Genecks

Context of the thread. Also, by saying family is important, I mean that people should feel like a family without thinking about genetics and bloodlines as determining factors.

Yeah, thanks for the source. I could not find that thing. I tried. I updated my post a moment ago. Maybe you've seen the last update. I think my best advice is try reading through articles, chemistry books, some biology books, medical science books... if you want a better grasp of what is going on. And then again, maybe if you have a few simple, discrete questions, then email the people at the medical research center and ask them. This is something I'll be looking into eventually again. But I think what I've quoted and the main site I gave is pretty good for now.

I've been looking for that article for a couple of years. I was somewhat against constantly mentioning it on SFN when talking about cryogenic hibernation for animals, because I didn't have the original source. Hello, Neco Vir. In terms of research being done, I would not be sure. But I'll look into it next week. As far as I know, I've read that many people are attempting to understand the biochemistry behind frozen organisms bring brought back to life. Furthermore, we could consider them still alive, as they were able to be brought back from the dead. Neurological death is some pretty serious death. *looks into it a little bit* I'm looking around this website: http://www.safar.pitt.edu/ source: http://www.safar.pitt.edu/content/archive/annualreport/pdf/SCRR2006_2007AnnualReport.pdf It looks like they've moved from general cryogenic stuff to medical emergency. I think if a person followed up on the sources, articles referenced, and research done by people, then you might get more information. Still, because it has been said that three hours were used... maybe that's the most time they could get out of the dogs before they couldn't be revived again? Also, there seems to be discussion about a mouse model. As such, that should give a lot of valuable information on the mammalian system. Then again... mice have a very fast metabolism... burn a lot of energy... But maybe being able to freeze them, slow down their metabolism, and bring them back to life after a day even... would mean a lot.

DJ Bruce, I think what you're stating is misguided. First off, a lot of things that doctors do through the years is book work. There has been little, if any, application of their knowledge. It's only until residency that they begin to be actual medical doctors who treat people. They get to see pain, death, and the happiness of the people they can treat and cure. What good is all of that book work? People can't and don't remember the massive amount of information they've been fed. They remember it for a period of time and then forget it. If you think that people remember all of that, DJ Bruce, that's very misguided. At best, the people have shown they've found a way to assimilate information. They've accomplished something if they know how to use it as a reference. They've mastered it if they can recall it. Think of an electrician or mechanic who never picks up tools to build something but always reads books about fixing something. It's not until the application (and ability to recall and apply what has been learned) that the person is true to his/her trade. I want a medical doctor who can actually figure out what's wrong with me. Does that mean his/her schooling that was about 11 years ago and about 6 years ago after residency helped? I doubt that person can remember exactly everything. Memorization and recall comes through repetition and application. I would want a medical doctor who had a nice residency filled with application of learned facts in relation to his/her trade. That's why people specialize: There is a large inefficiency when people attempt to be knowledgeable about everything. Sure, it would be great if God was working on you, but that's highly imaginative. Also, toughest and brightest? Such a free-will argument. There are a lot of people who are "in the know." You could call these people primed and spoon-fed to be future doctors. Such people may come from parents whom are doctors or even biologists. There are also the people who find good opportunities and resources to learn. And then there are people who do things to the best of their ability without much guidance at all. Truth be, those people are blind as bats and don't succeed too well. That's my serious guess as to what's going on. I relate to the SED reports, which show how graduate students often have parents that have graduate degrees. It's just passing down the torch from one member of a community to the other. Basically, people are being determined through external factors to succeed. The educational system is doing something highly unethical and unjust by causing people to compete as it does. I'm not saying it's impossible to study hard and succeed. But your ability to study depends on how you were taught to study. And sometimes people learn a few tricks on their own, but I've considered that most people are unconscious of how they've learned to be so effective, thus they claim to have done the majority of work themselves. I have a decent memory of the various people in my life who've taught me how to study, work harder, and so forth. Some people forget that stuff. I would say people are tough and bright if they can prevent themselves from going "ew" once they see a dead body or a person puking. You'll be amazed by how many pre-meds are easily disgusted and act childish upon such sights. I say throw them immediately into the real world to make them question their career choice. Then again, by the time people get so far, they rationalize their personhood and self, and they go on ahead anyway. Somehow they form into this "social role" and play their part as a "doctor." Think about medicine before we even got to decent modern biological mechanisms in the 1950s. Seriously? You're going to ask me if a modern knowledge of biology means they can handle having people's lives in their hands? That wasn't the case for people over 100 years ago. They had pathetic knowledge of their craft (of course which hadn't developed) yet attempted to take care of people. And we still have pathetic knowledge of biology, as I'm sure more knowledge is sure to come. YES. People can handle having lives in their hands while not having the best knowledge. People can be caring and empathetic while attempting to heal people to the best of their ability. That doesn't mean they'll always have the best knowledge, and they surely will not ever. I doubt there are enough savant-like doctors who can look at a problem and calculate the probable issues of your health from the most detailed physical details involving physics, organic reactions, rates and limits, etc.. into an answer about health. It's all about diagnosis. What do I think? I think the medical trade should be a specialized trade where people go to school just for that trade. If people want to be medical doctors, then let them be medical doctors. Let all of their training be toward becoming a medical doctor. Have separate schools for that. I'm a firm believer in specialized education, which the American educational system seems to not acknowledge due to guilds, such as the AMA, existing. It's about money. It's that simple. People are trying to act ignorant, b.s. others about how people really go about succeeding, and create a system of unethical competition and success. Many foreign doctors even consider the American medical institution to be corrupt. I've talked to them, too. If it was about people caring, knowing their stuff, and actually living out the role of a care-taker, the training system would be much different.

I think the length of medical school should be extended. As such, the classes studied, such as organic, physics, etc.. should be put into the medical school curriculum rather than the undergraduate curriculum. Why should undergraduate universities bear the burden? The AMA guild is what the problem is. It's forced universities to have ridiculous student competition. It should be medical schools that teach the organic chemistry, biology, and physics in relation to medicine. There needs to be a sharper division in order to allow scientists to become scientists and medical doctors to be medical doctors. I think most modern doctors are tools, anyway.

I think if that is your goal, you would want to move more toward cellular biology or biochemistry for sure (as you'll be doing a lot of chemistry). A neuroscience learning tends to involve some philosophy/psychology classes. A biology major will give you a taste of chemistry with more emphasis on genetics and cellular biology. If you wanted to be a psychiatrist, then I think the philosophy/psychology classes would matter, be useful, and make you more open-minded. If I had to throw you somewhere, I'd probably throw you in the biochemistry department. As I've said on this forum, I've become increasingly biased toward suggesting that anyone desiring graduate work in neuroscience should get a B.S. in Biochemistry. Reason: The philosophy and psychology classes a person is required to take seem trivial and almost worthless unless the material immediately relates to cellular neurobiology and neurogenetics. Such materials are not often covered until graduate school or taking graduate-level classes. I've taken the psychology and philosophy classes. I've experienced them. Sure, the philosophy of science is some cool stuff and fun to think about. After studying some of it, you feel like more of a scientist and question what you are really doing, but it's not going to immediately help you. The psychology classes might help, as they cause some people to learn some statistical tricks; but they, too, are not immediately helpful. I, personally, have not cared for the philosophy or psychology classes. Besides their not being immediately relevant, they cost money. I could just as well read the material in my free time. You want to build a skill set. Pharmacy is good money these days, as people are continually brain-washed to believe they need pills. Some people are loony and need to relax, but otherwise, it's a bunch of scientists being unethical capitalists. I think more research should be done on ADHD persons and the neural darwinistic effects of medication vs. non-medication and attempting to live normal lives. Being a biochemist should open many doors for you in terms of research. I think the best advice I can give you, as I suspect you're a freshman, is that you need to start talking to research professors as soon as possible and tell them you want to get into their labs. Tell them that you plan on being around for four or so years, and you're plenty willing to spend time training under them. That gives you a leg up. And professors are truly biased toward seniors, thus not wanting to hire them: They'll be gone soon. With a freshman, they can train you and shape you to conduct the tasks that his/her lab requires. You'll be a useful asset after a bit of training: Free labor for a couple of more years. And try not to get angry or show annoyance with the arrogant or socially ignorant ones. If the professor doesn't need any assistants, ask the graduate students if they need assistants. Graduate students do need assistants, as many I've talked to desire to have an assistant. And ask the graduate assistants if somehow they could get you in the lab working for them but still under the professor.

Will they be taking this audience through a time machine? I feel as though I've missed this event. Am I able to still make it if I register late?

Ok, thanks. I'm a little worried that I'd have to remember the exact proportions of solutions in certain media and how to reconduct experiments upon command. I really can't recall the measurements off hand.

Sometimes I think reality is too surreal. Fate/Nature/God is against me... all that jazz. Check this out: So, I was in my last class for the day, and something happened. The girl actually left her binder underneath her desk. Everyone else was gone. I would have left it there and thought to myself, "Oh, she'll come back and get it." Fact is, however, that there was someone in there the other day using the room as a study area late at night. So, I grabbed it and brought it with me. It was about 5 p.m. when all this happened yesterday. So, I emailed her and told her that I had her binder. I told her I would be around until 6:30 p.m.. I left my phone number so that she could reach me. I didn't really feel like carrying her binder around, and I didn't know what I was going to do next on campus, because I didn't feel like being there any longer. I went to a cafe, sat down, ate dinner, and then after studying and eating, I came out around 6:20 p.m., not having received a phone call, and saw her sitting and studying outside of the cafe area. I thought to myself, "WTF, man? Is this chick hunting me? Is this coincidence? Is this fate? Is this really, really fatalistic?" I gave her back her binder, chatted her up, and asked if she wanted to study. She had a straight-lace face and said she was already in a study group and wasn't too interested. So I left her alone and went on my merry way. But yeah, for her to be outside the cafe area? Well, she didn't know where I was. Also, a lot of places around the campus act like a Faraday cage, so I can't get a signal except in certain places. But the funny thing is that she emailed me last night: ... I've personally given people I like and am interested in a straight-lace face to make them think I'm not interested. But I don't do that immature stuff anymore. I don't play those games. I don't know why she kind of changed her mind at the last moment. This was maybe a few hours after I gave her the binder. I don't know what to think of this, really. I'm definitely not in the mood to play games nor do I have the time. Either she meant to leave that binder there or she didn't. It could have been subconscious, I don't know. If she did that on purpose, I'm going to have to play this girl in a game of chess. Either way, I have a feeling that I was meant to talk to her or some kind of time/space rip would have occurred. I've done my universal duty.

I'm thinking Osiris or the sun.

I don't like mosquitoes. Sure, they may act as a food source for some species, but I'm not sure they are the only food source nor major for those particular species. As such, I'm thinking if there is a way to get rid of mosquitoes, then it should be done. They are a nuisance. Is it ethical to get rid of mosquitoes from the world? Honestly, if I knew how, I think I'd do it even if that meant I got rid of 80 species of frogs.

you might like this: http://www.fda.gov/Food/ScienceResearch/LaboratoryMethods/BacteriologicalAnalyticalManualBAM/UCM071400 Also, if you're inoculating something, then you're using sterile technique. Doing that prevents other junk from growing on your agar. I think TSA would be more selective. The BHIA probably would have dextrose added to it, thus different bacteria could more readily access the dextrose for growth.

*gives Spyman compensation* That's excellent. I can actually put in a decent title now.

What are the current ranks associated with levels of post counts? I thought after 1000, a person then became an "Organism."

That's nice. But I think the point here is the rate of transpiration (water release) and water consumption by plant species within areas. What might make flower so different is that they often aren't very tall, thus if the wind were to breeze past them, it could be transformed into cool air from water transpiration by the flower. If you were standing around a lot of trees, the wind would hit into the trees and the flow would slowly deteriorate. I question whether or not tall weeds have some similar transpiration/consumption patterns. I'm skeptical about the program they made. 1 million lines of code is impressive. But I think there would be many more aspects to figure in, such as objects that are in the way of world wind currents. There are a lot of buildings you would need to account for. Using the power of Google Earth might provide some ability to better create world wind patterns or at least a more general idea.

The idea with a lack of sleep relates to an increases amount of stress. This relates to psychoneuroimmunology. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoneuroimmunology Personally, I've not found that lack of sleep gets me sick. Furthermore, I've found that starving myself tends to make me healthier. I seem to have quite an interesting physiology. Maybe my body can deal with the physical stress I put my nervous system and immunology through. Then again, people don't just get sick. I think for a lot of normal people, infection occurs through the oral route: People take their hands, touch something, and that something goes in the mouth. But to add to the conversation, I've read that upon first signs a person is getting sick, if he/she takes vitamin C, then it can improve the chances of a quicker recovery. Truth be, whenever I encounter a sick person, I wash my hands like crazy and take a vitamin that day. Animals other than humans have shown to produce vitamin C when they get ill. Humans don't produce vitamin C.

I'm not sure what you're asking, but... I'm guessing they are "connected," but I don't have the slightest clue what kind of things would be requested of me to do on practical exam day. I am taking two different classes. BIOS-220: Genetics lab BIOS-351: Microbiology lab I have a practical exam in each class at the end of this summer semester. In both classes, I've asked about what practical exams are like at the university level. Furthermore, I asked for help in those different classes as to how a person should study for the practical exam. I didn't really get much information, and the TAs were hesitant to offer any help. They were even reluctant to discuss their past experiences. That's really annoying, as I don't see why they couldn't discuss their past experiences.

How should I go about studying for a practical exam at the undergraduate level? I've tried talking to my TAs, and they have not given me much information. I find that awfully surprising, really. As I'm not sure if I should be focusing on labbook problems or if I will actually be replicating experiments we've already done in lab. The TAs just won't tell me. I've even asked them if they had to take practical exams in the past, and they wouldn't give me much information even then. So, I'm thinking, "WTF, man?" I have two practical exams: 1. Genetics practical exam 2. Microbiology practical exam I have practical exams to take at the end of the semester. I'm not familiar with how to study for a practical exam. As far as I assume, I need to be able to replicate things in lab or identify them. I'm not sure if that's the ordeal. I do know that if someone asked me to make yeast plates, transform bacteria, etc... in one sitting, then I don't think I'd be able to get done right away... Not enough time in the class for one person to do that. About the only practical exam I've ever taken in my life was an anatomy and physiology exam, during which I looked at cadavers, histological slides, and gave replies to lab book questions. Ideas? Suggestions?

I don't know if there is anyone like that here. Maybe there are a few people who have experience in it, but I don't know if anyone here specializes in that. You could try physicsforums.com if you don't get many replies in the next two weeks. I've noticed that sometimes the science professionals on this forum take a while (a week or two) to respond to a thread.

Thanks. I think it looks excellent. It's takes part of the past color scheme and applies it in a new layout.

That's a biased opinion if I've read one. "Oh, me and a select few rather than the majority of individuals here decided we just didn't like it, so we decided to not instate it." That sounds awfully like rule by the minority. And even regulars like me never saw it. I don't remember seeing it during the testing phase. I think I like the idea of blue more. Perhaps if I think about this too much, I'll push toward black.

If I were to accept the new format, then I'd at least like for that orange to appear blue. But what Zolar V said about the main page is/was very true: Unique, insightful, and a pleasant experience. However, I never really cared for the front page that much and went straight to forum.

That's kind of reasonable. Of course, we're neglecting a lot of things. You can't really figure out what the length and width would be from just the volume. However, you can attempt to assume various industry standards of refrigerators heights in relation to such a refrigerator volume and attempt an answer. However, I think it should be much taller if it's a refrigerator. A deep-freeze freezer might be 52.3 cm, but I don't think a refrigerator would be that. Even then, that deep-freeze freezer would be pretty shallow... maybe the width would be enough to put a body in, really.

It's worth a try. I'll take it slow and ask if she wants to study for both classes. I think she's perhaps the only person that is in at least two of the classes I'm in now. She's a valuable teammate if anything.

I've been in that room before. The clock is wayy behind us. They actually try hiding the clocks from the students around UIC. And, she definitely looking at me. She kept trying to make eye contact. I'm pretty sure she has an interest, although somewhat unsupported, I think. Maybe I've tainted an experiment, but a person can only have so much peripheral vision in a large room (250+ people room). And she was sitting far away enough that if I look straight at the project screen, I can't see her. I would have to turn my head to see her. So, one day, I got the idea and thought to myself, "She's been looking at me a lot in the 8 a.m. class. What's her deal? Is she looking at me in this class, too?" So, I turn my head for a brief moment, and I catch her glancing. I'm sitting across the room, and I smirk with a slightly held yet silenced chuckle. Probably nodding my head no because of the insanity of it all.