Who is a genius? This question has greatly interested humankind for centuries.

Let’s state clearly: Einstein was a genius. His face is almost the international symbol for genius. But we want to go beyond one man and explore the nature of genius itself. Why is it that some people are so much more intelligent or creative than the rest of us? And who are they?

In the sciences and arts, those praised as geniuses were most often white men, of European origin. Perhaps this is not a surprise. It’s said that history is written by the victors, and those victors set the standards for admission to the genius club. When contributions were made by geniuses outside the club—women, or people of a different color or belief—they were unacknowledged and rejected by others.

A study recently published by Science found that as young as age six, girls are less likely than boys to say that members of their gender(性别)are “really, really smart.” Even worse, the study found that girls act on that belief: Around age six they start to avoid activities said to be for children who are “really, really smart.” Can our planet afford to have any great thinkers become discouraged and give up? It doesn’t take a genius to know the answer: absolutely not.

Here’s the good news. In a wired world with constant global communication, we’re all positioned to see flashes of genius wherever they appear. And the more we look, the more we will see that social factors(因素)like gender, race, and class do not determine the appearance of genius. As a writer says, future geniuses come from those with “intelligence, creativity, perseverance(毅力), and simple good fortune, who are able to change the world.”

Why are more geniuses known to the public?

Young children who have experienced compassionate (有同情心的) love and empathy (认同感) from their mothers may be more willing to turn thoughts into action by being generous to others, a University of California, Davis’ study suggests.

In lab studies, children tested at ages 4 and 6 showed more willingness to give up the tokens (代金券) they had earned to fictional children in need when two conditions were present—if they showed bodily changes when given the opportunity to share and had experienced positive parenting that modeled such kindness. The study initially included 74 preschool-age children and their mothers. They were invited back two years later, resulting in 54 mother-child pairs whose behaviors and reactions were analyzed when the children were 6.

“At both ages, children with better physiological regulation and with mothers who expressed stronger compassionate love were likely to donate more of their earnings,” said Paul Hastings, UC Davis professor of psychology. “Compassionate mothers likely develop emotionally close relationships with their children while also providing an early example of satisfying the needs of others,” researchers said in the study, published in November in Frontiers in Psychology” Emotion Science.

In each lab exercise, after attaching a monitor to record children’s heart-rate activity, the examiner told the children they would be earning tokens for a variety of activities, and that the tokens could be turned in for a prize. The tokens were put into a box, and each child eventually earned 20 prize tokens. Then before the session ended, children were told they could donate all or part of their tokens to other children.

Taken together, the findings showed that children’s generosity is supported by the combination of their socialization experiences—their mothers’ compassionate love—and their physiological regulation, and that these work like “internal and external supports for the ability to act prosocially that build on each other”.

In addition to observing the children’s propensity (习性) to donate their game earnings, Hastings suggested that “being in a calmer state after sharing could reinforce (加强) the generous behavior that produced that good feeling.”

We’ve heard for years that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. But, it actually might be even more important than previously thought, according to a study published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, which examined the effects of skipping meals and meal frequency as related to mortality (死亡率) and heart health.

The study, which was published in August of last year, sought to find out if eating behaviors like meal frequency, meal skipping, and time between meals were associated with all-cause and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality.

The study consisted of 24,011 adults 40 years or older who participated from 1999 to 2014. Researchers looked at various eating behaviors of participants who self-reported their eating habits every 24 hours. Causes of death were tracked via death records through December 31, 2015.

After examining participants throughout the years, researchers found that certain eating behaviors were in fact linked to higher rates of premature death. Eating only one meal per day was associated with an increased risk of all-cause and CVD mortality while skipping breakfast was linked to an increased risk of CVD mortality, and skipping lunch or dinner was linked to an increased risk of all-cause mortality. Lastly, the study found that having meals too closely together (less than four and half hours apart) was also linked to all-cause premature death.

So, what does this mean for the average person? “At the end of the day what matters is that an individual can meet their nutritional needs for optimal (最佳) health,” explains Keri Gans, author of The Small Change Diet, “and breakfast typically is a good vehicle for nutrients associated with a decrease in cardiovascular risk, such as fiber and vitamins”. “If by eliminating meals they are missing out on important nutrients their body needs, then long term that can be harmful to their health,” leads to a “higher risk for certain cancers and heart disease,” she says.

While this study was large and comprehensive in many ways, there are also many limitations. It was mostly based on a 24-hour, self-reported dietary recall, “which may not always be the best method for dietary assessment,” explains Gans. “The participants may not accurately recall what they ate or honestly report it leading to the potential of misinformation.” Researchers noted that it was impossible to consider the role of sleep in the relationship between food and mortality, as well as a host of other unmeasured factors.

The bottom line is that while these findings about the relationships between meal skipping and mortality are important, there are a lot more factors that go into premature death.