve as “integrity boosters”, raising a person’s sense that they are a coherent, moral, and adequate individual. Many people wish to view themselves as compassionate, worthy, and capable individuals, but sometimes their behaviors, attitudes, and intentions don’t always align with that ideal (Critcher, 2015). By practicing affirmations aloud repeatedly, one can allow themselves to truly feel that they are who they ideally view themselves to be. Repeat this with me 5 times:
  Read this alound to yourself — “I am worthy of     good things”. Repeat. Illustration by Devi C.

2.  Drink a cup or two of water first thing in the morning. Your body will thank you and this will help prevent you from feeling groggy from dehydration upon waking up from a night’s sleep.

3.  Have a little dance party in your room/home. Blast on your favorite songs and dance like nobody is watching!

4.  Move your body for at least 30 minutes a day. This can be as simple as walking to all your classes in the day, instead of opting for the bus or scooters.

5.  Get a plant. Nurturing plants is very therapeutic and they are lovely to look at!

6.  Stop to smell the flowers – literally. This only takes a few seconds, but is very helpful in helping ground you in the moment and connect you with the very present.

7.  Say no. It is important not to overextend yourself – you need to take care of you first before you can take care of others. You are more important than your to-do list. Prioritize you wellbeing above little tasks you might think or feel you need to do!

               Ribbert the frog says hi! Illustration by Devi C.

 


 

References:

Berkeley. (2021). Mindfulness definition: What is mindfulness. Greater Good. Retrieved March 18, 2022, from https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/topic/mindfulness/definition#:~:text=Mindfulness%20means%20maintaining%20a%20moment,through%20a%20gentle%2C%20nurturing%20lens.

Critcher, C. (2015). Self-Affirmations Provide a Broader Perspective on Self-Threat. Retrieved March 17, 2022, from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0146167214554956 

Glowiak, M. (2020, April 14). What is self-care and why is it important for you? Southern New Hampshire University. Retrieved March 18, 2022, from https://www.snhu.edu/about-us/newsroom/health/what-is-self-care 

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.