Experiments: Natural vs. artificial

Recently we have been discussing various ways of gathering data in my epidemiology class. Epidemiology is the study of disease distibution and probable causes and has nothing to do with skin, unless of course they happen to be studying the flesh eating bacteria or something.
I mention this because I am currently reading a book that was written by an epidemiologist. She mentions in the intro that when people ask her what she does for a living her reply is "sex and drugs." Apparently if she says epidemiology people equate that with a skin condition and thinks she is some sort of dermatologist or something. I was kind of surprised that people would think that but then I was telling a friend about the book and when I said she was an epidemiologist he asked if that was some sort of skin specialist. So apparently she knows what she is talking about. Though really, I think being able to say that your job is sex and drugs is probably just a good conversation starter, more than a clarification.

Anyway, back to data collection. We have been discussing the differences between types of studies. An experiment is like the third grade science fair where you put the penny in the various solutions to see which one cleans it best and you manipulate variables and all the classic stuff that we have learned since grade school. (Is there anyone who hasn't done that experiment? Spoiler alert: tomato juice works best. Though I don't really know why anyone would need to clean pennies, let alone have the time to do so. Its kind of a dumb experiment when you think about it.)
(Also, did you know that nowadays pennies are made mostly from zinc and cost more than one cent to produce? And they tend not to circulate very long because they get lost or tossed or stored in a jar somewhere and forgotten about (mom:). So the US government is losing money on making pennies. They have actually considered doing away with them and rounding up, which is just another one of the reasons why economics makes no sense to me (You have no idea how close I came to using a pun there). But do you know why they haven't done that yet, other than for fear of confusing all the economics dunces like myself? Because of lobbyists. Specifically lobbyists from the zinc industry. Who knew? Well, now you do. More useless information. Unless you have a desire to become a lobbyist. Which I actually find tempting, but I don't want to lose my soul and I think the two are mutually exclusive. So I will stick to health ed. Which brings me back to the point.)

The point being that in addition to the typical experiment you also have other ways of gathering data, including the natural experiment. This is where you just sort of gather data from a scenario that is happening that you didn't really have anything to do with. Kind of confusing right? That's what I thought. Until this weekend. You see, it suddenly clicked when I realized that if anyone wanted to observe a natural experiment they could just observe me this weekend. Or read my blog, which is pretty much the result of the natural experiment.

You see, my roommates all went to Oregon this weekend. They invited me but I decided not to go because I have a bunch of homework and tests next week and a health conference and blah blah blah. So I stuck around and became a natural experiment instead. Essentially, the question being asked is, what does Lindsey do when nobody is around? Now, if they wanted to do a regular experiment they could just put me in a big glass box by myself and observe, like that stupid pledge commercial where they make the lady wait a week in a glass box. But you will notice that there is no bathroom in that box so it makes for a pretty implausible, unethical study and a stupid commercial. And since I would not likely consent to such a study, and an ethics board might take issue with it, they would have to wait for a natural experiment in which I just happen to find myself alone for three days. (I might think that my roommates were in on the study from the beginning but then I remember that a) they invited me to go with them, and b) there are far more important things to study than me. Such as physiology, which I am not studying right now.)

So, here I am, a natural experiment. Now, what can we learn from all of this? Well, it is now day two of solo time and I am writing a rambling, random blog post and I won't have any human contact until church tomorrow. (Do you think I can make it? The suspense builds.) So we learn that while Lindsey is ordinarily quite easily amused, this is not the case when she has nobody to share her amusement with. (See "pennies; made of zinc" from above for proof:)

We learn that she tends to watch a lot more TV when she is by herself. (Memo to me: Don't buy a TV.) Though, a confounding factor in this conclusion is that her roommate's boyfriend happened to leave season three of The Office at her apartment and she may have been inclined to watch that whether she were alone or not. Hard to say.

We also learn that she tends to mimic things that she reads rather than people that she speaks to. The style of this post is rather more similar to the book she is currently reading than the usual language of, "like", "seriously", "lame", and "I know" that she usually uses. So without human interaction she resorts to interacting as though she were talking to the things that she reads. Which probably also explains the scientific theme of this particular post. It is also a good indicator that she ought to stop reading and boring people with her ramblings and go to bed.

What else will we learn from this natural experiment? Only time will tell. Though I have a hunch I will probably do well on my epidemiology test:)

One final thought. Sometimes the results of experiments are not what we wanted or thought they would be. This seems pretty obvious, but there was a time in my life when it was not. Back to the third grade science fair. My first experiment was to determine if Coke would cause a nail to erode or a piece of ham to get holes in it. I was told that this happens and so was much disappointed when this turned out not to be the case. The ham and nail were a little sticky after three days in Coke solution, but none the worse for wear. Meanwhile I was scrambling to find dirty pennies I could clean with lemon or tomato juice for the science fair the next day because I thought that since my experiment failed to prove my hypothesis it was no good and I had to do another one. It didn't win any prizes and I went on believing that I had somehow done my experiment wrong.
Lesson learned? If you want to win a prize at the science fair, have your mom do it for you. Yeah, I'm talking to you Shannon B., Westside Elementary.
Also, Coke will not erode your stomach. Or ham.