Information comes from the United States Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). Beginning in 2005, the study included this question: In general, how satisfied are you with your life? Between then and 2008, researchers surveyed 1.3 million U.S. citizens who rated their satisfaction using a four-point scale.

“While the nature of the data set means that is not possible to record clinical data on people, the advantage is that its samples provide representative snapshots of the U.S.,” authors Andrew J. Oswald and Stephen Wu write. “Published research on life-satisfaction using this data set is thus only beginning.”

Statistics weren’t solely based on the amount of sunshine. Researchers also based rankings on factors such as crime statistics, environmental qualities (air and water quality, greenness, etc.), and quality of life.

Louisiana, Hawaii and Florida topped the list of happiest states. Outdoorsy states like Tennessee, Arizona, South Carolina, Mississippi, Montana, Alabama, and Maine were also in the top ten. Pennsylvania, Illinois, California and Michigan were among the bottom ten, and New York was ranked last.

“Many people think these states would be marvelous places to live in,” Oswald said in an interview with MSNBC. “The problem is that if too many individuals think that way, they move into those states, and the resulting congestion and house prices make it a non-fulfilling prophecy.”

Because much of the information was gathered before disasters such as Hurricane Katrina, it may not reflect current feelings of well-being.  Nevertheless, this research provides valuable, suggestive information.

“We wanted to study whether people’s feelings of satisfaction with their own lives are reliable, that is, whether they match up to reality—of sunshine hours, congestion, air quality, etc.—in their own state,” Oswald says. “And they do.”

’Tis the season for giving, and some people are taking it to the extreme. Thirteen people donated their kidneys for what they’re calling a “kidney swap.” Donors had nothing to gain, but because of their generosity 13 lucky recipients have a little extra to be merry about this Christmas.

End-stage renal disease, also known as kidney failure, can’t be treated with medication. When the kidneys cannot function, the body can’t filter out its wastes, and the person will eventually die. The only way for a person to survive this condition is to undergo dialysis or receive a kidney transplant.

This is one of the largest kidney swaps that’s ever occurred, the Associated Press reported. Donations such as this do more than just help the kidney recipients. They cut the wait list and give hope to the entire pool of patients who need kidneys.

Transplants are very complicated procedures, and much of the difficulty lies in finding a compatible donor. In the United States, nearly 105,000 people are waiting for an organ transplant. It is estimated that another 4,000 are added each month.

Patients waiting for an organ must register with the National Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). This registry helps match patients with the most compatible donors. The shortage of kidneys makes this process extremely difficult, and only a small number of patients are ever lucky enough to receive one.

Finding a compatible donor can take years. Because of the donation, however, the wait was cut significantly. Doctors from Georgetown University Hospital and Washington Hospital Center completed the 26 operations in just six days.

Five of the recipients needed to undergo a procedure known as plasmapheresis, a process of filtering the blood to retain antibodies that will keep the body from rejecting the kidney. All of the donations were life-saving operations.

"People keep wanting to know why, why, why," donor Sylvia Glaser, 69, says. "It sounds very trite but you pass through this world, and what do you ever do that makes a difference? You are giving someone a life, and there is no substitute for that."

Although they were complete strangers prior to the donation, donors and recipients were finally able to meet for the first time this Tuesday.

People who work out in the morning reap a ton of benefits. Many report better moods, more energy throughout the day and greater alertness. Thy also appear to have better, longer workouts.

A study from the U.K. found that morning exercisers work out harder. Translation? They burn more calories, which means they’re more likely to lose more weight.

Another study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that exercisers who ate breakfast were more satisfied by this meal. Some reported lower appetite throughout the day. Researchers asked 58 obese men and women to expend 500 calories daily and eat a regular breakfast of toast, tea and cereal to shed pounds.

“The effect of exercise on appetite regulation involves at least two processes,” authors write, “an increase in the overall drive to eat, and a concomitant increase in the satiating efficiency of a fixed meal.” Authors say it is the strength of this effect that determines weight loss.

All 58 participants reported being hungrier after exercise, but those who lost less weight reported feeling less satisfied by other meals.  Although they were satisfied by breakfast, they actually remained hungrier throughout the day. Their counterparts had less of an appetite.

“These data confirm that exercise has the capacity to alter the sensitivity of the appetite regulatory system via the compensatory response to consumed foods or preloads,” authors explain.

Despite the differences, all participants lost some weight. Researchers attribute differences in the amount of weight lost may be due to the lack of regulation for other meals. In any case, eating a regular breakfast appears to increase morning meal satisfaction.

“The exercise regimen apparently raised the sensitivity of the physiologic signaling system,” authors write, “which allowed the same amount of food to realize a greater suppression of hunger.”

More than 2,500 adults from Adelaide, Australia, participated in a study correlating leisure-time computer use with body weight. Participants filled out a questionnaire, reporting web usage (excluding work-time computer use) and other low-energy leisure activities.

Participants were divided into sub-groups based on how much time they spent on the Internet—no use, low use (less than 3 hours per week), or high use (greater than 3 hours per week).

“Adults with high leisure-time Internet and computer use were more likely to be overweight or obese even if they were highly active in their leisure time, as compared to participants who did not use the Internet or computer,” study authors write.

The average time spent on the Internet was 125.3 minutes per week. Participants with high use were 1.46 times more likely to be overweight and 2.52 times as likely to be obese. They were also 2.5 times more likely to do other low-energy activities, such as watching television, for five or more hours per day.

“These findings suggest that, apart from nutritional and physical activity interventions, it may also be necessary to decrease time spent in sedentary behaviors, such as leisure-time Internet and computer use, in order to reduce the prevalence of overweight and obesity,” the authors write.

Although the results of the study are suggestive, study authors explain that there were limitations that may have affected the outcomes.

“The strong associations of leisure-time Internet and computer use with overweight and obesity may in part be explained by the association of leisure-time Internet and computer use with other leisure-time sedentary behaviors."

Further investigation on leisure-time computer use will provide more information on the effects of internet usage on health and weight.