In high school senior year, I took "human biology".

[JohnPBailey]

It seemed to cover anatomy and physiology (human organs, tissues systems and functions) more than anything else and it also hit upon psychology, the human mind and behavior.  I never really understood the "biology" aspect of this course. What is "biology" really in the context a Homo sapiens? What is "cell biology"?  What does BIOLOGY cover regarding the human body that anatomy and physiology don't? The course started out by defining what all living things needed to be alive and to be considered living things such as the consumption of water and the ability to respond to stimuli. 

The textbook I had in this very same class was kind of odd. It said that the heart rate for women and girls was higher on average than that of men. It did not explicitly mention boys. That said, how does the normal heart rate of boys compare with that of men, women and girls? 

My mother also did not understand why this class was called "human" biology. 

[exchemist]

2 hours ago, JohnPBailey said:

It seemed to cover anatomy and physiology (human organs, tissues systems and functions) more than anything else and it also hit upon psychology, the human mind and behavior.  I never really understood the "biology" aspect of this course. What is "biology" really in the context a Homo sapiens? What is "cell biology"?  What does BIOLOGY cover regarding the human body that anatomy and physiology don't? The course started out by defining what all living things needed to be alive and to be considered living things such as the consumption of water and the ability to respond to stimuli. 

The textbook I had in this very same class was kind of odd. It said that the heart rate for women and girls was higher on average than that of men. It did not explicitly mention boys. That said, how does the normal heart rate of boys compare with that of men, women and girls? 

My mother also did not understand why this class was called "human" biology. 

In a nutshell, biology comprises the scientific study of living things. It therefore seems to make perfect sense to start a course on human biology with a description of what "living" means, and then proceed to the anatomy and physiology of the human body. 

Cell biology concerns the structure and biological and biochemical processes that go on in various sorts of cell, so what one might think of as micro-scale biology, whereas anatomy and physiology concern organs, the functions they perform, how they interact, where they are located and how they are connected etc., i.e. the macro-scale biology. 

As fas heart rates go, I'd imagine smaller human beings will tend to have a faster heart rate than larger ones. So boys' hearts will beat a bit faster than those of full-grown men. But why not ask your teacher? It's an intelligent enough question. You could even ask why this should be so, which could lead to an interesting discussion.  

[studiot]

I don't know where you are or what options your high schools system offers but in the UK you can take (straight) Biology  or Human Biology.

The choice would depend upon your intended career.

Human Biology was largely created for those intending to go on to study Medicine, although suprisingly enough the only compulsory A level required when my daughter went to Edinburgh to study Medicine was Chemistry.

Edit sorry I missed out the reference

https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en-GB&gbv=2&q=A+level+biology+v+human+biology&oq=A+level+biology+v+human+biology&aqs=heirloom-srp..

Edited December 15, 2022 by studiot

[exchemist]

11 minutes ago, studiot said:

I don't know where you are or what options your high schools system offers but in the UK you can take (straight) Biology  or Human Biology.

The choice would depend upon your intended career.

Human Biology was largely created for those intending to go on to study Medicine, although suprisingly enough the only compulsory A level required when my daughter went to Edinburgh to study Medicine was Chemistry.

Interesting. I think that would be because they teach all the relevant biology stuff ab initio but don't want to be diverted into trying to teach chemistry to people that can't cope with it.  A lot of people don't find chemistry easy. 

Edited December 15, 2022 by exchemist

[JohnPBailey]

20 hours ago, exchemist said:

In a nutshell, biology comprises the scientific study of living things. It therefore seems to make perfect sense to start a course on human biology with a description of what "living" means, and then proceed to the anatomy and physiology of the human body. 

Cell biology concerns the structure and biological and biochemical processes that go on in various sorts of cell, so what one might think of as micro-scale biology, whereas anatomy and physiology concern organs, the functions they perform, how they interact, where they are located and how they are connected etc., i.e. the macro-scale biology. 

As fas heart rates go, I'd imagine smaller human beings will tend to have a faster heart rate than larger ones. So boys' hearts will beat a bit faster than those of full-grown men. But why not ask your teacher? It's an intelligent enough question. You could even ask why this should be so, which could lead to an interesting discussion.  

Well, I took this course 41 years ago. I don't even know how to contact my teacher or even if she is alive today. I can't remember the textbook's name but why would the author have left out BOYS on purpose when comparing heart rates by age/sex demographics? By saying that the average heart rate for MEN is less than that for WOMEN and GIRLS, one is saying that adult males have a slower heart rate than females of all age groups. It implies to me that male children, living or dead, have no heart rate at all. Words mean things. 

 

 

[exchemist]

2 hours ago, JohnPBailey said:

Well, I took this course 41 years ago. I don't even know how to contact my teacher or even if she is alive today. I can't remember the textbook's name but why would the author have left out BOYS on purpose when comparing heart rates by age/sex demographics? By saying that the average heart rate for MEN is less than that for WOMEN and GIRLS, one is saying that adult males have a slower heart rate than females of all age groups. It implies to me that male children, living or dead, have no heart rate at all. Words mean things. 

 

 

You mean you are suddenly wondering about this in your fifties? (It was the reference to your mother  - and the rather basic nature of the questions - that made me think you were at school.)  Yes words mean things, but you are also expected to engage your brain a bit. I did that when I saw your question and came up with an answer for you. Did it seem reasonable?  

[JohnPBailey]

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

You mean you are suddenly wondering about this in your fifties? (It was the reference to your mother  - and the rather basic nature of the questions - that made me think you were at school.)  Yes words mean things, but you are also expected to engage your brain a bit. I did that when I saw your question and came up with an answer for you. Did it seem reasonable?  

I suppose the answer that younger hearts beat faster than older hearts seems reasonable. But as the why that old textbook left out the word BOYS explicitly in the age/sex heart rate comparison I don't think I shall ever understand. Perhaps it was a misprint by accidental printing press plate omission to have left out BOYS. I should have asked the teacher about it way back in 1982. I was hoping a human heart expert could chime in here about the heart rate of male children specifically in comparison with the respective heart rates of adult males, adult females and female children. I am now 58 and I have been progressively getting more interested in science lately. 

Edited December 16, 2022 by JohnPBailey

[TheVat]

The comparison is mainly about gender difference, so the key fact is that the female heart is smaller in proportion to total blood volume than in men, therefore needs to beat more frequently to circulate that volume of blood.  Age is less relevant, given that the heart grows as the whole body and its blood volume grows.  (any difference there is more related to youthful metabolism, as it handles growth)  Children's hearts don't beat that much faster, since their smaller hearts are pumping a smaller volume of blood.  

You misread the paragraph, which was simply comparing male and female at all ages.  

Edited December 16, 2022 by TheVat
Fixt