Seeing this sidebar made me curious about what other "obvious" scientific studies have been conducted. A couple pages later I decided I was wasting my time reading things I already knew such as quitting smoking makes you feel better...dog fleas can jump really high...bullies like hurting people...sword swallowing causes throat problems (you've got to wonder what warranted this study)....employees hate meetings...busty female wait staff get bigger tips.
I did however, learn some things I did not know, nor ever consider pondering or pursuing information about them. Here's the first: A cow that has a name will produce more milk.
Their milk producing statistics: on average, a cow produces 2,000 gallons (7,500 liters) of milk over a period of 10 months. I don't know how many cows were involved in this study but the ones with names produced 70 gallons (260 liters) more than the nameless Jane Does. (Or would that be Jane Moos?) It's not unusual for dairy farmers to believe that giving their cattle some “one-to-one attention” increases milk production, but this research was the first that tried to prove it scientifically. I wonder if the Borden Dairy Company suspected that when they named Elsie.
Mice With Mismatched Heart Transplants Live Longer When Exposed To Classical Music
And how was this data obtained? It came as no surprise to read that humans weren't the guinea pigs used for this study. Nope. Much smaller rodents were used. Mice. And not just any mice. Uchiyama’s research involved mice with mismatched heart transplants.
!! Who would even think to A) have a mouse undergo a heart transplant much less B)transplant the wrong one. As if these poor little guys aren't subjected to enough scientific abuse, they can't even keep their own eensy mousey hearts!
Anyway, about the music. The mice were divided into four groups. One group listened to Verdi’s opera La Traviata. Another listened to Mozart (don't know what composition). The remaining two groups got to bask in Enya's music and a range of single monotones, respectively.
Being a musician I was curious about the results yet also a little horrified and a lot ashamed of the scientists who put these animals through this. Here are the results:
The group that listened to Verdi’s opera survived for 26 days.
The Mozart group lasted for 20 days.
The groups of mice exposed to Enya and the single monotones survived 11 and 7 days, respectively.
No scientific experiment is complete without a Control Group, right? Guess what Uchiyama's Control Group was? Deaf mice. (this information conjured so many bizarre mental images based on the numerous hearing tests I've had since childhood: a one-way windowed miniature soundproof booth with miniature fur-lined headphones for the mice. The tester facing the mouse speaking into a microphone asking, "Is the first squeak louder or is the second squeak louder?") I mean really. Deaf mice? Oh, and not just deaf, but these guys had mismatched heart transplants like the four hearing mice groups, however, the deaf mice with mismatched heart transplants were all treated to Verdi’s opera, nothing else. These helpless critters lived only seven days. 19 days less than the ones who could actually hear the music. Maybe they sensed that they were missing out and strained their itty bitty brains trying to hear it?
Uchiyama’s assumption from all this testing? That actually hearing the music—and not other factors like vibrations—lengthened the survival rate of mice. Nothing was said about the actual cause of their demise; no connecting them with the original claim, that music benefited the heart.
If you know how this dubious information can be translated to humans, please share.
These scientists attempted to create diamonds from acetone, methanol, and ethanol. The ethanol when diluted in water formed high-quality diamond films. This led to the notion that if ethanol in water could do that, why not tequila? It happens to have similar proportions of 60 percent water and 40 percent ethanol, which apparently is the ideal compound for creating synthetic diamonds.
Further testing was required. The now soused scientists recreated their experiment with a cheap bottle of white tequila. At first they were worried that the other components of the alcoholic drink would obstruct or contaminate the process. But they didn’t. Just like the experiment with ethanol and water, the tequila produced spherical-shaped diamonds, albeit tiny ones. About the size of the granules of salt or sugar rimming a margarita glass. What they did with that knowledge I have not a clue but I could offer some suggestions, like meet up the other scientists I've written about and compare notes. I can envision it, can't you? Tequila imbibing scientists mixing it up with milk/spiked egg nog drinking scientists while keeping time to the rodent experiment scientist's opera music. Dancing mice would likely make an appearance.