After Reading Chapters 3 and 4 in EPTAS

1. Dr. Sanders mentions several "unintended consequences of good medicine." Please pick one and elaborate/explain.
2. Dr. Sanders mentions the power of touch. What does she say about touch, and do your own experiences resonate with what she says? This article from 2006 explores a different aspect of touch, medicine and the immune system. Taking both of these perspectives into account, if you were designing a training program for doctors, what might you have them do to prepare them for touching their patients?
3. The final statement in chapter 4 is very charged. Please address and assess Dr. Sander's assertion.

After Reading Chapter 2

How did Dr. Fitzgerald go about determining her diagnosis? What mistake did she make? Why do you think happened? Was this a realistic scenario?

Every Patient Tells A Story: Chapter 1

After reading the introduction and Chapter 1, what are some surprises or comments you have on how doctors really diagnose patients? Did you find the reading interesting? Scary? Reassuring? Please share your thoughts.

Brain Rules!

Go to the Brain Rules website and find the list of brain rules at the bottom of the page. Pick two of them and work through the interactive animation that is provided for each. When you are done, comment on which brain rules you chose, something that you learned or found interesting about each one, whether or not the rules you chose resonates with your own experiences, etc.

What to include in your yeast lab write-up (P 5-7)

1-2 pages or thereabouts should suffice, due Thursday

What is cell respiration?
What is glycolysis?
What is fermentation, what cells do it? why is it important? What are the products?
What was the point of the lab?
What is a reasonable hypothesis and why?
If you have data - do they explain your data? Why/why not?
What might we change about the lab for next year to make it more accurate?

Biology 2010-2011!

For my Power Points, Review Outlines, and HW materials, go to my Google BioWebsite! In sidebar!

Thoughts on "Race for the Double Helix"

After viewing the video: "Race for the Double Helix" respond to:

1.) Watson and Crick clearly made use of the ideas and results of other scientists research in pursuing their goal, including work by Linus Pauling, Erwin Chargaff and Rosalind Franklin. Sharing of knowledge is a foundation of scientific investigation. It has been suggested that the use of Rosalind Franklin’s information without her permission or knowledge was unethical on the part of Watson and Crick. Do you agree or disagree? Was Pauling’s and Chargaff’s information also used improperly? Thoughts?

2.) Rosalind Franklin was a meticulous lab scientist who avoided any sort of speculation. She relied on hard evidence – the factual data – before drawing any conclusions. Watson and Crick on the other hand, did no labor-intensive research and merely postulated a possible structure for DNA. Was Watson and Crick’s approach to solving the problem “less scientific” than Franklin’s? Do you think there is value in scientific speculation? Here is a link to a nice blog post in the New York Times that might help you think about this issue.