Close
today i learned (til)

Vertigo: Living like you’re on a perpetual rollercoaster

November 7, 2025

From ages 6-10, my uncle took my cousin and I to Navy Pier every summer. It’s July, school is out, the sun is shining, and not one multiplication table in sight! Fatty fair foods to our left and Lake Michigan to our right, the only thing missing was the adventure! Navy Pier doesn’t have many rides but there are a few that I was definitely excited for as a child. The only problem is, I can’t ride rollercoasters. And no, I am not afraid of heights. I still tried though it made my stomach hurt, but it got too much at one point and I stopped riding rollercoasters that day, and for the rest of my life. 

This would not be a problem if it wasn’t affecting my daily life. In addition to not being able to enjoy 98% of the rides at Disney World, I have severe motion sickness. Motion sickness is a common condition so, I was not surprised that I have it.

But my motion sickness doesn’t only affect me as a passenger. When I drive over large bumps or up steep hills, I flinch because of the stomach pain. Not only is this dangerous, but an Atlanta speed bump is nothing compared to a rollercoaster(at least it’s not supposed to be)!

So why can’t I ride rollercoasters? Why do I need to brace for impact driving up to my parents’ house? My mom gave me my first answer because she has a similar issue: Vertigo. Vertigo, though described as the sensation of spinning that leads to dizziness, is actually a symptom of several diseases/conditions such as: chronic migraines, benign paroxysmal positional vertigo(BPPV), persistent postural-perceptual dizziness(PPPD), or Meinere’s disease.  It’s also described as “disequilibrium”, which is just the feeling of being unbalanced constantly.

Figure 2. Percentage of people who suffer with some variant of vertigo

Here’s the science:

The stomach drop that many people feel when riding coasters is because your internal organs lag behind when you fall(Berg, 2024). This slight disconnect makes you feel like you’re weightless! Your internal organs don’t move as fast as the rest of your body so that sends a signal to your brain fooling you into thinking gravity no longer exists.

For people with Vertigo, this feeling is exhilarating. For me, it causes extreme nausea and pain. My stomach churns and my head starts aching, and then after 30 seconds it’s over. It turns out Vertigo is an inner ear problem. The inner ear is located in the vestibular system, which is a maze of canals filled with fluids and tiny crystals called otoconia.

According to University of California San Francisco, otoconia are “composed of calcium carbonate, and help the utricle sense head tilt and acceleration by acting as a weight that will slide relative to the hair cells with head position changes”.  They can be easily displaced by external factors such as age or trauma, but it can also be a genetic mutation. 

When the otoconia ends up in the wrong palace such as the semicircular canals, your brain thinks that there is movement of fluid throughout the inner ear when there really is not. This miscommunication of signals is what causes serious nausea, dizziness and even severe pain. Essentially, your inner ear tells your brain that you’re moving at a rapid pace but your eyes are also telling your brain that you’re not moving at all. Because the brain is receiving different signals, the rest of the body suffers the consequences. 

For me, it depends on the activity. Yes, I can ride the kiddie rides at Six flags. No, I cannot ride “Goliath”. I am not afraid of heights or planes. But when a plane lands, I often brace myself because the speed at which we land does cause a lot of pain. I also do not get sea sick, which is interesting because many people with motion sickness also have sea sickness.

Solutions:

  1. Motion sickness glasses. 
    1. Though they may look funny, many people have said these glasses help with car rides. The liquid inside the glasses helps balance the signal your inner ear and your eyes are sending to the brain.
    2. Antihistamines 
      1. Antihistamines can often be used to suppress the vestibular system’s hyperactivity when moving.
        1. Medicine such as Mezclizine, commonly known as Dramamine is the most popular form of medicine to help reduce motion sickness. Cinnarizine is also an antihistamine that is used for travel sickness.
    3. Surgery
      1. For people with Meniere’s disease, surgery may be required to correct the inner ear’s dysfunction.
    4. Sit in the passenger seat!
      1. Because the front wheels of responsible for the direction of the car, turns may feel less harsh. If you sit in the back, you’re farther away from the turning wheels so motion sickness is more likely. Drivers are even less likely to feel motion sickness.

My solutions:

  1. I take iron supplements to help with dizziness/anemia, so that motion sickness doesn’t make me pass out.
  2. I don’t ride rollercoasters.

References

https://www.ama-assn.org/public-health/prevention-wellness/what-doctors-wish-patients-knew-about-vertigohttps://ohns.ucsf.edu/balance-falls/BPPV

https://www.nhsinform.scot/illnesses-and-conditions/ears-nose-and-throat/vertigo/https://

www.rd.com/article/motion-sickness-glasses/

https://www.meandve.org.uk/information-and-support/treatment-and-management/surgery

https://www.canva.com/design/DAG3Yocer34/Lielrs9QrT29fb-6T_CN2Q/edit?utm_content=DAG3Yocer34&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link2&utm_source=sharebutton

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heel.com%2Ftherapeutic-areas%2Fvertigo%2Fvertigo&psig=AOvVaw3VWlit1xLmX4e-YTrBrPfh&ust=1762563486136000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CBYQjRxqFwoTCLCOsOTq3pADFQAAAAAdAAAAABAE

https://www.warrantywise.co.uk/blog/advice/travel-advice/10-ways-to-deal-with-car-sickness/#:~:text=Sit%20in%20the%20front%20seat,further%20from%20the%20turning%20wheels.

 

0Likes
About Author

You May Also Like

today i learned (til)
Let me check in the back: how 3D printing will revolutionize future commerce
today i learned (til)
Whale Fall
A green tree frog resting on a post. This is a small green frog with a bright yellowish-white stripe running down the side of its body.
today i learned (til)
The Green Tree Frog: Southern Summer Ambience
Articles, Field Notes, today i learned (til)
Three Dog Star Night (Part 1)

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.