Very funny!--- it made me feel sweaty and sick--like I used to feel on Exams in college --remember that first readthrough when you thought- Oh SH*T! I don't know ANY of this!
Regarding Tests---
Got an e-mail from CW, and at the risk of embarrassing him (so what's new) this tickled me. He had a high B on a psych test and wanted an A- so he e-mailed his prof asking him to re-evaluate two he'd missed.
The first question is in regards to #40. I was disappointed to notice
that the answer was A (I'd put that at first) Cited as the source for this question is p430 in the book, "When [the lateral hypothalamus] is
destroyed, the animal stops eating. ...under normal conditions, body conditions that stimulate the lateral hypothalamus cause the animal to eat." My logic, then, for answering D, is this: Were the L.H. involved in metabolic rate, it would seem safe to aver that the destruction of the L.H. as in the problem would result in metabolic dysfunction and possible loss of weight as a result. However, because I associate the L.H. with _hunger_, answer D seems more accurate: the patient will not lose weight as a result of the accident, but merely will stop being hungry. Coincidentally this may cause a loss of weight, but this is because the patient does not know when to eat; it is the complete lack of interest in food (D) that results from the accident.
>
E-mail back from prof....
>You and others will get credit for #40.
I think he is missing his calling as a lawyer. |
