In nutrition today, we taste tested some low-calorie sweeteners. Sugar/ fake sugar is not very good by itself. It was interesting nonetheless. We learned that Splenda is basically sucrose that has been chemically altered so that your body can't digest it. It's genius, right? You get the sweet flavor, but without the calories! And I will never EVER feed my child honey before he/she is one year old. It is very bad. I think I want to write my final paper on some kind of pediatric nutrition. I find pediatrics really interesting, and I'm even thinking about specializing in that when I go to PA school. It's fascinating to learn about how humans grow into adults. There are a lot of nutrition considerations, especially for infants.
I have my first test of the quarter on Friday. It's in Chemistry of the Elements. I have no idea what "Chemistry of the Elements" is supposed to mean. The first week was all stuff I've done before, but the last two weeks has been brand new material. Like, I didn't even know this kind of chemistry existed. I thought that by this point I've at least heard of just about everything in biology and chemistry. Guess not.
Lately, I've realized how very limited our science is. I have heard a few very scary reminders that we actually know very little. For example, years ago scientists thought SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome) was caused by an enlarged thyroid gland (which is found wrapped around your trachea). So, all "good" parents got surgery on their newborn babies to have their thyroid reduced. The reason behind this is that when scientists performed autopsies on babies that died from SIDS, they saw a very large thyroid. Turns out, what they thought was an enlarged thyroid gland was actually a normal thyroid gland. They thought it was enlarged because all the bodies donated to science to teach medical students were from poor people and poor people tend to have very small thyroid glands. They did these completely unnecessary surgeries because all the bodies used in medical schools were from poor people. It makes you wonder what treatments we're being given today that later will be found to cause cancer. There have been lots and lots of medical treatments even 50 years ago that were later found to cause cancer. I used to think that we were such an enlightened generation, that there is very little out there that is left to be discovered. That is definitely not true. It's exciting to see what new developments will occur in my lifetime. That's why I love science so much!
1 comment:
Great post Rachel. This is why it is so important to remind people who rail against evolution and other scientific theories, including those who believe in 'Creation Science', that science isn't a belief system...it's about creating explanations for phenomena based on the best evidence available. The biggest difference between science and belief is that a scientist must be willing to discard a theory as soon as it ceases to fit the evidence available. This view stands completely opposed to the practice of 'Creation Science' whose goal is to manufacture and interpret evidence/data in a way that fits with the final 'theory' (read: belief).
P.S. I know this post has almost nothing to do with what you wrote about ... but I like to remind you now that you're older that some of the stuff I used to say in Sunday School wasn't completely cracked :) I am proud that you're becoming a scientist and I hope that you always remember the discussions we had about faith and science.
Post a Comment