(no subject)

My organic chemistry class was canceled (presumably for lack of enrollment, as apparently only 4 people signed up), which leaves me in kind of a bad position (though I feel worse for friend/professor, who is now in the position of not being paid).

I have four lab classes I need to take (3 for 2 year programs, 4 for 3 year programs).

At WCC (where I need to go for financial aid reasons, plus it's easier to get to than the SCC main campus), 3 of the 4 have a biology class as a prerequisite (with organic chemistry being the one that doesn't). The AP Bio class I took in high school hopefully meets that prerequisite, but it's going to take time and money to get that report sent to them, and while the money isn't a big problem, the time is, since the results are older than 4 years and therefore take more time and can't be expedited.

If I can't take at least one of these classes this semester, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for me to take anything at all, since it won't actually help my progress.

Ok, this isn't true. Since none of the lab classes are prerequisite for eachother, I could do two lab classes each of the next two semesters and finish at the same time as if I'd taken one of them now. And in that case, I wouldn't have time to do as many of the non-science prereqs, so it would make sense to get more of those out of the way now. I don't want to have to do it that way, but that's life.

So now I need to find one other prerequisite or GE class that I can manage to enroll in, so my enrollment doesn't drop below 12 units. I'm now signed up to take the placement tests on Friday, so I'll have a little more choice in what to take.

Now I guess I need to email the professors of each of these classes (which are all full and waitlisted at this point) and ask if they'll accept my paper AP transcript as proof of prerequisite, assuming there's space enough for me to get into the class, as I can't even get on the waitlist at the moment. ARG. However, some only have 3 people on the waitlist or so, so it doesn't seem unworkable.

Maybe it will end up working out for the better after all. Since ochem is the class required for the 3 year program but not the 2 year programs, it really makes sense to get the others out of the way first. So if I can get one of those classes out of the way this semester, and two next semester, that's a semester earlier that I can start applying.

Or perhaps I could just decide on a career where just getting into the prerequisite classes, let alone the program itself, isn't an exercise in masochism.

koyote has not said whether he'll be back today or tomorrow from his latest out of town trip. I wish I knew.

(no subject)

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/08/14/diet.pregnancy.ap/index.html says, in short, that a recent study shows that toddlers of women who gained the recommended 25-35lbs (15lbs for obese women, 40lbs for underweight women) during pregnancy were 4 times more likely to be overweight at age 3.

Why are they emphasizing straight weight gain over proper nutrition and adequate exercise? It feels to me like they're confusing correlation with causation. The problem women probably aren't the ones gaining weight by eating a healthy variety of food - it's the ones who gain by eating unhealthily, and it may well have more to do with passing their bad eating habits onto their kids than an actual direct effect of their diet during pregnancy. If women are getting too many calories from nutrient-poor sources, reducing their total intake to conform to arbitrary weight limits without an underlying dietary change is just going to mean they aren't getting the nutrients they need.

Where does the weight gained during pregnancy go?

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/pregnancy-weight-gain/PR00111 says:

* Baby: 7 to 8 pounds
* Larger breasts: 1 to 3 pounds
* Larger uterus: 2 pounds
* Placenta: 1 1/2 pounds
* Amniotic fluid: 2 pounds
* Increased blood volume: 3 to 4 pounds
* Increased fluid volume: 2 to 3 pounds
* Fat stores: 6 to 8 pounds

So directly baby-related weight gain (not fat stores), would amount to 18-25lbs. Anything less than that is effectively telling the woman to lose part of her own body weight.

And the extra fat is needed, at least for women who are breastfeeding. Exclusive breastfeeding requires more calories per day than pregnancy (500 vs. 300). Many/most breastfeeding women lose the extra weight relatively easily. A few have so much trouble keeping weight on that they have to force themselves to eat and/or stop breastfeeding.

I think the part that worries me most is that too many doctors already use numbers as judgement on a woman's behavior. Way too many stories on www.preeclampsia.org sound something like, "I gained 10lbs in a week, and my doctor told me to cut back on the ice cream. Then both my baby and I ended up in the ICU with permanent damage to our health." (One of the symptoms of preeclampsia is excessive water retention, which causes sudden/extreme weight gain). And one view of preeclampsia is that it's related to maternal nutrition. If that's true, telling a mother gaining "too much" to stop eating so much is potentially dangerous advice.

Obesity is a problem. Unhealthy eating during pregnancy is a problem. Erecting more restrictive arbitrary weight limits is not a good answer. But I suppose it's cheaper and easier to implement than real education.