My last couple of entries I have tackled ridiculousness pertaining to issues that have massive scope. Issues such as energy independence, climate change, the fate of our current geo-political system; ridiculousness that we hear about everyday on television, in newspapers, and across the blogosphere.  However today, while riding the subway, I was reminded that ridiculousness comes in all shapes and sizes. And in this case, ridiculousness came in the form of a book title.

I was sitting on the 6 train this afternoon, heading uptown, the way I often do. Glancing ever so discretely at other passengers, just to entertain myself along the journey when something caught my eye. A man, standing across from me was reading a book called Darwinism Under the Microscope by James P Gills and Tom Woodward. At first I didn’t think much of it. I was just comforted to know that there are some average citizens left who still take interest in science and hopefully that man was learning a great deal.

But then I thought about the word Darwinism for a bit, and you know what, that term is rather ridiculous. The fact that it seems so normal and common speaks great volumes about how little we’ve actually progressed as a society. Before you get skeptical and begin to distance yourself from this blog post, allow me to explain.

First I am going to break up the word. The first part of the word is Darwin. This obviously refers to Charles Darwin. A man of great intellect, Darwin discovered the scientific theory of evolution while studying the behavior of finches in the Galápagos Islands. His work has been heavily peer reviewed and is accepted as a perfectly valid scientific theory by an overwhelming majority of the scientific community.

The second part of the word is ism. Ism is normally used as a suffix that comes after an ideology people subscribe too or follow. Communism, socialism, capitalism, fascism, Judaism, Catholicism and so on and so forth. Do you see what’s wrong then?

Evolution is an accepted scientific theory. Gravity is also an accepted scientific theory. We don’t call people who believe in gravity as part of Newtonism. Your calculus teacher does not preach Leibnizism. Yet in the world we live in, Microsoft Office recognizes Darwinism as a word and not Newtonism and Leibnizism.

We say that Darwin discovered the theory of evolution. We cannot claim that for the various isms people follow throughout the world. Nobody discovered capitalism, nobody discovered imperialism, nobody discovered Protestantism or Calvinism. They were thought up, that is why they are called ideologies because they all stem from ideas. They are all philosophical.

The theory of evolution is not philosophical. It stemmed from intense observation and adherence to the scientific method. The fact that the line between discoveries coming out of the scientific field and ideology are becoming so blurred within the eyes on the populace exposes a frightening fact. There is a massive disconnect between the citizenry and the scientific community.

When two authors with a PHD and an MD can demote a scientific theory that has the same status as gravity to an ideology that can be either followed or ignored without anyone batting so much as an eye, this fact is confirmed. When a politician puts an ad on television claiming his opponent believes in evolution, and that is considered an attack ad, this fact is confirmed. When people with no scientific background can discredit climate change every time it snows, yet ignore climate change theory in the face of record high summer temperatures, this fact is confirmed.

During President Obama’s inaugural address, he said that we need to restore science to its rightful place. The only problem is, we have become so far removed from the scientific community that we no longer know what that rightful place is. We have lost sight on how to properly educate the masses in science. We have lost our grasp on the basic foundations of scientific understanding and principle and thus we no longer take it seriously.  Scientists have to come out and show us what their rightful place is and that place must be restored before our times take a turn for the even worse. Remember, it was the Scientific Revolution that got us out of the Dark Ages.

Be Skeptical, Be Critical, Take Nothing On Faith.

All the best,

Jesse M. S.

Mom, you were totally spot on. My reports to you on the telephone weren’t just the mad ravings of a sleep-deprived med student. I really did love surgery. I loved being in the hospital taking care of patients, getting all their “numbers”, (re)presenting them on rounds, learning how to change their dressings (not a trivial task), and assessing their wounds, drains, staples, and sutures. I felt empowered with new skills; I was useful to my patients and team. I was even more intoxicated by the OR, its predictable rituals (draping, scrubbing, time-out, instrument counts, etc.), accoutrements, sounds, smells, colors, and people. I took every opportunity I could to steal away from the floor service to “scrub in”.

I’m surprised at how far I’ve come from my first OR exposure just 1.5 years ago as a “pre-clinical” med student—when I found everything there so alien—to now, viewing the OR as a sanctuary. But on my last day as a surgical clerk, I was reminded of the OR as the unnatural and otherworldly place it too often is.

It was our last week on the general/trauma surgery service and most of us had “checked-out” retreating to our books to study for the upcoming exam that completed our rotation. Taking a break from my studies, I ran into one of the trauma nurse practitioners (integral members of our massive team). She stopped me in the hall: “Hey, why aren’t you in the OR!?” A major car crash with three victims arrived in the ER just an hour or so before. The wife had already died; the husband hung on by a thread while my attending surgeons and chief resident were trying to save his life. They had come to visit San Francisco. Tourists and their taxi driver.

I had seen my fair share of traumas, but it had been a relatively quiet 2 months and nothing quite so devastating had come through our doors. I ran to the OR, grabbed a mask, a cap, and entered OR room #1 for the first time. OR #1 is reserved for major emergencies and remains empty waiting for them to arise. I joined a throng of nurses, technicians, anesthesiologists, surgeons, and students. It was no longer a safe and predictable place. The OR felt alien to me again. 20-30 blood-soaked sponges lined up in the corner, empty blood product bags scattered on the floor, and nurses and technicians were running about. The head trauma surgeon was in rubber boots, elbows deep in the abdomen, and anesthesiologists were monitoring his vitals closely and actively infusing life-sustaining fluids and drugs into his middle-aged body.

The draping was haphazard; meticulous control of the field was sacrificed for the sake of a few seconds of time in this life-threatening situation. Still, the various tools, towels, sheets, monitors, poles, and people that surrounded him obscured his form and face. All I could see was every effort used to keep him alive, rather than the person beneath it all. Normally, this disassociation (dehumanization, even) is what allows us to cut into and “wound” the body of another person. But this time, I struggled with that. I knew he was dying on the table and I wanted to see him as fully human, not as a part of this techno-medical mess.

My stay was brief. They were “closing him up” and hoping to stave off the bleeding and maintain his blood pressure. I left not because I was not useful, but because I was overwhelmed by what I saw. The controlled, orderly, and ritualistic OR where I had spent the past 2 months, and in which I had become so comfortable, so at home, was instantly transformed into something entirely unsettling and frightening.

Later that night on the local news I heard that the man did not make it. The next day, we discussed him in our morbidity and mortality conference and I understood why. He had fatal injuries. The chance that any OR could control the bleeding was very small. Was all that effort, the 4 hours of surgery, and the 20 liters of blood products we gave all for naught? Or was it just another ritual of the OR, of the hospital, of our medical system? We use every life sustaining effort we can because we hope that even the smallest chance will make our efforts heroic.

One of my greatest fears going into medicine and particularly surgery was that I would only see patients in the unnatural environment of the hospital—living in hospital gowns, scrubs and beds, reduced to malfunctioning body systems and lab data. I would lose sight of their humanity. I think no matter how hard we try as students or residents, this transformation of people into mechanical bodies is inevitable, if not necessary. But this last day in the OR, observing one of my first deaths despite resuscitative efforts, jarred me back to a time when I was more innocent of hospital medicine. It re-impressed me with the humanity and gravity of this work, and humbled me to it as well.

This, my first rotation in surgery, will feel different than every other one to follow. There’s no turning back now. I have chosen a path where I will constantly straddle two worlds and now hopefully I can do so while maintaining my humanity, and especially that of my patients.

I am incredibly grateful for having the opportunity to be invited into the lives of so many extraordinary people—patients as well as “the team” of surgeons, nurses, and others. Most of all, I now understand a bit of what my parents went through; how hard they worked to become who they are. I also see that they both provided us with exceptional (perhaps rare) examples of extremely dedicated and caring physicians. I’m grateful for that, too.

Will I fulfill my mom’s fantasy and travel the path to become the first ever mother-daughter ENT team? Stay tuned!

But as I listen from afar, I hear the memories stir that I have stored of my first patient encounters in the daily dramas of her medical student life. Getting to the “wards” (as we used to call the patient floors, a term left over from the open hospital wards that characterized a hospital almost a century ago) was a real milestone. And it meant that you were going to meet real, live, actual (not simulated) patients. That alone was awesome and frightening.

And to the uninitiated, no matter how close to medicine she/he may have been, no longer are the scientific facts and concepts enough to guarantee your success in this new environment. There is a large and rather complex layer of people that comes between the student and the patients. This layer is known as the “service.” A service, in a medical school/university teaching hospital, consists of many types of medical students, resident trainees at different stages of training, and the attending or staff physician. The attending (or staff) doctor is the doctor who has completed all her/his training and is now responsible for the patients on the service. He/she teaches at the medical school in a clinical capacity. He/she is the ultimate decision maker. That’s a lot of responsibility.

But in order to teach and take care of patients at the same time, a large cadre of helpers/learners is available to help the attending. Each has a different role that may change daily depending on the situation. One example is on round. On rounds (going around and seeing the patients two or three times a day to check on their progress) the student may present a patient at one time, or the chief (most senior resident) at another. Knowing when to do what can be very confusing and stressful. Another example is helping in the operating room. Knowing what and how to do something which might seem as simple as holding a retractor, can be a major life challenging experience! Let that retractor slip at a critical point in the operation, and significant harm might result. What lecture covered that in the pre-clinical years?

Thus, new skills come into play at this point in the student’s medical school journey. Social skills. Skills needed to assess a situation and respond quickly and correctly to the social cues of a totally new environment. When do I speak up? When do I volunteer to see a patient? How am I supposed to present this patient? Was I too long-winded? Did I leave out any pertinent information? Did I speak loud enough and with enough authority? When do I tell the surgeon my arm hurts and if I don’t get a rest soon, the retractor might slip?

Sometimes, when I was worried about all of these other things that go into becoming a doctor, the medical concepts I learned would fly right out of my head. I might stammer or think that I looked kinda jerky. And I guess sometimes I did. And yes, sometimes the retractor slipped, but the surgeons always saw it coming and I don’t remember any harm (even the time I fell asleep holding the retractor on a liver during the removal of a gall bladder at 4 am!) And somehow I made it.

I am sure Dana has had some of these experiences. I know that she thinks that she is unique in her mis-steps, but that just isn’t so. I hope in the next post she will tell you about her first clerkship and how she felt about stepping into a whole new world of learning how to take care of patients in the social system we call health care.

The underdeveloped world, at a glance, appears hampered by its lack of modern technology and infrastructure. However, that is only at a glance. In the poorest crevasses of Africa or the most isolated quarters of the Far East, some people have been spinning a web of new ideas and innovations. Just remember what young inventor Hugo Van Vuuren says: “If it works in Africa, it works everywhere.”

I found out how right Van Vuuren is when I went to the 2010 World Science Festival’s Modern MacGyvers: Innovations for a Developing World, held at the Museum of Arts and Design in New York City. Modern MacGyvers showcased a series of inventions that not only makes a substantial difference in developing countries, but also demonstrates simple ways that we can use our creativity to be energy efficient in our own world.

Hugo Van Vuuren demonstrated this point in much more than words. He was born in South Africa and focuses on designing for Africa. He and his team developed a battery that is powered by small electrical currents in dirt. That’s right — it runs on dirt, and it can power a light, charge a cell phone, and run a radio. This battery changes the way farmers in impoverished African communities conduct commerce and power their homes. We Americans can take a tip from this invention. In our own society, where we find it easier to waste than conserve energy, dirt technology has the potential to radically reduce the amount of energy and fossil fuels Western cultures consume.

Another Modern MacGyver is Winston Soboyejo, an engineer who teaches at Princeton. Using a special flexible solar panel, he was able to create a refrigerator that runs on solar energy and fits on the back of a camel. This is a near-perfect solution for the many parts of Africa crippled by their lack of highways and roads. This camel fridge can preserve food and vaccines for small isolated villages, without the need to change a battery or find an outlet.

All of the inventions shown at Modern MacGyvers have one thing in common: they can make a huge difference in the lives of millions of people. As any invention should, these have the potential to change the world. Who knows — maybe 100 years from now, our own lights will be powered with dirt, and our cell phones, cameras and fridges with solar. With thinkers like Winston and Hugo, maybe a sustainable future for all is not so far beyond the realm of possibility.

Jesse and Julian will continue to cover the 2010 World Science Festival. Check back throughout this week and next for fun and insightful reviews, photos, and video of this year’s events.

It’s Raining, It’s Pouring!

It’s that time of year when some days are beaming with sunshine one minute and the next there’s a big black cloud dropping rain overhead. So what’s that all about? The water cycle. It’s all about the water cycle. Check these experiments out. You can make a cloud and make it rain right in your own kitchen.

Make it rain inside

Why does it rain? You can make it rain right in your own kitchen and see for yourself.

What You Need

• A pop bottle
• Scissors
• Hot tap water
• Ice

What You Do

• Get a grown up to help you cut off the top part of your pop bottle at the shoulder, leaving the cap screwed on tightly.
• Fill the bottom part of the bottle half full of hot tap water.
• Turn the top part of the bottle so it’s upside down, and fill it with ice. Set this into the bottom part of the Pop Bottle and wait.
• What do you notice?

What’s Going On?

You made a miniature water cycle–evaporation, condensation, and precipitation– right in your bottle.

Heat causes the water to evaporate. Liquid water turns into a water vapor gas that rises into the air. When it rises it hits the ice and cools down. The cooling water vapor molecules start to stick to each other and make a cloud. This is called condensation.

Clouds collect water droplets until all the droplets are too heavy to float in the air. Then water falls from the sky as rain. This is called precipitation. In your bottle, the droplets get heavier and heavier until they fall back down into the bottom part of the bottle.

The water cycle happens every day over and over all over the Earth, on a much bigger scale.

Cloud in a Bottle

What are clouds made of? More than you think. Try this and see.

What You Need

• Black construction paper
• Hot tap water
• A pop bottle
• Matches—and a grown up to help out

What You Do

• Prop up the black construction paper on your kitchen counter. You will use the paper as background later on.
• Dribble about 2 inches of very hot water into your bottle—but don’t melt it!
• Quickly cap the bottle.
• Shake the bottle for about 1 minute.
• Put the bottle on the counter. Have a grown-up strike a match. Let it burn for about 2 seconds. Blow out the match. Quickly uncap the bottle, and drop in the match and cap up the bottle again.
• Put the bottle on its side in front of the black paper so you can see what’s going on inside the bottle more clearly. Push on the side of the bottle as hard as you can for about 10 seconds to pressurize the inside. Let go and see if you have a cloud. If not, repeat this until you see a cloud form in the bottle.
• After you get a cloud. Put the bottle right side up and uncap it. What happens to your cloud?

What’s Going On

Clouds are made of more than just water vapor clinging to itself. The water vapor needs a little something to hang on to. Something like particles of dust. In this experiment, the cloud began forming in the bottle when the water vapor in the air attached themselves to the particles from the smoky, sooty, match.

By Jesse Medalia Strauss and Julian Cohen-Serrins
This is the first post in a series covering the recent World Science Festival in New York City

It was a gorgeous night in New York City, the dark blue sky visible through the vast glass walls of Lincoln Center’s Alice Tully Hall. The perfect setting to share food, drinks and experiences with some of the smartest and most preeminent names in the entire field of science. This was the Opening Gala of the third annual World Science Festival. A most exquisite kick off to five days of forty different events, teaming with vibrant discussion, discovery, and displays of the latest and most innovative breakthroughs in the world of science and technology. A festival put together and built on the insights of some of the smartest, most interesting, and tragically overlooked people on the face of the Earth.

The night began with a welcoming ceremony, which featured drinks, hors d’oeuvres and excellent conversation. Breaking through a barricade of photographers and reporters, we were able to get within inches of icons such as theoretical physicists Michio Kaku and Lawrence Krauss, actor John Lithgow, painter Chuck Close, and cosmologist Steven Hawking.

The second phase of the Gala was a fantastic and often comedic compilation of science themed acts on the stage of Alice Tully Hall. This program included a lighthearted lyrical vision of a submerged post-global warming New York, a song about calculus performed by some of the cast members of the current Broadway production of South Pacific, an unforgettable live performance by violinist Yo-Yo Ma, and a tribute to and speech by Dr. Hawking, whom the Gala was honoring.

Following the stage performances, we saw a silent film, directed by British artists Al+Al, set to a live orchestra, conducted by composer Philip Glass, and narrated by John Lithgow. Entitled Icarus at the Edge of Time, it is based on the book for younger readers by Columbia University theoretical physicist Brian Greene, co-founder of the World Science Festival with his wife, producer Tracy Day. Both the book and the film re-imagine the famous Greek myth of Icarus, set in deep space where a black hole replaces the sun.

After the film came the Gala reception, set in the spacious and newly designed lobby of Alice Tully Hall. There were fancy cheeses from all over Europe, imported meats and delicious desserts. We had a brief yet delightful conversation with Chuck Close, listened to music, and got yelled at by one of Dr. Hawking’s bodyguards when we tried to take a picture. Unfortunately, there was no sign of Alan Alda, who helped organize the entire event and spoke during the performance. We had admired him on television and hoped to tell him so, but that was not a total loss. All in all, we had a wonderful time and if the Gala is any precursor, we will be in for a fun and exciting few days.

Jesse and Julian will continue to cover the 2010 World Science Festival. Check back throughout this week and next for fun and insightful reviews, photos, and video of this year’s events.

Think oysters are good on the half shell? They may be even better whole. Oysters can restore marine habitats by cleaning water, creating homes for other sea life and preventing coastal erosion. But oyster populations around the world have declined, experts say. Find out how scientists in New York are working to replenish oyster populations in the waters around the city.

Grade Level: 6th – 8th grade
Subject Matter: Life Science
National Standards: NS. 5-8.1, NS. 5-8.3

Overview

Marine science is a very broad and diverse field, covering the biology, chemistry and physics of the oceans and how these areas of ocean science relate to one another. Ocean scientists may study marine biology, coastline ecology, effects of water pollution, and more.

In this activity, students will become marine scientists who focus on water quality and possible sources of contamination that may be found in water. Using an ammonia water testing kit, students will follow scientific procedure for determining the level of ammonia in each water sample, and discuss how this gas can affect the health of organisms living in marine or freshwater environments.

Activity Materials

• Ammonia freshwater and saltwater testing kit (available at any pet store)
• Bottled water
• Window cleaner
• Water from an aquarium
• Water from a pond, river, stream, or other local source of freshwater
• Water from a salt marsh or an estuary, if possible
• Seawater, if possible
• Small plastic cups

Vocabulary

• Nitrogen: a colorless, odorless gas that is vital for living organisms.
• Nitrogen cycle: the series of processes by which nitrogen is converted from an atmospheric gas to nitrogen compounds in soil and living organisms, then reconverted to a gas.
• Ammonia: a colorless gas that is highly soluble in water.
• Control sample: a baseline or standard sample, used to help analyze data.
• Field sample: a sample that is collected outside of a laboratory.
• Parameter: a measurable quantity
• Estuary: A place where a freshwater river or stream flows into the ocean, mixing with the seawater. A wide variety of birds, fish, and other wildlife make estuaries their home

What To Do

Prep: Collect and prepare the control and field water samples by pouring each of the following into small plastic cups. Make sure to label each water sample according to the contents or source. This activity can be done solely with freshwater samples if seawater is inaccessible.

• Control water samples – one for each student:
• Bottled water
• Bottled water and window cleaner mixture (1:1 ratio)
• Field water samples – one for each student:
• Water from an aquarium
• Freshwater from a pond, river, stream or similar source
• Water from a salt marsh or an estuary, if possible
• Seawater, if possible

1. Begin the lesson by having students watch the Science Friday video, “Oysters – Not Just For Eating.” Begin a discussion with the students on the definition of marine science and the variety of things that marine scientists investigate. Why do marine scientists study water quality? Tell students that they will play the role of marine scientists by testing a number of water samples for concentrations of ammonia.

2. Ask students to discuss their personal experiences with ammonia and how it is used. What are the different ways that ammonia is produced? How does ammonia get into our environment?

3. Hand out the ammonia testing kit and review instructions on how to use the kit. Make sure students understand how to read the results using the indicator charts provided with the kit.

Activity 1: Testing Control Samples

1. Hand out the labeled control samples to each student. Inform students that these samples are the control samples that will be tested in order to test the validity of the test kit, and to familiarize students on how to perform the procedure.

2. Ask students to predict what the results should be for the sample labeled “Bottled Water” and the sample labeled “Bottled Water with Window Cleaner.” What is one of the main ingredients in window cleaner?

3. Have students test the two water samples and record the data on a chart. Compare their results to their predictions. What do they think would happen to any living organisms that lived in a lake or ocean composed of the water sample with window cleaner?

Activity 2: Testing Field Samples

1. Hand out the field samples so that each student has one of each sample. Review the sources of each water sample (lake, pond, etc.) and the various types of living organisms that typically live there. Ask students to describe how high levels of ammonia can affect these organisms.

2. Have students test the field samples and record their data on the chart. Have students compare their results with each other and with the results from the control samples. Were there any differences in the results? If so, what variables could have caused these differences?

3. Discuss the water quality of each of the samples from the field. What would be further actions to take if the results indicated high levels of ammonia in any of the field water samples?

What’s Happening?

Ammonia is naturally produced by excretions of living organisms, and as a byproduct of decaying organic matter such as plants and grass clippings. Ammonia is an important part of the nitrogen cycle, in which waste is broken down by bacteria into compounds that can be used for growth by other living organisms. Industrial and chemical companies also manufacture ammonia for detergents and fertilizers.

Ammonia levels in water can increase due to natural processes, such as an overabundance of organisms producing waste in a contained ecosystem, or human activities, such as dumping industrial or biological waste into the natural environment. Even low concentrations of ammonia in water can be harmful or even toxic to fish and other living organisms.

There are numerous parameters that scientists use to measure the health of marine or freshwater environments. Besides testing for ammonia levels, scientists may test for other factors — dissolved oxygen levels, salinity, pH, turbidity, temperature, etc. — in order to determine whether the conditions of the water are ideal for organisms that live in the water, as well as for those that depend on it as a source of drinking water.

Topics for Science Class Discussion

• What is the pure form of ammonia? What are the ammonia compounds created through bacterial decomposition?
• Why is it important to continuously test an aquarium in your home for ammonia levels as opposed to the ocean?
• Explain all the parts of the nitrogen cycle. Where can you see the nitrogen cycle in action?
• Why is it important to test marine or freshwater environments for other factors such as salinity, pH, turbidity (having sediment or foreign particles stirred up or suspended in it) and temperature?

Extended Activities and Links

• Give students the opportunity to collect their own water samples from other water sources in their community, and test their field samples for concentrations of ammonia.
• Have students research if there are any environmental issues with marine or freshwater habitats in their community. Students can become citizen scientists to develop scientific solutions or become student activists and create a campaign to promote freshwater or marine conservation.
• Challenge students to research, design and maintain a living freshwater or saltwater aquarium in the classroom.
• Visit the Coastal Ocean Observatory Laboratory (C.O.O.L.) website.
• Try these ocean-related science activities from Jean-Michel Cousteau Ocean Adventures educator resources

Basalt formations off the East Coast of the U.S. could hold a billion of tons of carbon dioxide, according to a new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Paul Olsen, of Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, takes us to a basalt quarry in New Jersey and explains what makes the rock ideal for soaking up emissions.

Note: Another Teachers TalkingScience lesson, Sublime Sublimation, makes an excellent introduction to Capturing Carbon Dioxide, and to carbon dioxide itself.

Grade Level: 6th – 8th grade
Subject Matter: Physical Science/Geology
National Standards: NS.5-8.1, NS.5-8.2

Overview

One of the leading causes of global climate change is carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that traps and stores heat from the sun that would normally escape from Earth’s atmosphere into space. Though some heating is beneficial to life on Earth, too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere leads to dramatic changes in the Earth’s climate. One important field of research aimed at combating climate change is carbon sequestration. Carbon sequestration is the science of taking carbon dioxide out of the air and storing it away. Scientists have been experimenting with different methods of carbon sequestration through chemical, biological or physical means.

In this activity, students will learn more about carbon sequestration by creating a carbonated beverage out of apple juice and dry ice. This experiment illustrates how carbon dioxide can be stored in a substance. Students will compare and contrast the results to determine if liquid carbonation is an effective method for carbon sequestration.

Activity Materials

• Dry Ice (find local distributors at www.dryicedirectory.com)
• Leather gloves
• Straws – one for each student
• Apple juice — for best results, make sure juice is very cold
• Glass cups – one for each student

Note: Before purchasing or handling dry ice, review and follow dry ice safety guidelines.

Vocabulary

• Greenhouse gas: a gas that contributes to the warming of the Earth’s atmosphere.
• Sublimation: process of changing from a solid to a gas or vapor. When something causes sublimation, chemists say that the solid sublimes. (Students should be familiar with these terms from the Teachers TalkingScience lesson, Sublime Sublimation.)
• Solubility: the ability of one substance to dissolve in another.
• Nucleation site: a location where dissolved gas molecules can group together to form bubbles.
• Carbonation: the process of dissolving carbon dioxide in liquid.

What To Do

1. Begin the lesson by having students watch the Science Friday Web video, “Stashing CO2 in Rocks.” Begin a discussion with the students on why scientists want to store away carbon dioxide.

2. Show students a cup of dry ice and have them make observations. From the Sublime Sublimation lesson, students should know that dry ice is frozen carbon dioxide. Where is carbon dioxide found and how is it produced? What are the effects of too much carbon dioxide in our atmosphere? Continue the students’ discussion on carbon sequestration and why scientists are trying to find ways to store away carbon dioxide.

3. Tell students that they are going to experiment with one method of storing away carbon dioxide by using dry ice. Pour cold apple juice into glass cups and distribute one cup to each student. Have students describe and write down how the apple juice tastes (sweet, cold, etc.) and how it appears (clear, yellow, etc.), using as many adjectives as possible.

4. Have students predict what will happen if dry ice is added to their juice. Using leather gloves, drop a small piece of the dry ice into each cup of juice. Have students use straws to stir the juice continuously. Have students write down their observations and explanations of the effects of the dry ice in the juice.

5. Once the dry ice has fully vaporized and no more bubbling can be seen, have students compare the taste and appearance of the juice. How have the taste and appearance of the juice changed?

6. Leave the cup of juice on a counter overnight and observe the juice in the morning. How have its appearance and taste changed when left exposed overnight? What might happen if the cup were tightly sealed and left overnight? Have students explain why liquid carbonation is or is not a good method for carbon sequestration.

What’s Happening?

Dry ice is frozen carbon dioxide. Since dry ice is a frozen type of gas, it does not melt into a liquid. Instead, it undergoes a process called sublimation. Sublimation occurs when a substance changes directly from the solid phase to the gas phase — as chemists say, when a substance sublimes. When dry ice is placed inside a cup of juice, the heat from the juice transfers to the dry ice and causes it to sublime even faster, releasing carbon dioxide gas into the liquid.

Since carbon dioxide is somewhat soluble in liquids, a small amount of the gas will dissolve into the juice. This dissolved carbon dioxide makes the liquid slightly acidic, giving it a tart taste. The dissolved carbon dioxide also makes the juice fizzy or carbonated, as evidenced by the random formation of small bubbles throughout the juice. These are bubbles of carbon dioxide that have formed at nucleation sites, or locations where dissolved carbon dioxide molecules have come together to form a gas again.

If left exposed to the air, the carbon dioxide eventually will exit the liquid in a gaseous form, in the same way that soda will eventually go “flat.” Liquid carbonation is not the best method to use for carbon sequestration, since the resulting effect is carbon dioxide being released back into the atmosphere.

Topics for Science Class Discussion

• What other ways can carbon dioxide be taken out of the atmosphere and stored?
• How does the temperature of the liquid affect the solubility?
• How does the amount of carbon dioxide dissolved in the liquid affect its acidity?
• What other types of liquids can be carbonated?

Extended Activities and Links

• Measure the pH of the carbonated juice at different time intervals. Do the acidity levels change as the carbon dioxide is released from the juice? Have students research the correlation of carbon dioxide and acidity on a molecular level.
• Try carbonating orange juice with pulp, and without pulp. Compare and contrast the number of nucleation sites or bubbles formed. How does the pulp affect the number of bubbles formed?
• Learn more about the carbon cycle through this interactive online animation.
• Challenge students to make a lemon soda that retains as much carbonation as possible.
• Have students research current carbon sequestration projects and create a poster board presentation, illustrating an overview of each project, including its carbon capture methods and effectiveness.
• Try these climate change activities from the Environmental Protection Agency. They include creating a carbon counter hand-held tool and ways to reduce your emissions.

Note: This lesson provides a great introduction to another Teachers TalkingScience lesson, Capturing Carbon Dioxide.

Looking for ways to jazz up your party? Patrick Buckley, co-author of The Hungry Scientist Handbook, demonstrates how to make carbonated fruit. Materials required: fruit (the firmer the better), a pressure cooker and a handful of dry ice cubes.

Grade Level: 6th – 8th grade
Subject Matter: Physical Science
National Standards: NS.5-8.1, NS.5-8.2

Overview

There are three generally known states of matter: solid, liquid, and gas. Each of these states also is known as a phase. Elements and compounds can move from one phase to another phase. A solid can become a liquid (one example: ice melting into water), a liquid can became a gas (water evaporating into steam) and a gas can become a liquid (water vapor in steam condensing into water droplets). Sublimation is a phase transition that occurs when a solid changes into a gas — or, as chemists say, when a solid sublimes.

In this activity, students will explore sublimation by conducting experiments with dry ice. Students will observe how dry ice changes phases, and the physical changes that occur when they mix or add other substances.

Activity Materials

• Newspapers, to protect countertop
• Ice cubes
• Dry ice (find local distributors at www.dryicedirectory.com)
• Glass measuring cups or beakers, one for each student
• Warm water
• Food coloring
• Liquid soap

Note: Before purchasing or handling dry ice, review and follow dry ice safety guidelines.

Vocabulary

• Evaporation: process of changing from a liquid to a gas or vapor.
• Condensation: process of changing from a gas or vapor to a liquid.
• Sublimation: process of changing from a solid to a gas or vapor.
• Carbon dioxide: a heavy colorless, odorless atmospheric gas.

What To Do

1. Begin the lesson by having students watch the Science Friday Web video, “Hungry Scientist Makes Fizzy Fruit.” Ask students what Patrick Buckley used to make the fruit fizzy. Tell students that they will observe a few dry ice experiments to learn more about its properties. Review dry ice safety information, and inform students that you will be the only person touching and distributing the dry ice for each experiment.

Activity 1

1. Ask students to explain what dry ice is, what it is composed of, and what its properties are. Have students predict what will happen when a piece of dry ice is placed on the counter.

2. Have students spread newspaper on the countertop to protect the table. Put on a pair of leather gloves and place on the countertop in front of each student one piece of dry ice and one regular ice cube. Have students compare and contrast the differences between dry ice and regular ice.

3. Have students observe the direction of the gas sublimating from the dry ice. Why does the gas drift down towards the counter instead of up? In what direction does steam from a boiling pot of water drift?

Activity 2

1. Have students fill a glass measuring cup halfway with warm water. What do they think will happen if a piece of dry ice is placed in the warm water? Have them explain their predictions.

2. With leather gloves on, place a piece of dry ice in each glass. Have students observe the size of the ice. Is it shrinking? What is the cause of this physical change?

3. Have students describe and try to explain the other physical reactions that are happening. Why is the water bubbling? Have student observe the rate of bubbling for a few minutes. Why does the rate of bubbling change from fast to slow?

Activity 3

1. Have each student fill another glass measuring cup halfway with warm water, and add a few pumps of liquid soap and a few drops of food coloring. Ask students to predict what will happen when the dry ice is placed in the soapy water. Compare and contrast their predictions.

2. With leather gloves on, place a piece of dry ice in each student’s soapy water. Have students observe and describe what happens in the glass. (A mass of bubbles will form.) Have students observe the direction of the bubbles. Why does the bubble mass spill over in a downward direction instead of floating away?

3. Instruct the students to pop some of the bubbles from the top of the bubble mass. Warn students that they should not put their fingers inside the glass container with the dry ice in it. What do they observe each time a bubble is popped?

What’s Happening?

The regular ice that we use to keep our drinks cold is made out of frozen water. Dry ice, on the other hand, is frozen carbon dioxide, a type of atmospheric gas that is produced during respiration. Unlike ice made from frozen water, dry ice does not melt; it sublimates. Sublimation is the process of going directly from a solid to a gas. Dry ice bypasses changing into a liquid state before converting to gas. That is why it is called ”dry“ ice. As gas sublimes from dry ice, it will drift in a downward direction. This is because the carbon dioxide is heavier than the air, causing the gas to drift downward.

Placing dry ice in a container of warm water will cause the formation of lots of bubbles. The bubbles are created when heat from the water enters the dry ice, causing it to sublime — change to its gaseous form. The water may appear to be boiling, but these bubbles are actually carbon dioxide gas being released into the air. Initially, the bubbling happens at a rapid rate because the warm water is heating the dry ice. As the water begins to cool and the temperature difference between the dry ice and the water becomes smaller, the rate of bubbling begins to slow down. Eventually, water ice will form a covering on the dry ice and then crack or pop, as the pressure of carbon dioxide gas further builds up inside.

Adding dry ice to soapy water will cause the carbon dioxide to become “trapped” in the soap that is dissolved in the water. Because carbon dioxide is heavier than air, a mass of carbon dioxide gas inside soap bubbles will form and spill over the container instead of floating away. Popping the soap bubbles will release the carbon dioxide gas into the air.

Topics for Science Class Discussion

• Describe and give examples of different ways that elements change from one state of matter to another.
• What would happen if the pieces of dry ice were bigger or smaller? How does surface area affect the experiment?
• Why does the gas appear white if carbon dioxide gas is colorless?
• What are other ways that carbon dioxide is used? What else produces it besides respiration?
• What else have you heard about carbon dioxide? (It is a greenhouse gas that plays a role in climate change.)

Extended Activities and Links

• Using a thermometer and a beaker of water at room temperature, measure and record the temperature of water before and after adding dry ice. Students must use leather gloves or tongs to handle the dry ice. Measure the temperature of the water every minute after the dry ice is added, and complete a graph with the y-axis as the temperature and the x-axis as the time. Have students explain their results.
• Challenge the students to blow up a balloon using only a balloon, a plastic soda bottle and dry ice. Make sure students have leather gloves or tongs to handle the dry ice.
• Assign students a research project to find out how dry ice is manufactured and shipped. Have students explain the reasons for each part of the process.
• Have students research and choose their favorite dry ice experiment video online. View each video in class and have students explain the science behind the experiment in their video.
• Try these amazing dry ice experiments at home or in the classroom

(Video with transcript)

Greetings Dear Readers,

On April 18, 1977, President Jimmy Carter addressed the nation with the first ever-proposed federal energy policy. In this speech, he stressed above all the vital imperative to conserve our dwindling oil resources and move towards alternative and renewable sources of energy. Carter warned that “the alternative may be a national catastrophe,” a national catastrophe like the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Right now, the federal government has no coherent energy policy. The only one we had ended the second President Ronald Reagan took his predecessor’s solar panels off the White House roof. From that point on, the man who said, “Trees cause more pollution than automobiles,” would encourage a nation whose morale was suffering from Carter’s truth injection to consume more, and pretend that none of our problems exists. A solid plan for Reagan. After all, he never lived to see oil wash up on Louisiana’s shores.

No one foresaw the problems we have today with oil as clearly as President Carter. When confronted with the truth, instead of making the necessary sacrifices that would have made offshore drilling completely unnecessary and unprofitable, the people of the United States did a most ridiculous thing. They threw out the only honest man in Washington and replaced him with the ultimate out-of-touch yes-man.

But what is most troubling about our collective decision to ignore the staggering evidence that lay right before us in 1977, is not the possibility of preventing dead fish and wildlife, as well as the swift end to the careers of many fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico. By steadily increasing our intake of oil, we have been forced to import more. When we import more oil, we end up financing some pretty unsavory folk. You may know them better as terrorists.

The United States has done a great deal since 9/11. We have invaded two countries, bombed the borders of a third, created a new cabinet position, beefed up our security and surveillance, and financed research into new, more effective approaches to security. But there is another front on the war on terror. The second requires more than the brave sacrifice of our enlisted men and women; it requires a sacrifice from every one of us.

The best thing we can do to prevent a second major attack on our soil is to follow through with Jimmy Carter’s plan. Every solar panel you install, every hybrid you buy, every cow you spare, and every windmill that is built mean less money in the pockets of Al-Qaeda. You can do more to fight terror by making simple changes in your own lifestyle than by using bombs and bullets combined.

News pundits are already calling the Louisiana oil spill the greatest environmental disaster of our time. It is also the loudest wake up call. It has been made clear as day that we cannot sustain our civilization if we continue in the direction we are going. We must have a clear and coherent energy policy, we must wean ourselves off oil, and we must switch over completely to alternative fuels. I understand that is a lot to ask of the American people, that the task seems daunting and naive. But remember, President Franklin D. Roosevelt said at the beginning of World War II that we needed to produce 50,000 planes. Everyone thought he was crazy, but after the hard work and sacrifice of every able American, we did not produce 50,000 planes, we produced 100,000.

The most powerful force in the world is a mobilized democracy. No task is too great. We must become energy independent if we are to remain the world’s most powerful nation — if we are to remain a nation at all. The stakes are that high. We must become energy independent and we can start by demanding that President Obama put those solar panels back on the White House.

Be Skeptical, Be Critical, Take Nothing On Faith.
All the best,
Jesse M. S.

Did you know that every time you make a sound you’re causing a major collision? Yup. Every sound you make or hear is an actual chain reaction of vibrating molecules crashing into each other until they bump into the tiny hairs and bones and membranes inside your ear. It’s sound. And it’s very dramatic. In this experiment, you can see the vibrations that you’re making every time you make a noise. Here’s how.

What You Need

• A big bowl
• Plastic wrap
• Rubber band
• Uncooked rice

What You Do

• Take a square of plastic wrap and secure it around the opening of the bowl with the rubber band. Stretch the plastic wrap until it is as tight as a drum.
  • Set your drum on a table and sprinkle a little uncooked rice on the plastic wrap.
  • Get about five inches away and talk to your drum. Sing to it. Hum. Yell. Whisper.  What happens? Can you make your rice dance?

What’s Going On?

Whenever we make a noise—squawk, sing, speak or peep—we’re making vibrations. We make sounds by forcing air from our lungs past our vocal cords.  The vocal cords waggle in the breeze and vibrate the air molecules around them and making a sound. We shape sounds by loosening and tightening the cords. Tighter cords make faster vibrations and higher sounds while looser cords make slower vibrations and deeper sounds. See if you can feel the difference when you sing high and low notes. We also change sounds by changing the shape of our mouths and by controlling the amount of air that rushes past them. Whatever we do, we’re changing the vibrations of the cords and sending those vibrations out into the environment as sound waves.

Those sound waves come out of us and bump into the air molecules around us.  They bump into more air molecules, causing what’s called a chain reaction.  That’s kind of like what happens when you line up dominoes in a row, and then knock the first one over: the first domino bumps into the next one, which bumps into the next one, all the way down the line until the whole row collapses.

When you aim sounds at your drum, the vibrating air molecules bounces off the plastic wrap, and in turn, makes the rice start to dance.

Huh?
This isn’t unlike how your own ear drum works–without the rice, of course. Sound waves bounce off your ear drums and bump into little hairs and bones inside your ear.  That sets off nerve endings,  which then send electrical messages to your brain that your brain reads as sound.

Music to the Ear

Organized vibrations come across as music. Different instruments vibrate the air around them in different ways.   Music is all vibrations, although to play music, you vibrate different parts of different instruments in different ways.

So go ahead and vibrate!

You can make your own music by vibrating a few air molecules. Here are three different ways to vibrate.

REED this!

Some instruments make sounds when you blow into them and vibrate the column of air inside. You vibrate your lips when you blow into a brass instrument, like a trumpet. You vibrate a reed when you blow into a woodwind instrument, like an oboe.  You vibrate the mouthpiece when you blow across the opening at the top end of a flute. With all these instruments, you change the sound by changing the shape of the vibrating air column inside by using slides, or placing your fingers on or off valves or holes.

To make a Straw Reed  Instrument:

What You Need

• Plastic straws
• Scissors

What You Do

1. Flatten the end of a straw with your fingers and cut the corners off.
2. Put the cut end in your mouth and press your lips together to keep the straw sides close together.
3. Blow until you start to get vibrations. You’ll hear them and feel them. If you don’t, then re-flatten the end and try again.
4. Keep blowing and making different sounds. Try cutting the straw length to see how the sound changes. How does changing the length of the straw affect the sound?
5. Can you use two straws (one slightly larger in diameter than the other) to create a trombone-like instrument?

What’s Going On?

When you blow,  you are vibrating the straw and setting off  collisions of air molecules down inside the straw tube. When the tube is longer, the vibrations are slower because they had a longer journey to take through the long tube. Then when you cut the tube, the vibrations are faster.  The shorter the tube, the faster the vibrations. The faster the vibrations, the higher the sound. The number of times that a sound wave vibrates in a second is called its frequency. Each sound produced in an instrument relates directly to the frequency of the vibrations.  (High frequency or pitch = fast vibrations; low = slow vibrations.)

Stringy Thingy

Stringed instruments make sounds when you pluck or rub one or more of the strings. The strings vibrate, which makes the instrument vibrate, which causes the air around the instrument to vibrate and . . . you get the picture. The shape of the instrument has a lot to do with the kind of sound it makes. Bigger shapes like a bass fiddle have longer, slower waves and make deeper sounds, while violins create faster vibrations and higher sounds.

To Make a Guitar

What You Need

• A shoe box with a lid
• Six rubber bands (try using different bands of different widths to see what sounds they will make)
• An index card or a piece of cardboard about the size of an index card
• Scissors
• Pencil
• Coffee mug

What You Do:

1. Use the pencil to trace around the mouth of your coffee mug in the middle of the box lid. Cut this circle out. This is the sound hole, that allows sound waves to come out.
2. Place the lid back on your box and stretch six rubber bands around the box the long way.  Make sure the rubber bands stretch over the sound hole and that they don’t touch each other.  The bands are the strings on your guitar.
3. Fold your index card, end to end. Then fold it again and then once more — three times in all.  You should end up with a sturdy piece about three inches long. This will be your bridge. Slide it in under all the strings on one end of the hole to lift the strings away from the hole.
4. Pluck the rubber bands where they pass over the hole. What kind of sound do you hear? Can you see the vibrations of the rubber bands? What happens when you strum them?

It’s a Hit!

You hit percussion instruments and that vibrates the air. This is a real countertop crowd pleaser in my family.

To Make a Juice Glass Xylophone

What You Need

• 8 glasses (or 8 glass bottles)
• Pitcher of water
• Chopsticks (a pencil will work, too)

What You Do

1. Place 8 glasses on the counter.
2. GENTLY tap a glass with a chopstick to hear the sound.
3. As you tap, fill the glass. what happens? (The more water you put in a glass, the higher the sound will be.)
4. Create a scale by filling each glass at different levels.
5. When you’re done, tap each glass and compose a song.

So, here’s the background:

I earned my Ph.D. from the University of Chicago in 2009 in Molecular Genetics and Cell Biology. It became increasingly apparent throughout grad school that science outreach was my thing. Not that research isn’t-it totally is. I have done research in a lab since I was 19 years old, and worked on projects in labs since without pause. I love to do science. I love to ask questions, design experiments, test hypotheses and formulate models based on data. I love to sit for several hours a day taking in the literature on a research area I enjoy (Fig 1.).

I love writing about science, condensing the work of several years into six concise figures. But I also love people, helping others, seeing tangible results every day, and was moved by my own experience to help others who might have professional aspirations in science themselves, as well as my uncontrollable craziness for bringing science to the public. It’s out of control, I tell you. I also have a gregarious and social nature that sometimes competes with the side of my personality that loves to slap my iPod on and crank through a solid session on the electron microscope until 2:30 AM without a soul around in the basement of a science building (Fig. 2).

Fig 2: Extreme isolation, rocking data collection-2:00 AM, sometime in 2009

Make no mistake: those two sides of my personality co-exist, but I left graduate school knowing that I wanted to take a different, but related, path. It’s heresy, but I-wait for it-decided to go for a job that I knew would light me up everyday and skip the post-doc.

You read that right.

I’m one of those.

But read the other part: I got my Ph.D. and took a job that lights me up every day.

So, I want to help you do the same, if that is what you want. If you’re exploring that idea and are not sure how to make it happen, or feeling a little nervous about it, have an advisor who thinks your education is a waste if you don’t take the tenure-track route-which is awesome, but not for everyone, I hope this will help you.

I’ll give you the punchline of the whole thing right now-follow your heart first, and then get the skills you need to make sure you have what it takes to get where you want to go. I warn you, this requires vigilance, self-awareness, planning, and often a feeling of otherness when you are in an intense academic environment. However, you’ll be in another intense environment doing what you love and really happy at the end of all your preparation, so you may as well just go for it, it is worth it. Here’s the other thing: you can learn the other skills, although you don’t want to be missing many of them, but no one can teach you what it is to be a scientist on the job. That, you need to pick up elsewhere. So, pick it up.

In upcoming posts, I will detail what I have learned as I went through this transition, the skills I didn’t pick up in grad school that have become essential to my work in the day-to-day, why I love what I do and what it’s about, and how you can make a plan to get where you want to go.

_____________________________________________________________
www.science-is-sexy.com

Muscle contraction begins with a signal from your brain, which propagates through your nervous system and causes the release of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine at the neuromuscular junction. When the acetylcholine binds to its receptors a muscle, a series of intracellular events occurs and the muscle fibers contract. The energy source for this contraction is called ATP. During normal exercise, glucose (sugar) and oxygen produce a sufficient amount of ATP to fuel muscle contractions (via the Krebs Cycle). However, during extreme efforts like sprinting, our bodies require more energy and a different energy cycle is revved up to produce much greater volumes of ATP for a short amount of time. Each of these cycles of energy production produces pyruvic acid, a product of glucose breakdown. At moderate levels of exercise, moderate levels of pyruvic acid are produced and much of it goes into the Krebs Cycle to produce energy; at high levels of exercise, high levels of pyruvic acid are produced.

Pyruvic acid is converted into lactic acid and at high levels of exercise, more pyruvic acid is produced than the body can handle and a buildup of lactic acid results. At a certain point, our body can clear lactic acid at the same rate that it is being made. This is called the lactate threshold and it is a very important aspect of training for elite athletes. The higher their lactate threshold, the longer they can go at a high tempo before the build-up of lactic acid brings on burning and muscle fatigue.

A process called the lactate shuttle is important because it allows for some of the lactic acid to be oxidized and converted into additional energy for the muscles. Efficient clearance of lactate is likely an important factor in lactate threshold and it has been suggested that lactate may ultimately contribute to the prevention of fatigue.

The burning sensation associated with the build-up of lactic acid is due to the presence of hydrogen ions in the blood. The hydrogen ions released by the lactic acid may act locally to indicate fatigue, but may also act on peripheral nervous system receptors to send the signal to the brain that glucose is being utilized at a high rate and muscle fatigue is setting in. In this way, the central nervous system (which initiated the muscle contraction in the first place) regulates the physical activity.

At Dana’s medical school, the University of California, San Francisco(UCSF) the students get a 2 week transitional period to ease them into clinical medicine. I am told that they learn about hospital culture, basics in chart notes, how to keep from being a pest, and how to get the nurses on your good side (so at least if they don’t help you, they are not likely to bite off your head!) These are things I think my generation of doctors just picked up as we went along, for better or for worse, for both the patient and for us.

A lottery system assigns who gets which “rotation” (another name for a clerkship) and when. You put in your request, and the computer spits out a schedule. Dana wanted to start with surgery and she lucked into a very busy hospital, one with a lot of trauma, one where medical students are likely to be needed. A lot.

She also got lucky in that her first night was a call night. She was there working for 24 hours straight. She watched a tube being put into a chest to drain an infection, and she stayed up all night except for a few hours of sleep in the wee hours of the morning before she had to get up at 4 a.m. to pre-round with the interns (real doctors in their first year of training after medical school) which happen before the usual work rounds with the residents (the more senior doctors in training) which occur before the operating room schedule starts, and most certainly before the attendings (the real doctors) come on the scene to make sure everything is being done exactly right. So as you can see, Dana is really the low woman on the team, but it’s a start!

We didn’t hear much the first few days. Only that she hadn’t been in the operating room yet. I had to wait until Sunday afternoon when she finally called and told me all about her first week.

She told us that she has great senior residents, and a great team. I knew this was very important, because if your team players (and surgery training is most certainly a team sport) are not willing to teach, you will be miserable. Inwardly I heaved a sigh of relief. Hurdle #1 overcome.

“Mom, I scrubbed on a hernia. My resident, a really nice guy from Stanford med, sat down and prepared me for all the questions I would be asked about the anatomy. When the attending asked me a question, I didn’t get the first one because I wasn’t quite sure what she was asking me. But after that I knew all the answers.” There was more than pride in my baby’s voice. A pride I couldn’t help but feel as well. Hurdle #2—she would not fall apart under pressure, even in the operating room.

“That’s good Dana,” I replied. But she really didn’t hear me, as she rushed on to the next operation.

“Then we had a perforated bowel (a hole in the large intestines) and the patient was really sick. It was the first time I had seen the intestines. They were sooooo beautiful, orange and shiny and glistening. We did a side-to-end anastamosis. It was so cool.”

Dana continued to report about the personalities. She heard others complain about the all night call which didn’t bother her. And even though it was suggested that women might not (yet) have the physical stamina, Dana was quiet. She has a lot of knowledge about that sort of thing and knows that her surgeon Mom is far better than her surgeon Dad at staying up all night and handling all sorts of physical and emotional trauma surgeons must learn to endure. Good move, Dana, I thought. Hurdle #3—she knows when to speak up and when to keep quiet.

Then, I couldn’t believe it. She said, “Mom, I could so totally see myself in surgery. I love it!”

Will Dana really become a surgeon? Maybe. And maybe not. It’s really too early to say. After all, it’s her first clerkship, and I am sure she will be drawn in many directions before her journey is complete. (But it would be really cool if we were the first mother-daughter ENT doctors!)

So after we hung up the phone, I heaved a sigh of relief as I thought, ahhhhh, she’s over hurdle #4. She is going to love being a doctor, and that’s a great feeling. I know.

Vitamin D is found in foods such as fatty fishes, eggs, beef liver, and UV light-exposed mushrooms. So….why is it that people head out into the sun and say, “I need to go and get some vitamin D?”

It is because UVB exposure above the UV index level of 3 is necessary to activate the vitamin D. There are several forms, or vitamers, of vitamin D and they are not all equal. The foods mentioned above contain a pro-form (7-dehydrocholesterol) that becomes active (cholecalciferol) in the skin following UV exposure. The cholecalciferol then travels from the skin to the liver, where it is hydroxylated (calcifediol/25-hydroxyvitamin D3). Finally, the modified vitamin moves to the kidney, where it undergoes another round of hydroxylation to become calcitriol (1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3), the most active form of vitamin D3. The vitamer of vitamin D that is supplemented in foods is cholecalciferol- it has already been irradiated and is therefore active.

It is possible to ingest too much vitamin D, which makes sense since its role is to maintain normal blood calcium levels. Too much vitamin D results in hypercalcaemia, a condition that can lead to increased blood pressure, weight loss, nausea, vomiting, and even kidney damage. For pregnant women, hypercalcaemia can cause very serious fetal damage. Excessive vitamin D levels occur when people take too many supplements- not from getting too much sun exposure.

But it’s not just the social sciences that help you out as a doctor. The humanities offer so much to clinical practice as well. For example, next week at UCSF Dr. Rita Charon will be visiting from Columbia to give a talk called “Stories Can Only Be Understood from their Endings.” She has an MD and PhD in English Literature, and directs the program in Narrative Medicine at the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons. Her work examines the doctor-patient relationship through stories. She helps medical students understand and explore their reactions to patients through writing. These aren’t just intellectual exercises, though. They ultimately improve how we understand the people we care for and therefore help them more. She reminds us that in clinical practice—while we are working with lab tests, drugs, imaging studies, and various forms of scientific data—most of our interactions are stories we tell each other (amongst students and physicians) and texts we collect, read, and interpret (charts and notes).

So having a degree in literature, history, philosophy, or any other text based field also gives you useful tools with which to approach the complex layers of patients’ stories. And to take this even further, it’s not just the patients that have story arcs and complex social relationships that impact their health, disease processes (pathophysiology—the step by step process of how a disease begins and ends) themselves are miniature stories that students must be able to follow, piece together, and relate to the heaps of information and sources that we must consult.

So overall, I would argue that medicine is equal parts social, narrative, and scientific. So bottom line: study what you love and you’ll find ways to connect it to the art and science of healing others.

Maybe I’m being overly romantic about the liberal arts, but these thoughts just echo my own personal story. There was a moment in the middle of college, beginning my biology major and getting through the pre-med requirements when I thought about giving up on the pre-med track. I was doing fine in my classes, but I wasn’t sure why I was pursuing this path. (Because it was obvious? Because my parents did it? How could I make this path my own?) It was also quite difficult to make the connection between the less human and heavy sciences of general and organic chemistry to what it was like to be a doctor. But then I discovered anthropology. It gave me a ‘why’ and got me thinking so much about people and health and illness, much more than atoms and electrons ever could.

Enough waxing poetic, you say? Fine, let’s talk about practicality.

Even if you are concerned about how you might ‘look’ to admissions committees as a gender studies or international relations major, have no fear. I would say that my university likes to boast about how diverse its student body is, including how many non-science majors they have in a class. Studying something off the beaten path is very desirable and ‘sexy’ nowadays to admissions committees. (Of course science is awesome too! I have some classmates who’ve done mind-blowing things with electrons.)

I went on lots of med school interviews. Some of the conversations I had were regurgitations of my CV; others were more interesting and pushed beyond the limits of my written application. But over and over again, the doctors were most interested in what I had to say about all of my ‘atypical’ studies and activities.

Unfortunately, being pre-med has been distilled to a formula, and these admissions committees see the same activities over and over again—volunteer work, lab work, leadership positions, etc. But they want to know what makes YOU stand out and what gets you excited and involved. And that could be what you study OR what you choose to do when you’re not studying. Just be yourself! Being genuine and dedicated is always the way to go—following a scripted path when your heart’s just not into it will show through. Genuine enthusiasm, engagement, and passion will always win!

Today is Earth Day, one of the few holidays I actually take seriously. Yet at the same time, it is also a holiday that I find is ridiculous that we need have in the first place. Everything comes from the Earth. Everyday we pillage for its resources, not just for our survival, but mainly to support our lifestyle, a lifestyle of excess and consumption. A lifestyle that is nothing more than a perversion of the American Dream and by consequence inhibits the survival of others and sucks the lifeblood out of our very tolerating planet.

Everyday we fly through our Earth’s air, we cut down its forests, we fish its seas, we pollute its rivers, we drill its grounds, we hunt its animals, and we pour heaping clouds of smoke into the sky. However, we only dedicate one day to say, “thanks planet that has supported my life for so long, please let me continue to walk all over you without any repercussions.” But the obvious problem is this, the Earth can only take so much abuse and unless we start treating the Earth everyday with the respect it so well deserves we will see first hand what happens when our planet decides its not gonna take it anymore.

The obligation we all have to the Earth is an individual one. There are changes, some drastic, some minute that we can make in our lifestyles, to show the Earth we care. Here is the moral code that I do my best to live by at all times of the year. Think of them as The Green Ten Commandments, only instead of written on stone tablet, they are typed on virtual, carbon free Internet paper.

Green Commandment I: The Earth is your home. You have no home before the Earth.

Whether we like it or not, we are all citizens of the globe. We have a greater responsibility to the whole than to the individual. If we can ensure the survival of the whole, all will be taken care of, including the self. Honor the Earth as if it was your home, because it is your home.

Green Commandment II: Avoid driving whenever possible.

I am nineteen years old. I do not own a car, nor do I have a license. I am a man of public transportation. Granted, I grew up in New York City and now live in Washington, DC so that’s hardly a sacrifice. I’m sure if you’re a suburban kid, you’re about ready to cross this one right off the list. Well hold on. Every town, no matter how small should have some form of 24-hour bus system. In fact, back in the day, most of them did. Car companies would seek these towns out and do everything in their power to dismantle the bus system to force the inhabitants to rely on cars. Write your state senators; go to your town hall meetings, run for office, advocate for this. You will create jobs, and save a lot on gas. Or you can just follow the third commandment.

Green Commandment III: Avoid living in the suburbs whenever possible.

The average New Yorker has a carbon footprint that is 75% less than the national average. There is a reason for this. A suburban lifestyle makes it nearly impossible to be green. A house uses substantially more energy than an apartment and statistically speaking there are most likely multiple cars per household. Living in the city means you don’t have to drive, you’re in close proximity to your job, you take up less space, use less energy and have greater access to recycling options.

Green Commandment IV: Eat only local, grass fed, organic meats whenever possible.

I have a very strict requirement when eating meat. It must be grass fed (if it is beef) and it must be local (unless I’m on vacation in another country, then all food is fair game). Industrialized meat is one of the top contributors to climate change. The amount of oil it takes to raise a single cow for McDonalds would astound you. Grass fed, and local is healthier for you and more humane for the animal and produces fresher, tastier meat. Also all game meat fits this criteria, and believe me, a rabbit or elk sandwich is much more interesting than a burger.

Green Commandment V: Buy local, organic and fair-trade whenever possible.

The fastest way to get corporations to greenafy their practices is not through legislation, it’s simply buying already greenafied products. Take my favorite beverage, Honest Tea, for example. Honest Tea only uses organic, fair trade tea and recyclable packaging. Because of that, a lot of people started to buy it, so many people that Coca Cola began to take interest. Now Coke owns 40% of the company. Nothing has changed about the green standards of the product, all that’s changed is more people now have access to it and the price has gone down. Remember, five years ago there was no organic section at Wal-Mart. The more we buy green products the more corporations will try to deliver them. That’s really how you can change the world.

Green Commandment VI: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle whenever possible.

I’m sure if we look hard, we can all find products we don’t need to buy, we all have bags and water bottles we can reuse and we all can take that extra time to recycle. You’ll save money and it’s a small effort on your part. You’ll be doing the Earth a lot of good.

Green Commandment VII: Shutdown, unplug, buy solar whenever possible.

It’s not that hard to save energy. When you go outside, turn off the lights, turn off the air conditioning and unplug some of your stuff. To save energy further, buy Energy Star rated products. You’ll save a lot on your electric bill. If you want a return on your electric bill, invest in solar panels for your house. You will actually be generating electricity and will be paid to do so buy electric companies.

Green Commandment VIII: Invest in green technologies whenever possible.

The greatest thing you can do, if you have money floating around, is invest in green. Make green profitable. You can create jobs and drive innovation towards making the world a better place. It will work out nicely for you in the short run and will do wonders for all of us in the long run.

Green Commandment IX: Vote green whenever possible.

Be informed, listen to what politicians have to say, look at their campaign contributions and make sure they have the well being of the Earth in mind. Every election we empower individuals with enormous influence and decision-making capacity. They are in the best position to bring about change. Don’t be afraid to hold their feet to the fire and if ensuring the Earth remains inhabitable for your grandchildren isn’t at the forefront of their policy, don’t be afraid to vote them out. Vote early, vote often.

Green Commandment X: Spread the word, stay active, get involved whenever possible.

If you can follow these commandments to the best of your ability, you will be making a difference. If you want to make a great difference, get someone else to do it too. Talk to your friends, write your local papers or your favorite blog sites, make a movie, join a group. We are above all else a community and we must stand united. The best way to ensure our survival is not to cut each other’s throats but to work as a community, to work for each other. Like I said, we all have an individual obligation to honor the Earth, because the Earth represents the whole. To honor your obligation to the Earth is to honor your obligation to your peers. You have to make sure they are working too. You have spread the word, you have to educate.

Everyday day we are alive is a day spent on Earth. Everyday is Earth Day. We cannot set aside one day of the year to care about our home. It must be everyday. We must constantly be improving ourselves, constantly striving to better our community, to achieve new levels of greatness. We have to set an example right now for the next generation and the generation after that. We have to show the future that the meaning of life is to leave the Earth better than you found it, to be a positive influence, give back to your community and pass on what you have learned. We have to set this example for the future, because if we fail to do so, there may be no future for us at all.

Be Skeptical, Be Critical, Take Nothing On Faith.

All the best,
Jesse M. S.

All doctors are expected to continue their medical education and there are requirements for learning which have strict standards. But doctors who do research with patients and in the laboratory more often have the opportunities to present their work to the medical community at national and international meetings.

My husband, a pediatric urologist (a surgeon who cares for the medical and surgical problems of the urinary tract in kids), and I travelled to spend a week in Israel at the American Association of Pediatric Urologists. This was the first time they “internationalized” their annual meeting. It was fun, informative and very fruitful in making the contacts and plans he needed to extend his NIH (National Institutes of Health) funding with his fellow pediatric urologists. We wives also had a great time, having known and seen each other for the past 22 years this group had formed and met. For this part of the trip I was on vacation and had opted to not lecture or make contacts with my colleagues in Israel.

When it was over and we had visited family and travelled other parts of the country, we left for Greece. It was there that we switched hats and I was the “professor.” I visited with one of my former trainees, originally from Greece, who had spent 2 years training to be a pediatric otolaryngologist with our group at the Children’s Hospital of Buffalo. Her name is Dr. Sofia Stamataki.

I lectured at the University of Athens Medical School, met her colleagues, lunched with her director. We toured the children’s hospital where she worked and learned about medical care in Greece.

We talked and compared notes and discussed cases. We planned some research and for her next visit to the US. And, of course, over the course of the 4 days, we toured.

I am very proud to have been part of the training of the first US fellowship trained pediatric otolaryngologist in Greece. It was wonderful to see my former student, now colleague, climbing the ladder to success. She is in a good place and that made me feel good.

So if you want to be a doctor and also a teacher and researcher, you will find yourself travelling to places you never thought you would visit with people you never imagined you would meet. So become a doctor, travel the world.

Dana, when you get back from your vacation (after you just took part 1 of your medical boards), as an MD/PhD in anthropology, could you tell our readers some of the other ways doctors travel the world?

What You Need

For the flake
White pipe cleaners (chenille twists)
Scissors
String
A pencil

For the crystal concoction
(If you want to make crystals quickly use a Borax solution—you can make cool crystals overnight. But if you don’t have Borax, no worries; you can use sugar. It takes a little longer but it works just the same.)
1 box Borax Laundry Booster (the 20 Mule Team brand works well but Boraxo soap will not work)
A wide mouth glass jar (such as a peanut butter or jelly jar)
Hot water
Food coloring – optional
Spoon

For the fabulous finished flake
Pretty ribbon

What You Do

For the flake

1. Cut the pipe cleaner into three equal segments and twist the three pieces together at the middle to make a six-pointed “snowflake”.
2. Tie one end of the string to one of the spikes.
3. Dangle the snowflake in the jar. Tie the other end of the string to the middle of the pencil so the flake will hang about one half inch above the bottom of the jar. Pull it out and set it aside.

For the crystal concoction

1. Have a grown-up help you pour boiling water into the jar to about one inch from the rim.
2. Add the borax powder (or sugar) to the hot water a spoonful at a time, stirring until it dissolves. Keep doing this until it won’t dissolve any more—you’ll have some powder hanging around at the bottom of your solution.  That’s OK: it means your solution is supersaturated.
3. Add a few drops of food coloring, if you’d like to make colored crystals, and stir.
4. Dangle your flake in the solution making sure it’s completely covered by liquid and let it still overnight.
5. Check it in the morning. Has anything changed? How does your snowflake look? (If you used sugar instead of borax, you may need to wait a couple more days.)

For the fabulous finished flake

1. Pull it out when it looks good and let it dry completely.
2. Snip the string off, tie a pretty ribbon on the flake, and it’s ready.

What’s Going On?

Crystals are solids made up of molecules that line up in specific repeating patterns. Different kinds of crystals have different patterns and different shapes. Snowflakes are ice crystals and they always have six sides.  Salt crystals are always cube-shaped. Borax is a crystal, too.

Borax powder dissolves in water. It seems to disappear, but the molecules are still there; they’re just separated by water molecules so you can’t see them. If you add borax to cold water until no more dissolves, you have a saturated solution. That means no more borax molecules can hang out between the water molecules–the solution is full. But when you add borax to HOT water a funny thing happens. In a container of hot water the molecules are moving around faster, so the spaces between are bigger and because the spaces are bigger, a lot more borax powder can dissolve and fit in.

So instead of a saturated solution, you made a SUPERsaturated solution. And as it cooled, the water molecules got closer together and there was less room for the borax molecules. The borax molecules came together, lined up and formed into crystals. Since you had your pipe-cleaner snowflake shape in the cooling solution, the crystals formed all along the pipe-cleaner surfaces.

The Science View is The View re-imagined, if it covered the science milieu. It returns below, to celebrate women’s history month. The first segment was a hypothetical discussion about women who received Nobel Prizes last Fall. Below is a mix of the unreal and real; hypothetical hosts interview a real author about her book.

ESTELLE: There’s a new book out about women and science called The Madame Curie Complex. The Feminist Press has just published it, and we’re so pleased to have the author with us today. Welcome, Julie Des Jardins.

JULIE: Thanks for talking with me, ladies.

ESTELLE: Julie is a professor of history at Baruch College, here in New York. Many of us know that Marie Curie was the first woman to win the Nobel Prize. And that she and her husband won for the theory of radiation. She later won a second Nobel for the discovery of the elements radium and polonium. But what’s the Curie Complex?

JULIE: Sadly, it’s a sort of inferiority complex American women have had ever since Curie came to the United States and seemed to be all things to all people—a world-class scientist, and a perfectly maternal, altruistic, domestic woman. She wasn’t necessarily all that, by the way, but that’s how Americans perceived her.

CHELSEA: Oh wow, I don’t get that. Do you think women today would have seen her as a role model?

JULIE: Women scientists have always seen her as a role model, in large part because her myth gets made over and over again to resonate with the times.  The Nobel scientist Rosalyn Yalow truly envisioned herself in the Curie mold, as have so many women who watched depictions of Curie on the movie screen during World War II. Or they read her daughter’s biography of her, which created an iconic Curie that lasted for 70 years.

FAITH: Why write about women and science now? I mean, the book is really interesting, but there are quite a few books on the subject already.

CHELSEA: Faith, what a question.

FAITH: No really, with all due respect…

JULIE:  There are plenty of biographies of women scientists out there and academic works that problematize the gender of science. But the scholarly books are highly theoretical and don’t reveal the workings of gender through compelling human-interest stories. The bios don’t question masculinist assumptions about science. I try to do both—to see gender in science, offer alternative ways of envisioning gender in science, and yet make this resonate through the stories of fascinating, identifiable women.

TANIKA: You write about how these women were acceptable to male scientists and the public so long as they could also see them as married women and mothers. Are we over that yet?

FAITH: I don’t see anything so wrong with that.

JULIE: Things have changed, but historically, single women have had better fortunes in science because employers have presumed that these women don’t carry the same domestic baggage. The only times when marriage was a professional asset were in rare elite contexts in which prominent husbands shared their connections to other men in high places. This was so with the brilliant physicist Maria Goeppert Mayer. She was so competent, but she needed her husband to put her in places where she could do her science.

ESTELLE: It seems that the women in your book adopted several strategies to succeed. Some partnered with their husbands, others worked within the system…would you outline them for us?

JULIE:  Well, a lot of these strategies are historically and contextually specific, so it’s hard to classify them across the board. The important thing is that women have always felt pressure to negotiate social expectations in ways that men have not. Few people accuse men of being neglectful of their children as they burn the midnight oil in the lab, or of not being committed enough to their science when they play a more active role at home. Women, however, have been stigmatized at either extreme.

FAITH: You know, there are men who say really smart women everywhere figure out the ropes and find ways to succeed. Is there something different about what women in science face compared to other professions?

JULIE: There is institutional chauvinism in lots of professional environments, but in science women especially fall prey to a false veneration of youth. The great scientists are supposed to do their most ground-breaking work when they are in their twenties and thirties, so the myth goes. These of course are years when women often want to have children, when they may need more flextime or acceptance of competing responsibilities. Tenure clocks often compete with biological clocks more fiercely in science.

ESTELLE: That’s so interesting. And now we have to pause for a word from our sponsor.

- STATION BREAK -

ESTELLE: We’re back with Julie Des Jardins, author of The Madame Curie Complex, a fascinating look at the hidden history of women in science—how they succeeded, what worked and what didn’t. I thought the sections about the Harvard Observatory and the way you connected how those women were treated with the women on The Manhattan Project was really an eye-opener. Just used as just calculators, mere observers. And then the head of the lab didn’t give them any credit.

CHELSEA: Yeah, that was just outrageous. I’d never heard anything about those women. Other than that, I can think of few popular references to these important women scientists. Part of the problem is that few people have remembered these women as “scientists” at all. Often they are passed down to posterity by some other name.

FAITH: Do you think there’s a feminine way of doing science?

TANIKA: What do you mean? Like there’s a black or Latino way of doing science?

ESTELLE: Actually, it’s a legitimate question, given that enduring metaphor of conquering Mother Nature…

CHELSEA:  Well, Faith could have asked if there’s a feminist way of doing science.

ESTELLE: OK, OK. Do women do science differently?

JULIE: I do think women can do science differently—not all women all the time, but some, some of the time. They do science differently not because of their biology but because often their roles as mothers, domestics, and marginalized scientists have given them different perspectives on scientific subjects. Sometimes they ask different questions and come to science with different methodologies.

TANIKA: I really got into the section about Rachel Carson and Silent Spring. I mean, how she saw nature as a major force effecting man’s survival versus the idea that men control nature. That debate seems totally relevant today.

JULIE: You can’t see what’s happening with climate change and not think the debate is relevant today.

ESTELLE: You also write that she refused to “see science as rarified, boxed off from nature, art, women, and the rest society.”

JULIE: Yes, she broke down many of the boundaries defining traditional science. Science has been seen as empirical, nature as random; science as objective, art as subjective; women as emotional, science as disinterested. Scientists have been perceived as people in a privileged realm of knowing that the rest of us can’t participate in. Carson broke down all these assumptions.

ESTELLE: What’s the best way to overcome The Madame Curie Complex? What do you want young women who read your book to come away with?

JULIE: I want women and men to consider a differently gendered scientific enterprise Women would get more traction in science if we thought of culturally feminine traits as assets, but it would also be good for science as a whole.

ESTELLE: Julie, thank you so much for being with us today.

More Information: The Madame Curie Complex

Now Afsaneh Rabiei, associate professor of mechanical, aerospace, and biomedical engineering at North Carolina State University, has found a way to make metal mimic the elastic modulus of natural bone. Not only is Rabiei’s porous steel structure more flexible than other metal implants, but it is also lighter and its properties easier to control.

Flexibility and its flip side, stiffness, have always posed problems for implants, especially those used in artificial hips and in dental and jaw implants. Natural bone is only 10 to 30 percent as stiff as titanium, a material used in many implants.

The mismatch in stiffness leads to “stress shielding.” This is a condition where the titanium implant carries more of the load than surrounding natural bone. Unfortunately, natural bone needs pressure applied to it in order to thrive. As a result, stiff metal implants reduce the health of the bone surrounding the implant.

Consider how this plays out in an artificial hip. First, stress shielding weakens the bone around the implant. The implant is also much heavier than bone. With each step, all the weight of that stiff titanium implant pounds away at the deteriorating natural bone. Eventually, the implant loosens and the patient needs new surgery.

Rabiei’s solves the problem with porous metal composite. By varying the amount of porosity, she can match the foam’s stiffness with the modulus of natural bone, eliminating stress shielding. Composite porous metals are also good energy absorbers, so they cushion the shock of each step. The composite’s pores also provide places where natural bone can grow and anchor the implant in place.

Porosity also reduces mass. “I have a hip replacement on my desk, and even though it is made of titanium, it is about three times heavier than a healthy bone with the same size,” Rabiei said. “My mother-in-law had one of these implants, and after a while, it pushed into her bone and her physician had to remove it and replace it with another. Our composite weighs up to 70 percent less. If we had used our material, that might not have happened.”

Rabiei’s composite porous metal achieves its balance of weight and strength from hollow spheres distributed uniformly within a metal. The spheres act much like straw in ancient bricks or rebar in concrete to impart additional strength to the composite. She makes the material by mixing hollow metal spheres with metal powders and sintering in a furnace, or by casting molten metal around the hollow spheres in a mold.

Others have tried to make porous composites, but the pores weakened them and they fell apart after only moderate use. Rabiei’s formulation, which uses steel spheres, is much more durable.

“We can engineer the stiffness and durability of the implant by controlling size, wall thickness, and percentage of spheres we add to the matrix,” she said. She also has a wide range of material options. Rabiei says she can make the composites from steel spheres in a steel matrix, steel spheres in an aluminum matrix, or titanium spheres in titanium matrix. So far, Rabiei’s group has produced steel and aluminum composites and extended the technique to such other metals as titanium and cobalt-chromium.

Rabiei made her first sample seven years ago. “It took time to get it right,” she said. She has patented the technology and is currently lining up applications for funding the animal experiments.

Life is the result of Discovery’s collaboration with the BBC, known for Sir Richard Attenborough’s adventures with nature. Life’s patient cameramen spent months waiting for perhaps two hours of animal, insect, or plant activity. The result: lots of things in nature you’ve never seen before, but that you can fully appreciate now in slo-mo. If you’ve ever wondered how flying fish fly, why a Venus flytrap isn’t fooled by rain drops, how a lizard can walk on water, why tiny herring can dodge huge sailfish – Life shows you. The series also tells you what it was like to get those fantastic shots. One cameraman heard his pal shout, “Move!” and turned to see a Komodo dragon – and its mouth of shark-like, serrated teeth – at his shoulder. He moved.

We said hello to physicist Michio Kaku, who’s on Discovery’s Science Channel every Sunday night, answering science questions. And we hugged environmental reporter Andrew C. Revkin, whose blog about climate change is going up on The New York Times’ editorial page. Andy’s a wonderful bluegrass musician, and a star of our TalkingScience Cabaret. If you’re applying to college, think about Pace University. Andy’s designing a course there on global warming.

Back to Life: we promise your mouth will hang open at the gorgeous photography. Your heart will turn over as you wonder whether that ostrich can escape three cheetahs, how that crab-eating seal can outwit a pod of orcas (there are good reasons they’re known as killer whales, whether a baby ibex will outrun a fox, if a lonely young male hippo can defeat an old “warlord” and find a mate. You’ll love the music, especially during the sequence where dolphins off the Florida Keys demonstrate their clever way of catching fish – something no scientist or photographer had ever seen before. You’ll agree: the world we live in is more beautiful than and just as amazing as Avatar’s Pandora.

I understand that this is a funny headline for a science blog. But unfortunately we live in very politically volatile times. Although ideally science should be kept far, far, far away from the soap opera with a trillion dollar budget that is American politics, the reality is that politics and science are very much intertwined. Without the votes of our elected officials, there would be no funding for important and revolutionary projects like RHIC (Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider) at the Department of Energy’s Brookhaven National Laboratory, a true modern marvel that I recently had the privilege to see. Totally funded by the United States government, this 2.5 mile circuit has the power to heat particles to up to four trillion degrees, and then smash them together to replicate conditions right after the Big Bang. Brookhaven scientists are working very hard in hopes of discovering vast new things about the origin of our universe.

Politics not only holds power over the current state of America’s scientific affairs, but also their future. For our government, local and national, has direct control over school curricula and funding. This means public officials have the power to graduate future scientists — or not. If the schools stop taking science seriously, I can tell you for sure the students will stop too, if they haven’t already. This is precisely why it is crucial that scientists everywhere keep very close track of current political trends.

But above all else, this blog encourages rational thinking by exposing irrationality wherever it exists. Unfortunately the epicenter of irrationality often radiates from a white-domed, column-lined building, where every so often, 535 people congregate to determine the future of everything.

Last night, the United States House of Representatives passed HR 3590 with a vote of 219 to 212. This marks the greatest step forward in health care reform since the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. This bill will cover 32 million people who previously could not afford health insurance, ban discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, and prevent arbitrary rate hikes. The bi-partisan Congressional Budget Office conservatively estimates that this bill will save the United State over a trillion dollars.

It was a long and painful path from the moment President Obama announced his intentions to reform health care to last night’s achievement. The national discussion was not a debate over critical data, economic realities and moral philosophy; it was a debate hijacked by a storm of irrationality. What should have been an open and honest discussion very quickly turned into the mass broadcasting of erroneous, fear-mongering rumors, with the other side’s feeble attempts to dispel them falling on deaf ears. President Obama could have hung a giant banner outside the White House that read “HEALTH CARE REFORM WILL SAVE US $1 TRILLION!!!” And yet every time I turn on the television there is a Tea Partier or a Fox News anchor talking about how the bill will increase the national debt and drive up medical costs.

Dissent over health care reform is valid. But there is a difference between irrational dissent and rational dissent. When the opposition has to launch one of the largest disinformation campaigns ever perpetrated against the American populace, they invalidate themselves. One should never have to lie to prove a point. As a tragic result, half the population now thinks that a bill that is less progressive than what Republican governor Mitt Romney signed into law in Massachusetts, and far less progressive than systems that work for almost everyone living in Europe and Canada, will turn this country into the Soviet States of America, with a 90 percent tax hike on all the kids to pay for it. That’s not thinking scientifically.

A scientific thinker examines available data and forms a hypothesis. For the most part, the opposition to this bill tried to alter reality to fit the hypothesis they already created.

The fact that the Republican Party was almost successful in derailing this bill is not a sign of its strength but a sign of its decline. Not a single Republican in the house voted, not just for the bill, but even to debate it openly. When President Clinton proposed his plans for health care reform, there was unanimous consent to open debate. No bill in U.S. history has ever attracted this much partisan opposition to any bill. Even the 1964 Civil Rights Act had bi-partisan support. The Republicans have banded together to form one dogmatic, homogenous voting block against the Obama administration, no matter what its agenda may be. They have done so because they are desperate. The Republican Party is a cornered wolf, taking one ferocious last stand.

Firstly, let’s take a look at minority voting trends. Statistically speaking, minorities tend to vote Democrat. According to population projections, it will not be long before minorities make up a majority of the American population. At a time when Republican survival depends on widening their tent, their new-found dogma has only managed to narrow it.

Secondly, the Republican base has been hijacked by former Alaska Republican governor Sarah Palin, the religious right, and the Tea Party. What this means is that rational Republicans have to distance themselves from the base of their party. They have to clarify that even though they are Republican, they are no fans of Palin or even former President George W. Bush. However, Republican candidates still have to campaign to their base if they stand a decent chance of winning primaries or drawing high turnouts for general elections.

Take Mitt Romney. He is a highly educated man who signed into Massachusetts law one of the most progressive pieces of health care legislation this country has seen. But when someone of his intellect goes on national television, as he did during the C-PAC conference, and calls Obama supporters “neo-liberal monarchs,” you know he knows better. Moderate Republicans and independents are forced to take a step back, and the Democrats now have another sound bite to use against Romney in 2012.

The third sign of the decline of the Republican Party is simply that America is growing more liberal. The majority of young people vote Democratic, support gay marriage and drug legalization, and are pro-choice. We also are the generation that didn’t grow up during the Cold War. Outside Tea Party and Wall Street culture, the Red Scare doesn’t really exist. The word “socialism” doesn’t send chills down our spines the way it did for our parents and grandparents. So we are more open minded when it comes to social programs, such as a public option.

These realities are forcing Republican strategists to use fear mongering and disinformation tactics to the point where their constituents are buying into a new reality, one that is not based on fact or reason. In this reality, even the U.S. Census, which has been constitutionally mandated since our nation’s founding, has become unnecessarily controversial and called an “encroachment on our civil liberties.”

These tactics are most effective and most dangerous when they are implemented in our public schools. Some of our most important elections — and often the most overlooked — determine who serves on our school boards. Scientists especially should be paying very close attention to school board elections. All too often, a school’s science budget is the first line item to be cut, before sports. All too often, teaching widely accepted scientific theory is considered controversial. What goes into our curricula could easily determine the future of the scientific standing of the United States and how effective we will be in dealing with issues pertaining to the environment and energy independence.

There is no greater evidence of this than the recent conservative overhaul of Texas’ textbooks. In what came down to a party line vote, the overhaul went so far as to significantly downplay Thomas Jefferson’s role in history, simply because of his secular ideology and writings. What makes this even more frightening is that Texas is the largest buyer of textbooks in the nation. So textbook publishers must cater to the Texas curriculum to survive. Changes in Texas education affect the rest of the nation.

Grade school science is so much more than just teaching kids the periodic table or what happens when you mix vinegar and baking soda. Teaching the scientific method and habits of scientific thinking is crucial because it teaches kids to base their conclusions on data and observation. Students learn to have viewpoints that are reflective of reality — not to have their reality reflect their viewpoints. To study the scientific method is to encourage rational thinking. When that is cut, then perhaps students will cease to question why Thomas Jefferson is no longer in their textbook.

Schools should encourage students to think scientifically and civically. What this country needs more than anything right now is a generation of young people who will grow up thinking that success is not determined by profit margin but by whether you make the world a better place for all. Last night, 219 men and women in Congress did just that. Because of the great risk they all took by voting for HR 3590, 32 million Americans finally got that breath of fresh air they so desperately needed. The passage of the health care bill will be remembered as one of the most important pieces of legislation since the Civil Rights Act and Medicare. The only thing that will prevent that is if we let the Republicans cut March 21, 2010 out of the textbooks.

Be Skeptical, Be Critical, Take Nothing On Faith.

All the best,

Jesse M. S.

However there is a slim window, a matter of weeks at the height of summer when it is possible to find a way through the gauntlet of islands and get across to the North Atlantic. Few have completed the trip, and the first known explorer to successfully navigate starting from the Pacific Ocean needed three years to do it. It is one of the most recent triumphs in the history of ocean exploration, achieved only about 100 years ago – while cartographers have had most other waterways documented for hundreds of years.

Although the Arctic may look as if frozen for eternity, global warming has significantly changed conditions in the region; in the century since the first successful crossing, only about one hundred ships have navigated the Northwest Passage. The summer of 2009 was the third consecutive year that enough ice had melted for vessels to safely get through. There is evidence to suggest that more ships will make regular trips across northern Canada in the future.

There are few intrepid explorers that have made this trip, and fewer still have done so with such advanced navigational equipment as that on board Ocean Watch, the 64-foot steel sailboat that is the heart and home of the ongoing Around the Americas expedition.

Ocean Watch in Alaska. Photo by David Thoreson, Around the Americas.

The route and ports of call for Ocean Watch.

The boat started from Seattle, Washington on May 31, 2009 on an approximately 13-month voyage that will sail about 24,000 nautical-miles, circumnavigating the American continents with a permanent crew of four experienced sailors, and a rotating complement of onboard scientists and educators. The primary aim of the mission is to raise global awareness of the ocean’s health, and to motivate Americans of both hemispheres to actively engage in protecting our shared resource. Around the Americas is unique in the way it brings together ocean travel, science research, and environmental education. The project provides a rare, long-term view of the ocean while traversing extremes, literal and otherwise. The ship was built to withstand the brutal Northwest Passage, as well as reliably cruise long distances in varying conditions, literally from one end of the planet to the other, and back. Furthermore the planned ports of call range in size from the village of Barrow, Alaska, home to about 4,400 people, to the 10 million-strong in the city of Sao Paulo, Brazil.[1]

Zeta Strickland, the first onboard educator to join Ocean Watch. Photo by David Thoreson, Around the Americas.

I spoke with one recent Arctic traveler, Zeta Strickland, who climbed aboard in Barrow, Alaska as Around the America’s first onboard educator. Prior to joining Ocean Watch, Zeta’s boating experience was limited to a few hours on a small sailboat on Lake Washington – but she quickly adapted to life at sea. Zeta has worked at the Pacific Science Center in Seattle, Washington for almost 10 years. The facility provides hands-on science education for visiting school groups, youth groups, and summer camps, in addition to offsite programs. As director of the Science Outreach division, Zeta oversees the Science on Wheels program, for which she was a traveling educator for a few years. Science on Wheels brings the education resources to schools’ assemblies, creating hands-on workshops on-the-spot. The projects range among all the sciences: geology, astronomy, biology-the school can choose a subject and the team of traveling teachers will set up a mini-museum. Zeta half-joked that Ocean Watch’s Captain and Around the Americas Project Director Mark Schrader “had a pool of teachers used to the nomadic lifestyle” to invite to join the expedition.

Zeta in her survival suit - training purposes only! Photo by David Thoreson, Around the Americas.

Zeta brought her teaching experience to Ocean Watch, helping develop educational materials for the project and for the port-stops around the continents. During those short stops on land, she led visits to school assemblies as well as teaching ship visitors about the vessel, the importance and nature of the expedition, and the state of ocean health. In larger cities, when school is in session, the crew generally works more closely with teachers to plan hands-on activities. Throughout the expedition the Around the Americas website also allows anyone to “tap in from anywhere,” according to Zeta. There are activity sets available for teachers to download from the Around the Americas website for the classroom about environmental concepts such as ocean acidification and food web ecology, in both English and Spanish.  In addition to the educational component of the mission, Zeta also worked as part of the crew to help do chores, cook, read sea-ice charts, and generally shared in the duties with everyone else on board.

Arctic iceberg. Photo by David Thoreson, Around the Americas.

An example of 2/10ths pack ice. Photo by David Thoreson, Around the Americas.

When the Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen made the same trek through the Northwest Passage, it took him three years (1903-1906) to get all the way through. When blocked by impassably thick ice, Amundsen overwintered in an Inuit town called Gjoa Haven, so named for the relative comfort it offered his ship, Gjoa, after steering through the hazardous waters of Simpson Strait. (If you imagine that the path Ocean Watch traveled is shaped like an ice-cream-scoop, lying scoop-down across Canada – a straight line with a large bump on the most eastern end – Gjoa Haven is situated just after Simpson Strait, and just before the scoop.) Amundsen passed the time conducting research on the location of the geomagnetic northpole. In his August 20, 2009 crew log entry, Ocean Watch’s Captain Mark Schrader noted the admiration he shares with the crew for Amundsen’s navigational talent. To safely pass through the gauntlet of islands, shoals, and rocks in addition to the ever-changing seascape of ice floes – without the advantages of “charts, chart plotter(s), radar, depth sounder(s), GPS, wind instruments and satellite ice reports” – was enough to inspire great respect.

9/10ths pack ice. Photo by David Thoreson, Around the Americas.

Zeta echoed this appreciation of Amundsen’s success, noting many other benefits the crew of Ocean Watch had during their journey that were unavailable for the historic voyage over a century earlier. She and the crew enjoyed email and a freezer full of fresh fruits and vegetables, and a powerful water filter to produce plenty of fresh water, among other amenities. Perhaps most important psychologically speaking, Ocean Watch sailed where people had sailed before, and the crew knew there was a way out through all that ice. Even with this in mind “it was still a little nerve-wracking.”

Canadian Ice Service Chart. Blue is clear water, red is 9/10ths impassable ice; green (1-3/10ths) and yellow (4-6/10ths) are the most navigable routes.

Although Zeta is probably one of few women to have ever traveled the passage, most people disregard this historic quirk to focus on the gender-ratio of the crew during her leg of the trip: Zeta lived with five men, in a tight space, for about two months. From the day she was confirmed to join the crew in from Barrow, to the recent few months since she disembarked, Zeta has been asked repeatedly if she had concerns being the only woman on board. When I asked, she brushed off the issue as immaterial. “There were so many other things to think about, gender was so not the only thing on my mind. Everything would be so new, gender was irrelevant.” Around the Americas’ mission on the whole is much more important to her than something as relatively trivial as the number of women on board. Instead, she said the hardest part was being the least experienced at sea among the crew. At sea, “everything is just a little bit different from the norm – even tying your shoes in the morning,” and Zeta had to learn how to live on a boat along the way, among salty sailors with the combined nautical-mileage of several circles around the globe.

The crew in the Canadian Arctic. Photo by David Thoreson, Around the Americas.

Even if gender had been a concern for anyone on board, there was always plenty of work to be done to keep oneself distracted. Besides interpreting ice charts and cooking meals, crewmembers share responsibility for conducting science research. At-sea research is generally performed under entirely different conditions: scientific research ships often go out on intensive 2-3 week legs with a very specific subject of focus, collect a large quantity of samples, and return to port. Though there may be multiple trips, research is often completed during a particular season, or in one limited region. However as Zeta put it, “not much science is usually done on a 64-foot vessel – there’s no room for it. Everything is very small.” Ocean Watch would also be sailing through all the latitudes and a wide-range of ecosystems. The Around the Americas team therefore got creative when planning the kind of research that was practical onboard Ocean Watch.

Captain Mark Schrader helps steer Ocean Watch through sea ice. Photo by David Thoreson, Around the Americas.

Captain and Project Director Mark Schrader worked with members of various institutions to examine the project’s unique advantages for research. The most obvious one is the atypical route, which allowed Ocean Watch’s crew to contribute to ongoing research in the atmospheric and oceanic sciences, in collaboration with many supportive research institutions. There are a number of projects happening onboard, and one in particular involves, NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.  In 1997, NASA launched “S’COOL,” a program to study the role of clouds and the energy cycle in global climate change. S’COOL stands for “Students’ Cloud Observations On-Line,” and it encourages science students to engage in cutting-edge climate research. Students all over the world can record observations of cloud formations at the exact time a NASA satellite in orbit passes overhead, photographing the earth’s surface. The students’ ground observations are compared against those collected from satellites to verify the accuracy of satellite imagery – a process called “ground-truthing” – and the more observations, the more accurately scientists can interpret satellite data. (One might call this method for data collection a type of citizen science by crowd-sourcing in today’s lexicon.) The crew of Ocean Watch is supplementing NASA’s dataset considerably by regularly documenting cloud formations en-route, in locations where most S’COOL contributors cannot travel.

Anvil cloud. Photo by David Thoreson, Around the Americas.

Illustrating NASA's S'COOL Program, which helps researchers interpret satellite imagery for applications in climate and atmospheric sciences.

Example of SCOOL cloud observation record.

Around the Americas is an ambitious project, and the mission is still underway. After her experience on Ocean Watch, Zeta still feels very much a part of it and she continues tracking the ship’s progress through the daily crew log.  Zeta’s time at sea made her much more aware of how we use resources. As she adjusted to life back on land in Seattle, everything from drinking water to garbage disposal took on a new significance. As she described it, the water maker and electrical generator aboard Ocean Watch both make a lot of noise individually, and due to the way the pumping system works, both start up whenever water is used.  Such a racket was strong incentive for the crew to use the bare minimum amount of water necessary. Furthermore, between ports of call, the crew collected any trash they produced and waited to dispose of it properly on land. It is fair to say that living with a growing amount of garbage for extended periods would heighten anyone’s awareness of the volume of waste people generate.

When we spoke, Zeta had only been home for a few weeks, but she hoped to incorporate much of what she learned into her work at the Pacific Science Center. Following up after our conversation in an email, she explained that her involvement significantly altered her view of, and her relationship with the oceans. Some of the joy of being a part of Around the Americas is the opportunity Zeta now has to share her experience with others. She wants to help develop the relationship between the public and environmental research, illustrating the science with human stories, because as she put it, “it’s hard to connect with a graph.”

Ice and clouds in the Arctic. Photo by David Thoreson, Around the Americas.

There is a great deal that everyone can learn from the Around the Americas expedition. Ocean Watch has just reached Peru, and continues sailing north along the west coast of South America. Follow the ongoing expedition, see some fantastic photography, and learn more about the mission, the ship, and her sturdy crew at www.AroundtheAmericas.org.

Thank you to Zeta Strickland and the Around the Americas team!

[1] Population estimates from: City of Barrow website, http://www.cityofbarrow.org; Brazilian Tourism Portal, www.braziltour.com.

]]> http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/03/around-the-americas/feed/ 4 http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/03/doctors-are-not-only-scientists/ http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/03/doctors-are-not-only-scientists/#comments Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:29:37 +0000 Linda Brodsky http://www.talkingscience.org/?p=3607 Our friend Rosalee Washington asked, “Should I major in something that has to do with science if I want to become a doctor?” This is a really good question. Do all doctors need the same skills? The same talents? Have a certain personality?]]> Our friend Rosalee Washington asked, “Should I major in something that has to do with science if I want to become a doctor?” This is a really good question. Do all doctors need the same skills? The same talents? Have a certain personality?

First the skills. Doctors learn to apply scientifically based knowledge to human beings who live, behave and act in wholly unscientific ways. Biology intersects with culture and politics and geography and much more. Cultural values and social systems may impact our health and well-being as much as or more than our biology in some cases. Think about the violence in some communities that takes the lives of innocent people. A doctor can treat the wound and maybe save a life, but only society and culture can control the behavior.

All doctors do not need the same set of skills. So there is no one “doctor type.” There are doctors who spend most of their day in their offices seeing patients, talking, looking at lab tests and doing what most people think doctors do. It made for a great TV series 30 years ago when Marcus Welby was popular. And there are some doctors who spend all their time seeing patients for a few minutes in a hospital emergency room and then move on to the next (do you any of you remember ER?)

Other doctors never (or hardly ever) talk to or directly see a patient. Those doctors still can play an extraordinarily important role in a patient’s care. Take the pathologist. A pathologist is a medical doctor who is responsible for looking at samples of tissue or body fluids that are removed from a patient in order to determine a diagnosis. They may be given very little information about the patient. Sometimes they just know the age, sex, and where the tissue sample came from. And yet their assessment, based on the different types of tests that might be done on that tissue, will determine everything that happens to the patient after that. They have an awesome responsibility in the patient’s care.

Their participation is more likely to rely on knowledge in the “science” of medicine (and physics and chemistry and imagery) than in how they interact with patients, which they rarely do. They need sometimes interact with other doctors. But their skills are more like those of a detective who has to take all the clues scientific testing of parts of the body (or in the case of an autopsy, a dead body) and try to figure out what has or is happening to that patient.

The radiologist is a doctor who interprets “films.” He or she is presented with images made from x-rays (radiation), MRIs (magnetic waves creating images), ultrasounds (sound echoes against tissue interfaces), PET (positron emission) scans and other types of imaging taken to determine the problem a patient might face. Radiologists need to have an in-depth understanding of physics (not my best subject for sure!) than might another type of doctor. Being able to imagine 3-D anatomy and computer savvy skills are also helpful.

Or take a doctor such as the pediatric surgeon. That doctor has to develop skills in caring for children, listening to families, and manual dexterity in working on small, fragile patients. Fixing very small delicate people who are fiercely protected by their families requires a completely different set of skills.

So you see, Rosalee, science, while very important, is not the only area of study that helps you to become a doctor. To become a doctor you have to be determined to become one. Learn your science, but study anything else that might interest you. Whatever you learn, you will find useful in whatever type of doctor you want to be.

BUT, they have never defined my path. Exams will never predict who I will become or how well I will do at it. And that will be true for you. No one exam can measure the value of your personal experiences, the way you see the world, or how you interact with it. They can only measure certain ways of thinking, certain types of knowledge, and given ways of organizing this complex world we live in.

The Boards don’t test for so many things: how will I interact and form relationships with patients? How will I think beyond algorithms and formulas to treat people individually and creatively? How will my non-linear way of thinking allow me to become an anthropologist and see the world in unique and more complex ways?

Daunting? Imprecise? Frustrating? Necessary evils? Yes. Impossible enough to deter us? Definitely not.

What else can keep these monstrous exams in perspective?

I’ve passed so many tests and have so many to come. But the number of tests in my life are nothing compared to the number I’ll run on patients. From the more mundane (cholesterol and sugar checks) to the more profound (prenatal and genetic screenings). Those are the results that matter. Those are the tests that change lives.

So while I’m sweating about the Boards, I remind myself that in comparison to the test results for cystic fibrosis, lupus, metastatic cancers, ALS, Huntington disease, and the thousands of other challenges patients may face, my tests pale in comparison.

So, yes, Step 1 is one of the most important exams I’ve ever taken. But it’s just another test. Just 8 hours of narrowly focused medical knowledge. And with so much uncertainty in life, in medicine, and in our own health, I welcome the reliability of these exams. So far, they’ve been one of the only constants in an uncertain (but exciting!) life.

Wish me luck on March 31st.

Thomas H. Poppleton, Plan of the City of New York, 1817. NYPL, Lionel Pincus and Princess Firyal Map Division

In honor of the 400^th anniversary of Henry Hudson sailing into New York’s waters, the New York Public Library presents a beautiful selection of maps spanning the 17^th through 21^st centuries – ranging from maps that Hudson would have used, to a dynamic satellite map supported by Google.  The collection offers an overview of the region’s earliest exploration and how maps of the region have changed through the years.

The NYPL is home to one of the largest and most well used map collections in the world, according to my enthusiastic and knowledgeable docent. The exhibit includes unique images of the five boroughs, with views of Manhattan and Brooklyn seen from intriguing angles. These illustrations force you to think differently about the history of development in context of the river named after its most famous European explorer. The exhibit frames the development of New York in terms of its waterways – from the trade encouraged by sheltering harbors and the river extending north, to the fresh drinking water that allows so many people to live here.

A few highlights:

John Bachmann. New York & Environs. New York, 1859. NYPL, The Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs, Print Collection, Eno Collection

• At the very beginning of the exhibit, take a look at the four circular views of New York that center on Manhattan. My favorite is an image drawn by John Bachman (1859) which focuses on the very tip of Manhattan and Governor’s Island, as if seen through a fisheye lens.
• Walk along the Hudson all the way to Albany by following an impressive floor-appliqué in the middle of the exhibit.
• Keep an eye out for some of the more beautiful maps, such as The Hudson River and Its Watershed, from the Beacon Institute (2007). Its detailed decorative frame illustrates topics in the river’s history such as exploration, recreation, and industry.

Connie Brown. The Hudson River and Its Watershed, 2007. The Beacon Institute. NYPL, Lionel Pincus and Princess Firyal Map Division.

• Also keep an eye out for Interpretive Cartography, a fun 1947 map of Long Island that is full of cultural iconography (such as fishermen, lighthouses and lobsters) drawn in the familiar style of Richard Scarry. (You may remember his books from your childhood – a worm wearing a single sneaker, and cats in lederhosen.)

The exhibit also looks at the revitalization of the waterways that carried the burden of pollution from intense industrial activity that made New York a center of trade.  Look at the brightly colored 1922 map of New York City’s myriad industries: leather goods, printing and publishing, women’s wear, and many others, proudly highlighted by city block. Factories dumped great volumes of chemical waste into the waterways for decades, damaging the ecosystems and restricting the general public from accessing the waterfront. The effort to bring the public back to the water has involved legislation to limit or stop pollution, actively cleaning up the river, and increasing public access to waterfront property, including the beach. Take a look at the cheerful 1941 map of NYC-area beaches, with little flags to note their quality as Good, Bad, or Fair. This refers to the cleanliness of the beach, and the intensity of overflow from sewage treatment plants during storm surges, which continue polluting certain areas today.

Industrial map of New York City showing Manufacturing industries concentration. 1922. NYPL, Lionel Pincus and Princess Firyal Map Division.

I recommend taking advantage of the free guided-tours of the exhibit. Besides learning a lot about New York’s history, you may also enjoy some bizarre questions from other visitors. I was lucky to overhear the docent politely handling heated accusations from an older gentleman who was convinced that Brooklyn is “not attached” to Long Island. Thankfully the docent had a wide selection of evidence supporting his argument.

The NYPL gives visitors a glimpse into how Henry Hudson and the earliest European traders coming to the New World saw the region. It was fascinating to see the changes in map design and style over time, and watch the shorelines come into focus from the earliest, imprecise first impressions of Hudson, to highly accurate English maps from the 18^th century. The exhibit gives New Yorkers and visitors from all over a chance to see the city in a new way, with views of Manhattan before the skyscrapers, and a better appreciation for the city’s visual history.

Visit Mapping New York’s Shoreline: 1609-2009 in the Stephen A. Schwarzman Building at 5th Avenue at 42nd Street, at the New York Public Library, through June 26, 2010.

Exhibit is open Monday, Thursday-Saturday, 10 a.m. – 6 p.m.; Tuesday-Wednesday 10 a.m. – 7:30 p.m.; Sunday, 1-5 p.m.

Free public tours are offered Monday through Saturday at 12:30 and 2:30 p.m., and Sunday at 3:30 p.m.

Images included here at the courtesy of the New York Public Library.

Well, I should qualify that: it’s the last test of my pre-clinical years. (The first two years are called pre-clinical because we don’t see much of the clinical side, because we don’t really know too much.) So, for two years we sit mostly in lectures, labs, small groups, and the library, learning the basics of human biology and illness. The cycle is predictable: three weeks of cramming, test, repeat. In our last block Life Cycle (our curriculum is organized by topic or organ system), we can finally see the light at the end of the tunnel.

But it turns out, that light is an illusion. It’s just another train heading full-speed towards us. We can’t we continue on to clinical training until we’ve passed the boards. What are the boards, you ask?

Well, “the boards”—or ‘the big quiz’ as one of my neurology professors calls it—are the first in a series of exams you take to become a doctor. Also called the USMLE, which stands for the United States Medical Licensing Exam. There are 3 Steps:

Step 1 encompasses all of general physiology (how the body works), anatomy, pharmacology (medications), microbiology (germs), biochemistry (proteins and that kind of stuff), and pathology (how disease happens and what it looks like). This is the stuff we learn during the first 1 ½ to 2 years of med school. In most schools passing step 1 is required in order to continue onto the clinical training of the second half of med school. Your step 1 score is important when you apply for the training after medical school, i.e. your residency.

Step 2 is usually taken in the 4th year of medical school. This next step tests your application of medical knowledge you have learned in diagnosing and treating patients. This is another 8 hour exam.

Step 3 is a 16 hour exam, taken over two days after the completion of the first year of residency (a.k.a. ‘internship’). Then you are finally a doctor.

More knowledge. More questions. More pressure.

So how is this supposed to be encouraging? How will this litany of obstacles keep you excited about becoming a doctor?

Well, it’s about perception. How you choose to see this path ahead. Stay tuned!

If you live anywhere within continental United States, you are no doubt informed of the rippling snowstorm spreading across the country. Some citizens even experiencing snow for the first time, like many Texas residents who had the pleasure of receiving a whole foot of the stuff dumped on to their unsuspecting roads and houses. In Washington, DC, where I live the majority of the year, we experienced the worst snowstorm in 200 years. A storm powerful enough to shut down the roads, metro, schools and even the United States government for a whole week. A storm so intense, the district could not start plowing until four days in, making navigation and travel excruciatingly difficult. At American University, where I attend, not only were classes canceled for a week, but part of our dining hall collapsed. Luckily no one was hurt.

So from a crop freeze in Florida, to record high snowfalls across the country, to the crippling of our government, people, and by people I mean several conservative talk pundits and the sheep that blindly follow them, are starting to doubt climate change. Well not so much doubt, they’ve been doubting climate change ever since the airing of the first trailer of Inconvenient Truth. It is more accurate to say that they are delivering the rest of world, the demographic that is more in touch with reality, a very snowy and unwarranted “I told you so.”

At first glance, this is puzzling. Certainly an abrupt spike in weather phenomenon that is unprecedented in recent history bares some evidence that our climate is in fact changing. Scientists have stated over and over again that the shift in the Earth’s atmosphere will result in a higher frequency of storms that will become increasingly more severe. But unfortunately we made a colossal mistake. Just as our movement started to gain momentum beyond a few local farmers and recycling freaks, and evidence of our planets transformation began to take real form and reach broad consensus, Al Gore coined the term Global Warming.

Environmentalists have a lot to thank Al Gore for. An Inconvenient Truth rallied and educated millions of people and forced scientists and politicians to come out and address problems facing the environment. The film lifted the cause of a few commune living hippies and dismally funded lobby groups up onto its shoulders and into the national stage of conversation. In those respects, the film did its job flawlessly. Al Gore got people talking about the environment, and when people talk, they get interested and want to know more. Now the Environmental Protection Agency is operating on a budget larger than ever before, companies all over the world are spending millions of dollars investing in fuel-efficient cars and green technology. Mayor Bloomberg’s Plan NYC is going to plant a million new trees, sort through New York’s trash to find recyclables, require all schools to launch recycling programs and greenify building codes. Environmental Science is slowly becoming part of the core curriculum across the country. Environmental Filmmaking is now a major in universities everywhere. Even the set of 24 has gone green with digital scripts and carbon offsets.

A lot is being done, and the efforts of millions upon millions of people who are working as hard as they can to leave the Earth better than they found it are quite often overlooked. However, as much as we are indebted to Al Gore for legitimizing our movement, he also made a crucial mistake. You see Al Gore is a democrat and unfortunately being a democrat he is cursed with the inability to name things well. Lets look at some of the names Republicans have come up with, The Patriot Act, a law that limited civil liberties. The Internet Freedom Act, a bill that would allow companies to control the speed and content of the Internet based on how much you pay them. The Pro Life movement has a great name, hell, even the Tea Party is kind of cleverly dubbed in its own way.

Democrats have Cap and Trade, Gas Tax, and Single Payer Healthcare System to name a few. Doesn’t have quite the same ring. Al Gore decided to call the shift in Earth’s climate global warming. And although there is legitimacy in that name. Sunlight is being trapped in the Earth’s atmosphere by fossil fuels, which are heating it up. But that doesn’t necessarily mean the weather we experience on the ground is warmer. In fact a melting ice cap will result in colder ocean temperatures. And even though the last two winters were some of the warmest on record, the fact that global warming and not climate change is the common terminology, every time Sean Hannity has to ware a coat to get to work he can later go on TV and call Al Gore’s theory “hysterical.” The frightening thing about that is people believe him, a lot of people, and now every time the weather is colder than usual or snow falls in areas where it shouldn’t be falling, the entire green movement is undermined.

The environmental movement is asking for our civilization to sacrifice a lot. The way we get around, the way we eat, our entertainment, one could say a whole culture is being called into question. We sometimes forget the scope of what we demand from our fellow citizens to save this Earth. That is why there really is no room for error. We cannot afford to have our statements taken out of context, we cannot afford to be dishonest, and we have to always remember the more disorganized we look, the more we falter, the less legitimized we appear to be and the less people are willing to take us seriously and perform the sacrifices the world desperately needs them to do.

Be Skeptical, Be Critical, Take Nothing On Faith.

All the best,
Jesse M. S.

Now, I understand given this is talkingscience.org, so there is an argument to be made that this blog post could be deemed “inappropriate” or “off topic.”  However,  recent events in the circus that is the American political world have injected me with what can only be described as an adrenaline rush equivalent of ridiculousness. So, given the thousands of universities that now offer political science as a major as my justification, as well as the fact that the Democrats are pro-science, I will now analyze for you the ridiculousness that is the most recent Massachusetts Senatorial election.

Now, Massachusetts is traditionally an extremely liberal state.  The late Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy held his seat for generations, and he accidentally killed a woman.  Massachusetts has the most progressive health care system in all the United States, which a Republican governor was forced to implement. Massachusetts was the first state to legalize gay marriage. How is it possible to screw all this up? Well, not surprisingly, the Democrats have found a way. Not only did the Democratic Senate candidate, Martha Coakley, basically stop campaigning after winning the primary, but she insulted the Red Sox. How can you run for any office in Massachusetts and insult the Red Sox?! Additionally, at a time when health care is so critical nationally, Coakley proved her political brilliance by flying to Washington to attend a fundraiser hosted by multiple health insurers. Even Obama, who carried the state by over 60%, couldn’t lift this woman onto his shoulders. In fact, his last-minute campaign contribution came off as pathetic and desperate.

Now since I’m a science journalist, the results of this election worry me greatly, especially if this upset is a precursor for election disasters to come in November. Let me explain why. For eight years I have witnessed, along with the rest of the United States, the systematic dismantling of the role scientific research and argument play in society. For the last eight years, there has been an undeniable full frontal siege on the intellectual fortress of reason and rationality. A siege that has been led by religious right-wing fundamentalists, a neo conservative administration, and the oligopolies they were in bed with. Before you write me off as a looney leftist extremist, I ask you to allow me to explain my thesis in a rational and factual manner.

Firstly, and most alarmingly,  the Bush administration attempted to perpetrate a fraud of global proportions against the American people and their future well being. It is a fact, let me repeat this, a fact that the oil conglomerates of the world worked with White House officials in altering scientific data in order to propagate a version of reality for the United States in which climate change does not exist. This was done under the banner of greed and justified under the Social Darwinist ideology that is American capitalism. Like the cigarette companies, who launched a widespread cover-up campaign in order to hide their highly addictive product’s relation to a plethora of deadly conditions, mainly lung cancer, the oil companies sought to cloak the stranglehold they have on the Earth’s health in a veil of deception, propped up by the credibility of a pPesidential seal.

Secondly, let’s take a gander at the religious right. It is impossible to deny their relationship with the Republican Party. Just look at polling results in the Bible Belt. We can thank  this constituency for the Bush Administration’s push for federally mandated abstinence-only sex education, which denies students the very relevant information they need to protect themselves from STDs.  Ironically enough, abstinence-only sex education increases the chances of teen pregnancies.

If the religious right had their way, the Bible would play a major role in science education. For example, in a recent story in The New York Times, an Ohio science teacher named John Freshwater was quoted as saying that because according to the Bible homosexuality is a sin, scientists must be wrong in their claim to have isolated a gene that causes homosexuality. In fact, there exists a substantial proportion of the Republican party, including top Republican officials such as former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, who have stated that creationism should be taught alongside evolution as an alternative scientific theory. This idea conveniently overlooks the fact that creationism isn’t a scientific theory. There are no scientific proponents or consensus backing creationism, nor was it proposed originally by scientists. Creationism is a theological theory, and should be taught, if at all, in an objectively-taught theological studies class.

Then there is my personal favorite. There was a group of Christian Republicans who demanded that the Hubbell Space Telescope be taken down. Their rationality: the photographs it was producing contradicted the Bible. Let me reiterate the key word in that sentence: photographs.

But the greatest crime of all is how a Republican majority altered language connotation. As we saw during Palin’s book tour, they have an engrained bias against anyone who is  liberal and educated. The truth is, public education is a liberal idea, and chances are that under Republican leadership, we would see somewhat less of it. Over the past eight years, we have reached the point where Obama literally had to say “We will restore science to its rightful place.”

Your vote is sacred.  Use it wisely. And when you do, I ask you to consider the long term well being of this country. Science and math scores are at an all time low, budgets are being cut across the country, and the debate over creationism is actually growing. If we are to restore science to its rightful place, we need to make sure we have elected officials who are willing to give the subject the time and credence it deserves. And for all those candidates campaigning for Congressional seats in 2012, bear in mind that in this political landscape, no district is “safe.”  Don’t win your primary and go on vacation.  Campaign your heart out to the end.

Be Skeptical, Be Critical, Take Nothing on Faith.

All the Best,
Jesse M. S.

I asked other students at my high school to weigh in. According to many of my peers, this is the fault of high schools and colleges. Students attest that schools put too much pressure on students to be successful, which leads to a very high level of stress. One student told me that her friends often call her up at 12 midnight or 1:00 AM complaining that they are unable to finish all of their work, or they are suffering from insomnia, or just plain stress.

However, my peers did not place the blame on the shoulders of academics alone. They believe that this increase in teen mental illness is partially the fault of parents, and the increased pressure that they put on their children. Although many if not most parents pressure their children to be successful in order to benefit the children, it still produces anxiety and stress. Now there is pressure not only to succeed in A.P classes, but also to be captain of a sports team or president of a club, and to accumulate community service hours. To the modern teen, these parental expectations are just a part of life, but they do put a strain on the psyches of many adolescents.

More surprisingly, the numbers of certain mental illnesses went up even more than five times. There has been a steep rise in hypomania, a disorder that produces anxiety and unrealistic optimism, depression, and psychopathic deviation, which means having problems accepting authority and feeling exempt from the rules. According to my peers, they have not seen a prevalence of these disorders among teens that they know; however teenagers are often experts at deception.

Perhaps this rise in mental illness is not the fault of one single institution, or even a group of them. Maybe it is just the byproduct of a changing society. In the age of the Internet adults and teenagers alike want all the information, and all the success, right now. They will settle for nothing less than instant gratification, and sometimes this is a good thing. It prompts healthy ambition and self-confidence. However, when teens fall behind, or feel that they can’t measure up to the standards of this changing world, the effects are detrimental.

Please write in and tell me what you think!

One of the more interesting conclusions is that the standard lecture format of undergraduate courses is poorly matched to the way people actually learn and retain scientific understanding – in fact, often students come out of these classes thinking more like a “novice” scientist than when they started. By novice, I mean the following: there are certain ways that an expert in a scientific field thinks about that field that are very different from the way a novice thinks about that field. For example, a novice believes that scientific content consists of isolated pieces of information that have been handed down by some authority and require memorization. An expert believes that scientific content consists of a coherent structure of concepts that build on each other, being accurate descriptions of nature and established by experiment. Sad to say, but students coming out of intro science classes are even more likely to believe that science is bits of memorization based on nothing more than faith, as opposed to a coherent argument based on reality.

These results resonated with me, because in this blog, I’ve tried to emphasize how one builds to a conclusion (like “dark matter exists”) from a variety of physical observations and theories (like the 20 posts that followed my original three). I’m sure that sometimes (often?) I fail in communicating this key point about the way I look at physics, but that is ultimately the goal of this blog. And when I start writing it again regularly, I’ll try not to forget that.

Finally, Wieman and his group have developed a series of simulations for students to play with that really demonstrate key concepts of physics. One example that caught my eye is something that I tried to explain in a post a few months ago, the photoelectric effect. If a reader really wants to understand what I was trying to say in that post, I highly recommend trying out Wieman’s simulation, located here. Especially you, mom (although she’s currently in India right now, and therefore not reading this blog at all. By the time she gets back, I’ll be writing more regularly…)

Eventually the universe began expanding and cooling.* As it did so, the ions and free electrons “recombined” (during the time romantically referred to as the era or epoch of recombination) to form neutral atoms, after which photons no longer scattered (romantically referred to as the “surface of last scattering,” a phrase that always puts me in mind [for whatever reason] of the “Last Homely House” in the Lord of the Rings [yes, I am a physicist and I love Tolkein and I write a blog for my mom]). Those photons remain unmolested since that time.

*Aside: my mom asks in a comment “why did the universe cool?” The short answer to that is because it expanded. Temperature is in some sense a measure of how many collisions occur in a space [recall my analogy about money in the last post] – at high temperature, there are lots of collisions. Suppose we expanded the space, but kept the number of particles the same. All of a sudden, the number of collisions would go down, because the particles wouldn’t be able to find each other to collide. Therefore the temperature drops. Many [if not all] refrigerators operate this way, by allowing a compressed gas to expand rapidly and thereby drop in temperature. A follow-up question is then “why did the universe expand?” and I have a less satisfactory answer to that. My best explanation is that there was a lot of energy released in the big bang, and it was that energy that drove the expansion. We may have more to say on this subject at later times).

In the mid 1960s, a group at Princeton led by Robert Dicke began building a radiometer to detect the CMB. At the same time, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson at Bell Labs observed some noise in a sensitive antenna they were planning to use for radio observation. After careful work, they decided that this noise had to be external and coming from all directions in the sky. Eventually they made contact with the Princeton group, and this background noise was interpreted as being the CMB (after first talking to Penzias and Wilson, Dicke supposedly got off the phone and told his collaborators, “Boys, we’ve been scooped”). The two groups published companion papers on the observation and the interpretation, and in 1978 Penzias and Wilson received the Nobel Prize.

Although important, that first observation is not on its face all that exciting. The CMB is remarkably smooth or isotropic (meaning it looks the same in all directions). The picture below shows what Penzias and Wilson might have seen if they’d been able to observe the CMB in all directions (courtesy www.map.gsfc.nasa.gov), and it’s hard to see what all the fuss is about. But I’ll leave that for the next post.

No one likes taking tests. Unless you are really well prepared and know the answers to all of the questions. And then it can be fun as an affirmation of your hard work, perseverance, and mastery of the material.

My first big, important, life-changing test occurred in the 8th grade. The DATs—tests to help you figure out what career you might be good at. Don’t remember what the “D” stood for. On this 6 part test, I scored in the 99th percentile in spatial relationships, mechanical thinking, scientific reasoning and mathematical concepts. But I only scored 80th percentile on transcription and memorization. When the test results came out, the guidance counselor met with my parents to tell them what line of work I would best be suited for.

Based on my scores, my counselor told my father I would be a very good secretary! To his credit, my father told the counselor that his honor student daughter could be other things beyond a secretary. And then he told me to ignore her the same way she ignored those tests.

Why do I tell you this? Because tests, while important in helping someone else determine your strengths and weaknesses, are only one part of what you are and what you are going to become. They are simply not a complete picture of you.

Having said that, it is important to know that test taking is a fact of life if you are going to become a doctor. The tests start early and they seem to never end. In fact, every time you take on the care of a patient, in some way, you are being tested as to how good you are as a doctor.

But let’s leave that particular philosophical debate aside for the moment. Practically speaking: What kind of tests will you encounter? How important are they in becoming a doctor? When do you take your last test?

First, it is very important you know how to take tests. The subject matter is important, and preparation is the key to success. There are the tests you take for classes. Teachers are usually pretty generous in letting you know what to study. But then there are those dreaded standardized tests that colleges require for your application to their school. Unfortunately, many times these tests are used as cut offs to separate out students who will be considered for admission and those who won’t.

The last time I looked, the pre-SATs (scholastic aptitude tests) are taken early in the junior year of high school. These tests help determine who will receive national merit scholarships. They also give the student a taste for what’s to come.

Then comes the big sister test. The SATs. They have three parts—math, English and writing sample. These scores are weighted more or less heavily towards admission depending on the college. Their results are also provided to colleges which then begin the process of sending you material encouraging you to apply to their school.

Prep courses abound. Is Kaplan better than Princeton Review? Don’t know. But they can be expensive, and I do not think there is financial aid for the near $1000 fee charged for college preparatory tests. (I sent an inquiry to each last month, but have yet to receive and answer). But they also can help boost your scores and even guarantee it or your money back.

Even without test prep courses, you can find used test prep books on-line. And then: Practice. Practice. Practice. The discipline is not only useful for these first tests, but also will help you learn how to learn to take tests for the rest of your life. Alas, a painfully necessary skill.

Hey, Dana, now that you are back from the Big Sur, what do you think of my take on tests?

Each year, millions of Americans pay to have their eyeballs poked, prodded, suctioned, sliced and zapped with a laser. In exchange, their vision is corrected. In this video, we go inside an operating room at Acuity Laser Eye and Vision Center in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, to watch Dr. Steven Vale, who has done over 20,000 surgeries, perform lasik eye surgery. See for yourself!

Grade Level: 6th – 8th grade
Subject Matter: Life Science
National Standards: NS.5-8.1, NS.5-8.3

Overview

The human eye may be only about the size of a ping-pong ball, but it is an amazingly complex sensory organ that requires all of its components to function properly in order for a person to have optimal vision.   Each part of the eye works together with the others to process light rays into electrical impulses, or messages that are transmitted to the brain.  The brain interprets this information and allows us to be aware of our surroundings. Our eyes and brain are able to capture and interpret millions of images a day, shaping our view of the world.

In this experiment, students will dissect a cow’s eye to learn the anatomy of the eye, and compare and contrast a cow’s eye and a human eye.

Activity Materials
N.B.: If your budget does not allow for each student to conduct a cow’s eye dissection, then divide students into groups or conduct the dissection as a demonstration. Review safety rules and proper use of scalpel and scissors with students before beginning activity. Students should perform dissection only under adult supervision.

Cow’s eye, preferably one for each student. Available at your local butcher or online.
Scissors, one pair for each student or group of students
Scalpel, one for each student or group of students
Cutting board, one for each student or group of students
Latex gloves, one pair for each student

Vocabulary

Pupil: circular opening in the center of the pigmented, or colored, iris of the eye, through which light passes to the retina.
Iris: an involuntary muscle that controls how much light enters the eye by changing the size of the pupil.
Retina: light-sensitive membrane that lines the back wall of the eyeball.
Rods and cones: light-sensitive cells on the sensory layer of the retina. Cones allow a person or animal to see color, and rods enable them to see shades of gray and motion.
Aqueous humor: a clear fluid that helps the cornea maintain its rounded shape.
Cornea: a tough, clear covering over the iris and the pupil that helps protect the eye.
Lens: a clear, flexible structure that bends light to project an image onto the retina.
Optic nerve: the bundle of nerve fibers that transmits information from the retina to the brain.
Vitreous humor: the thick, clear jelly that helps give the eyeball its shape.
Depth perception: the ability to judge how near or far an object is.

What To Do

1. Start the lesson by having the students watch the Science Friday Video, “Laser Eye Surgery in Six Minutes.” Review with students the parts of the human eye that were operated on, that they saw in the video. Tell students that they are going to conduct a cow’s eye dissection to learn more about the human eye and how it works.
2. Place the cutting board on a flat surface.  Hand out a pair of latex gloves and a cow’s eye to each student who will be performing the dissection. Have all students put latex gloves on and begin examining the outside of the eye.  Ask students to describe the texture of the eye. Can they identify any parts of the eye? Why do they think there is so much fatty tissue around the eye? Tell students that the fat protects the eye from being damaged by the surrounding bone.
3. Have students slowly and carefully use the scissors to cut away the fatty tissue.  Underneath, students will find red muscle tissue.  Ask students what do they think the muscles do.  Tell the students that cows have four muscles to move their eyes up, down, left and right, whereas humans also have an additional two muscles that allow clockwise and counter-clockwise eye movement.
4. Have the students locate the cornea, a cloudy covering over the iris and pupil. Tell students that the cornea focuses most of the light that enters the eye.  The cornea may be cloudy after death, but would have been translucent when the cow was alive. Have the students make an incision in the cornea.  A clear liquid will leak out from the incision. This clear liquid is called the aqueous humor and helps the cornea retain its shape and nourishes the front part of the eye. Ask the students to notice how the human cornea bulges out by looking at another person’s eyes.
5. Have students continue to cut the entire cornea out. Place the cornea on the cutting board and cut it with the scalpel.  What did they hear as they tried cutting through the cornea? Tell students that the cornea is made of layers of interlocking fibers that strengthen the cornea so that it can protect the eye from harmful particles.
6. Located underneath the cornea is the iris. Tell students to carefully pull the entire iris out and describe what they see.  Can they explain the function of an iris? The iris is an involuntary muscle that will change the size of the hole in the center of it, called the pupil. Ask the students why is it necessary for the pupil to get bigger or smaller? How is the shape of a cow’s pupil different than that of a human?
7. Ask students to feel and look for a small clear ball that looks like a marble.  That is the lens. What does the lens on a camera or microscope do? How is this lens similar to the lens in a human eye?  Have the students remove the lens and use the scalpel to peel off the different layers of the lens.  Tell students that in the human eye, the lens grows in layers until the age of puberty.
8. Ask students to squeeze out the jelly-like substance from the back of the eye. This is the vitreous humor.  Ask students to explain what they think it is for.  How is it similar to the aqueous humor?  Tell students that the vitreous humor has a lot of protein in it, which gives it a jelly-like texture.  Once the vitreous humor has been squeezed out, have the students compare how the eye felt before the dissection and how it feels now.  What do they think is the purpose of the vitreous humor?
9. Ask students to look for a cream colored layer behind the vitreous humor, towards the back of the eye. This is the retina, consisting of millions of light-sensitive cells (called cones and rods) that make up the surface of the retina.  Ask the students why they think these light-sensitive cells are important.
10. Ask students to move the retina around until they find a spot where the retina is attached to the back of the eye. Have the students describe what they see in that area.  This bundle of nerve fibers is the called the optic nerve. Based on how the optic nerve seems to stretch towards the back of the cow’s head, what do they think the optic nerve does?
11. After completing the dissection, have students place their cow’s eye and latex gloves in a plastic bag and dispose in the garbage.  Equipment, work area and hands should be washed thoroughly.

What’s Happening?

Our eyes need light in order to see.  Light first enters the eye through the cornea, a tough covering of tissue that protects the outer layer of the eye. The light will then pass through the pupil, the small opening in the center of the iris. In order to achieve the best vision possible, the iris will cause the pupil to change size depending on the brightness of the light.  When the light is dim, the pupil will increase size to allow more light to enter the eye.  In bright light, the pupil will decrease in size to avoid overexposure to light.

After passing through the pupil, the light rays will pass through the lens. The lens bends the light rays and works like a camera by focusing on an object and projecting that image onto the retina.  However, since light will bend after passing through a lens, the image of the object on the retina will be upside-down.  On the surface of the retina are two types of receptors called cones and rods. Cones allow us to see color and rods allow us to see shades of gray and motion. The image is then converted into an electrical impulse that travels through the optic nerve to the brain. The brain then interprets the information that it receives;  even though the image is upside-down the brain will process the image right side up.  However, the brain can sometimes visually perceive an image that differs from reality.  This is known as an optical or visual illusion.

Topics for Science Class Discussion

• What happens to the lens when someone is nearsighted or farsighted?
• Describe the conditions in the eye that cause cataracts and glaucoma.
• What are the three different types of optical illusions? Demonstrate examples of each type.
• What is a blind spot and where is it located in the eye?

Extended Activities and Links

• Draw an illustration that demonstrates how the individual components of the eye are similar to how a camera works.
• Assign students to investigate various eye irregularities or conditions.  Have them create a class presentation,  explaining how these conditions occur and how to prevent them.
• Ask students to define depth perception.  Have students experiment with depth perception by holding a pencil sideways in each hand, so that the erasers of each pencil face one another. Have students close one eye and try to touch the erasers together. What happened?  Why is it difficult to have the erasers connect? Have students try it with both eyes open.  Did they achieve better depth perception with one or two eyes?
• Explore how images are produced on the retina of the human eye as an object is moved closer or further away:
• Students can research and explore the diversity of eyes in the animal kingdom:
• Try these online activities from the Exploratorium that experiment with sensory perception:

Brenda Tan and Matthew Cost, high school seniors from Trinity School in New York City, used a technique called DNA barcoding to find out what species were present in over 200 animal products. Their extracurricular experiment, which they completed with the help of Mark Stoeckle, adjunct at Rockefeller University, suggests that buyers should beware!

Grade Level: 6th – 8th grade
Subject Matter: Biology/Life Science
National Standards: NS.5-8.1, NS. 5-8.3

Overview

In 1953, Francis Crick and James Watson discovered the structure of the DNA molecule, the double helix.  Their discovery led to many developments in the fields of forensic science and biotechnology and in the understanding of heredity and genetic diseases. The two high school seniors featured in this SciFri Vfideo were able to apply DNA extraction for a more practical application: to find out what really is in the food that we eat.

In this activity, students will review and discuss the definition, function and importance of DNA. They will learn a simple scientific method to extract DNA from a common food source (strawberries) and how each step in the experiment is important, thanks to the basic structure of a cell.

Activity Materials

Large glasses, one for each student
Small glasses, one for each student
Measuring spoons
Water
Salt
Coffee filters
Rubber bands
Dishwashing liquid
Rubbing alcohol (70% ethanol and refrigerated)
Ziploc bags, one for each student
Coffee stirrers, one for each student
Strawberries, at least one for each student
Optional: 1.5 ml Microcentrifuge tubes (available at www.sciencekit.com for $18.25 for pack of 500)

Vocabulary

DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid): a molecule found in the nucleus of a cell that contains genetic information.
Nucleus: a part of the cell that contains DNA and is responsible for growth and reproduction.
Cellulose: the substance that makes up most of a plant’s cell walls.

What To Do

1. Begin the lesson by having students watch the Science Friday Video, “High Schoolers Give Hot Dog A DNA Test”.   Ask students if they know what DNA stands for.  Begin a discussion with the students on what DNA is and where it is found. Tell the students that they are going to extract and isolate strawberry DNA.
2. Have each student mix two teaspoons of dishwashing liquid, nine tablespoons of water and 1/4 plus 1/8 teaspoon of salt in the small glass. Tell students that this is their extraction buffer solution.  What do they think that means?  Since DNA is found in the nucleus of cells, they will need a buffer solution to help break open the cell’s outside layer of fat and protein. Set the buffer solution aside.
3. Hand out strawberries and have students remove the green leaf from the top of the strawberry. Place the strawberry in a Ziploc bag and squeeze as much air as possible out of the bag before closely it.
4. Have students mash the strawberry in the bag. Ask students why do they think that this is a necessary step.
5. Have students open the bag and add 3 teaspoons of buffer solution. Squeeze the air out again before closing it and then continue to mash the contents. Ask students to describe what effect does the buffer solution have on the cells of the strawberry.
6. Have students secure a coffee filter with a rubber band on top of the large glass. Strain the strawberry puree into the large glass through the coffee filter. Carefully remove the rubber band and gently squeeze the wrapped coffee filter against the inside of the glass so that the remaining liquid drips into the glass. Ask students why it is important to use the filter. How would the results be affected if a filter were not used?
7. Have students tilt their glass and slowly add the rubbing alcohol until there is an alcohol layer one-half of an inch deep on top of the strawberry liquid. Tell students to gently rock the glass back and forth as the alcohol flows down the side of the glass. What is the purpose of slowly pouring and rocking the glass? What would happen to the contents of the glass if the alcohol were quickly poured in?
8. Have students let the glass sit for a minute and observe what is happening inside the glass. Ask students to describe the layers that are forming. What do they think is causing these layers to form?
9. After a minute or two, have students gently twirl the coffee stirrer inside the glass to gather the white clumps that resemble mucus from the middle layer. Tell the students that this is strawberry DNA. What shape does it have? How does this relate to the molecular structure of DNA?
10. Optional: Students can preserve their strawberry DNA by placing their sample of DNA in a microcentrifuge tube with a small amount of alcohol.

What’s Happening?

All living things are made of cells. DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) is a molecule found in the nucleus of a cell that contains the set of instructions needed for that cell to perform functions that will enable that living organism to live and grow.

The first step in extracting DNA from a strawberry is to create an extraction buffer solution, which will help break open the cell membrane layer consisting of fat and protein. The soap in the buffer helps break apart the cell membrane just as soap helps dissolve oil when you are washing dishes. Once the cell membrane is dissolved, the salt in the buffer helps the reaction along in two different ways. Firstly, it causes the other parts of the cell that we don’t need to separate away, or precipitate. The second way salt helps is that it causes the DNA to clump together so that it is easier to collect. This is because DNA has a slight negative charge that prevents the strands from getting too close because they are repelling each other. By adding salt, the negative charge becomes partially covered, allowing the DNA strands to move closer together since they are not repelling each other as much.

The coffee filter separates the cellulose or bigger components of the strawberry puree from the liquid content that contains DNA. Although DNA will dissolve in water, it will not dissolve in alcohol. The colder the alcohol, the less soluble the DNA will be in it. When alcohol is slowly added to the glass, the DNA will separate out into the alcohol layer while the water and protein remain in the bottom layer. Since alcohol has the lowest density of the liquids in the glass, it will form a layer above the DNA. DNA molecules are too small to be visible to the eye. The strand collected is actually a clump of thousands of DNA molecules.

Topics for Science Class Discussion

• Why is it easier to yield clumps of DNA from a strawberry compared to other types of fruit?
• Why is it important to study fruit DNA or DNA from other foods?
• Could the same extraction method be used for animal cells?  Why or why not?
• Are there any types of organisms that don’t contain DNA?

Extended Activities and Links

• Repeat the experiment using different variables such as other types of detergents or fruits, or changing the measurements in your buffer solution. How does each variable affect your result by comparison?
• Have students research the molecular structure of DNA. Students can build an edible DNA model using various types of food or candy (gumdrops, marshmallows, etc.) and toothpicks. Have students present their model with a colored-coded chart that explains what part of the DNA each food or candy represents.
• Learn about DNA replication through this interactive online activity.
• View real scientific images of DNA as you zoom from your hand to the your cells.

What do permafrost and methane have to do with each other? In this video, Torre Jorgenson, a landscape ecologist at Alaska Biological Research, explains the connection. Watch methane bubble up as Jorgenson stirs up a melted permafrost pond.

Grade Level: 6th – 8th grade
Subject Matter: Life Science
National Standards: NS.5-8.1, NS.5-8.3

Overview

Some microbes produce different types of gases as a byproduct of their metabolic processes. The microbes in this Science Friday Video released an odorless and flammable gas called methane. The type of gas or gases released by a microbe depends on the species and their metabolic characteristics.

In this activity, students will conduct an experiment to observe the metabolic process of yeast by using household ingredients. Students will vary conditions in the yeast’s surrounding environment and observe the amount of gas that the yeast releases. Students will use the results to determine which environmental conditions are suitable for yeast growth.

Activity Materials

16 oz. clear plastic soda or water bottles, three for each student
Active dry yeast or baker’s yeast
Sugar packets, three for each student
Plastic spoons, one for each student
Small plastic cups, three for each student
Warm water
Large bowls
Ice
Vinegar
Permanent marker
Balloons, three for each student

N.B., If any of your students is allergic to latex, DO NOT let him/her handle the balloons.   Have students who are allergic work with partners who are not allergic, and who will work with the balloons.

Vocabulary

Microbe: a small organism that can be seen only through a microscope.
Metabolism: a series of chemical interactions that happens in living organisms to provide the energy and nutrients needed to sustain life.
Yeast: a single-celled fungus.
Fungus: a single-celled or multi-cellular organism without chlorophyll.  A fungus lives by absorbing nutrients from organic matter.

What To Do

1. Begin the lesson by having students watch the Science Friday Video, “Bubbling Methane; Melting Permafrost.”   Explain to students that permafrost is permanently frozen ground found in cold regions such as Alaska. Ask students what could cause permafrost to melt. How can melting permafrost affect the environment?
2. Tell students that they are going to conduct an experiment to observe how a microbe interacts with its surrounding environment, and how varying conditions in the environment can affect its ability to thrive.
3. Hand out three plastic bottles to each student. Have students use the permanent marker to label each of the plastic bottles in the following manner: Bottle A – Sugar, Bottle B – Vinegar, Bottle C – Sugar/Ice
4. Distribute to each student three sugar packets and three plastic cups with small portions of the following ingredients separated into each cup: yeast, warm water, and vinegar. Ask students to explain what yeast is, and how it is used. Why do they think we are using yeast in an experiment about microbes?
5. In Bottle A, have students mix one spoonful of yeast, one packet of sugar and three spoonfuls of warm water. Gently swirl the ingredients inside the bottle until the contents have dissolved. Cover the top of the bottle with a balloon. Have students observe the contents inside the bottle. Why is it bubbly or foamy? Does it remind them of any footage from the Science Friday Video?
6. In Bottle B, have students mix one spoonful of yeast, one packet of sugar, three spoonfuls of warm water and one spoonful of vinegar. Gently swirl the ingredients inside the bottle until the contents have dissolved. Cover the top of the bottle with a balloon. What is happening inside the bottle?
7. In Bottle C, have students mix one spoonful of yeast, one packet of sugar, and three spoonfuls of warm water. Gently swirl the ingredients inside the bottle until the contents have dissolved. Cover the top of the bottle with a balloon. Place the bottle upright in the middle of a large bowl, and place as much ice as possible around the bottle.
8. Set the bottles aside for about 15 to 20 minutes. During this time, have students create a chart on a sheet of paper with three columns and two rows. Label the columns “Bottle A”, “Bottle B,” and “Bottle C.” Label the top row as “Predictions” and the bottom row as “Results”.
9. Have students write their predictions in the appropriate column and row for each bottle. Ask students to write explanations for their predictions on the chart. Based on their initial observations, what do they think will happen to the balloons? Which balloon do they think will inflate the most? After students have finished writing their predictions, have them discuss their predictions and explanations with the entire class.
10. After 20 minutes, have students observe their bottles. What has happened to the balloons? Why have some balloons inflated more than others? Have students write the results in the bottom row of their chart. Compare and contrast their results with each other, and with the students’ predictions.

What’s Happening?

Yeast is a single-celled organism that can only be seen through a microscope. We are able to see the yeast in this experiment because a packet of dry yeast sold in a grocery store holds billions of yeast cells (one gram holds about 25 billion cells). These yeast cells lie in a dormant state until they are activated by the warm water, and begin to break down the sugar for energy. As the yeast cells metabolize the sugar, they release carbon dioxide gas. The build up of carbon dioxide gas in the bottle causes the balloons to inflate.

Similar to any other living organism, yeast need to be in an environment that is suitable for survival. The yeast’s ability to thrive in the bottles, or the artificial “environments” that the students have created, can be measured by how well each balloon inflates. A thriving community of yeast will produce more carbon dioxide gas.  If less carbon dioxide is produced,  the environment for yeast is less suitable.

The balloon for Bottle B will not inflate, because vinegar is a type of acid. An overly acidic environment can hinder the growth of yeast. Yeast tends to thrive in warm environments.  By surrounding Bottle C with ice, we have created an environment that is too cold to sustain yeast growth.

Bottle A should have the most inflated balloon of all three because it contains the optimal conditions for the growth of yeast.

Topics for Science Class Discussion

• How does the acidic environment created in this experiment compare to the effects of acid rain in our environment?
• How would we create an experiment to simulate the effects of climate change in our environment? What variable would we have to change?
• Besides carbon dioxide and methane, what are other types of gases or by-products that may be released by microbes?
• Explain the process of how yeast helps bread dough to rise.

Extended Activities and Links

• Have students change some of the variables in this experiment. Try different types of possible food sources for yeast (e.g., artificial sweetener, corn syrup, honey, etc). Which food source causes the yeast to produce the most gas? What are other ways that the experiment can be modified?
• Have students research the different types of microbes that produce gas, where these microbes are found, and how they can play an important role in creating or combating climate change.
• Try this hands-on science activity on permafrost from the PBS television series Scientific American Frontiers.
• Learn more about how carbon is exchanged throughout the Earth by playing this interactive online carbon cycle game.