Author Archives: Sgt. Steve

Food Branding is Scary and also Awesome!

Posted on by
2

At the final Becker/Rose Cafe series, I met three members of the Cornell Food & Brand Lab, a research division of the University that studies eating patterns and how to subtly shift those patterns towards making healthier choices. I remember from last year’s events that there was a talk about branding patterns in yogurt marketing, and I expected this talk to be pretty similar, but I actually liked this one much more.

The researchers told us about experiments they conduct in order to see how people choose to eat what they do, specifically at buffets and such, and found that when buffets (not unlike those at house dinner) are organized such that the healthier items come first, patrons are more likely to fill their plate up with healthier foods before getting to the high calorie main courses. And when people are given the choice between two different vegetables, they’re more likely to eat their choice rather than eat the vegetables on their own.

Personally, I don’t entirely feel the effect of the branding techniques. I consider myself very aware of what I put on my plate, and very aware of my eating patterns. Not in a bad way, but I make an effort to represent all food groups at every meal, cut down on carbs as much as I can, have a salad every day, etc. So I don’t know how the experiments done in the branding lab would work on me. But, I do see people in the dining hall every day, grabbing pizza, pasta, breadsticks and a cookie, all on the same plate and that’s dinner, which I find ridiculous. Some people coast through the dining hall and pick up only what they want, which of course would be the unhealthier, taste-goodier options. To some extent I think the kinds of psychological trickery these guys are researching could benefit these kinds of people, making their unconscious decisions for them. I don’t want to sound like a jerk, but I also don’t think anyone is mean enough to criticize another person’s bad eating habits directly, so if we can change people without them knowing it, that’s the best plan yet.

Poisonous Plants and Where To Find Them

Posted on by
1

Last week, I went downstairs to check out the new artwork now adorning the Rose Dining hall. The paintings are interpretations by students in AAP of poisonous plants. I don’t know much about botany, or fine art, so it was a good experience to stretch my interests a little.

Both the art professor and the botany professor who aided with the project were at the showcase, and as I was looking around at the abstract paintings I asked them a few questions about how the plants were chosen and how the art was made. I learned a bit more about how the paintings were either computer generated and laser printed onto the paper, or done with etchings of different materials. I never really considered creating paintings or anything on a computer, as artwork has always been a physical thing for me, and I only ever use my Adobe products to make designs, videos or manipulate images. But the process sounded cool, if tiring.

One painting caught my eye, which was a black and white painting streaked vertically by what looked like birch trees. In a faint gray, I could see some molecule drawn in the background, what I assume would be the active toxin of that particular plant. And drawn at the very top is an image of a floating woman, as if possessed. But as I asked the professors, I don’t think anyone knew what plant it was exactly. I want to say it had to have been the birch tree, which is slightly poisonous in the sense that it might cause a rash, but that doesn’t seem nearly as grave as the painting would make it out to be. The drama and weight I felt viewing the artwork made it seem like it should have the toxicity of a nightcap mushroom, or something causing death or hallucination. I suppose it’s all up to interpretation.

Feed Me

Posted on by
Reply

Last week, I went to the Becker/Rose Cafe series with Chef Daniel and Paul Muscente, two of the big characters in Cornell Dining. I recall going to the same talk last year, which was just with Paul, and I remember not liking it very much. In my opinion, Paul treated the students more like “customers” last year, but this year I was pleased that he had a more personable presentation. I think Chef Daniel’s intermittent comments made the whole presentation more palatable.

Yep, there’s a pun.

What I appreciate about Cornell Dining is that they take their job to heart and make an honest effort to be a great dining program. I’ve had food at several other colleges while I was visiting friends, and I have to say that we beat them by a mile, which was unfortunate for me to recognize because it only made the meals there worse. It’s great that we can get chefs like Daniel Czebiniak who trained at the Ritz Carlton, people who actually know good food.

That being said, I’m still wondering what’s the point of limiting how much of a certain item we can take. I’m not talking about the cookies or fruits that we take out of the dining hall, I’m talking about the hot entrees that one of the dining staff has to physically put on your plate. I know they don’t want everyone to take heaping platefuls of turkey or pork loin, but honestly the serving sizes of what they give us are too small, at least in my opinion. And it should be said that I don’t eat that much usually. Still, it seems like I just end up hating the guts of the smug individual who puts a single chicken wing on my plate. I was going to ask Paul what the rationale behind this is, but I never got the chance.

Oh well, I should probably appreciate that I even can go to a dining hall in the moment before I go off into the real world and subsist off leftover pad thai four nights a week in a small apartment.

All of these things will be dead

Posted on by
Reply

I just finished an oceanography exam, so I figured this would be a fitting time to post about the Blaschka glass talk from last week. Being in that course, I already had a pretty good idea what Drew Harvell was going to talk about with respect to coral reefs and biodiversity, and I think I had heard about the Blaschka glass structures as well. It’s an amazing research area, and I’ve gained a great appreciation for marine biology from Professor Monger’s course, but I take some issue with the way Dr. Harvell presented her talk.

As I expressed when I asked her about why it was our duty to save such species like starfish dying of viruses and endangered species, I question whether or not it’s our place to interfere with the course of nature. When she talked about the massive starfish death off the coast of California, it sounded like her motivation was to fix things, when really a viral epidemic is a completely natural occurrence and we have nothing to do with it. Furthermore, I found her motivation to conserve marine biodiversity, underscored by the beautiful glass structures, amounting to nothing more than “these animals look pretty, so we think they should be protected.”

I was playing devil’s advocate. Of course, I knew better.

The massive starfish deaths off the coast, I have come to learn, are thought to be caused by the weakening of the starfish immune system by unusually warm waters on the West Coast. What’s causing the warm waters? Global climate change. What’s causing global climate change? Humans. It’s indirectly an artificial change to the ocean. And the endangerment of species? Caused by ocean acidification, and, again, global warming, all caused by humans. So this isn’t nature taking its course. This is human arrogance at its finest.

That said, I take issue with how Drew Harvell presented her talk, and I think she would do well to change its tone to a more self-conscious message, that humans are the cause of lost biodiversity, and it’s our responsibility to fix it.

International Criminal Law School?

Posted on by
1

Last week, I was able to attend the Becker/Rose Cafe with the Associate Dean of Cornell Law School, who spoke about criminal law and how cases can be handled between countries after injustices across borders occur. Most of the talk revolved around the recent American bombing of a hospital in Afghanistan, and how it would be handled by considering the different aspects of the attack, and whether or not it can be considered a “war crime.”

The talk was very exciting for me, because I come from a family of lawyers, but my parents and uncles mostly do litigation and property damage cases. This was perhaps the more exciting arm of the law that I had seen on television, more reminiscent of the Law & Order episodes I had watched in middle school. The thought process that goes into this case is astounding, and I see Professor Ohlins has carefully thought about many different aspects of this case in particular, from how the trial can go to the International Criminal Court to whether it can even be considered a war crime instead of “collateral damage.”

This makes me almost (almost) want to try my hand at law. Not because I want to go before a judge and talk loudly in a a courtroom in front of a jury of my peers, but because it seems like a problem that requires a lot of thought, a challenge that needs to be met, a question that needs to be answered. This is where the analytical essays we wrote in high school come in handy, learning how to craft and argument and effectively convey your own viewpoint. A lot of people say that the things we learn in school, like essay writing and math, are never used in the real world, but I see examples of it every day (granted I’m still in school, but I read the paper). I’ve always wanted to be in an environment where the stuff I learned throughout my life isn’t going to waste, just sitting in a file cabinet in my brain gathering dust, and hopefully I can find that kind of balance once I graduate. Not necessarily doing international criminal law, but something that can validate everything I’ve experienced and learned, the sum total of my life thus far, while still providing new and exciting challenges to look forward to.

We’re on Native American Land, Everybody

Posted on by
Reply

Last week, I went to the Becker/Rose Cafe series to hear a talk by Eric Cheyfitz on American Indians and how the influx of European immigrants and the general flow of American history had abused them and their culture. I remember everything he said basically from APUSH in high school. Reservations, the Trail of Tears, various statistics about how many Native Americans are in the U.S., etc. All fine and good, I think his talk was interesting.

But I’m still not sure what the overarching point to the talk was actually about. One thing he kept coming back to and harping on was how abused the Native Americans had been by American leaders and historical figureheads. And by “harping on,” I mean mentioning it practically every other minute while he was talking.

I know this is an important issue today, and that preserving the Native American ethnicity is imperative, but I still can’t reconcile what Cheyfitz wanted us to do with that information. Did he just want us to recognize that we owe something to the people living here before? Probably, as that’s what the hundreds of years of historical injustice implies. Or does he want us to take action to help the Native American cause to keep their culture alive? I still don’t know how to help, or if there’s even a way to help, or if I should help at all, and what I should be helping with.

Do Something Fun

Posted on by
Reply

As a returning Rose Scholar, I remember Dan Schwartz’s talk from last year, in the cramped space of Garrick’s apartment. I remember he said basically the same thing, along the lines of get involved in the community, work on your career, don’t waste your time here, same old same old. But after rereading my blog post from last year, I realize that the good professor had changed a little bit of his lecture to include a new piece of advice: do something fun every day.

Sounds obvious, right? But I find that in the stress-induced environment that Cornell produces, it becomes harder and harder to make time to do something fun. Take right now, as I’m writing this blog post. I’m in the middle of my Operating Systems problem set, after grading assignments for the course I TA for ten hours before that, after writing code for my project team for three hours before that, after working on web development jobs for clients I have from the summer, after organizational meetings and doing work for a different club. And looking forward, I have a Machine Learning problem set and a math problem set due this week, as well as a prelim on Monday. So fun can wait, right?

The problem is that doing all of that stuff in a row is tiring and if you’re not careful and don’t let your brain relax, you’ll get stretched too thin. This happened to me towards the end of last semester. But Schwartz’s simple advice actually makes things a lot better. Watching a little television or taking some time to get dinner with friends (as opposed to stress eating through a coding session in the dining hall) really helps to unwind and put your academic woes on hold.

I also want to point out that, if you actually love what you’re doing, work can be fun as well. Though it seems like all my problem sets are tedious and annoying, I actually enjoy them. And I wouldn’t be part of the clubs I’m in if I didn’t think they were incredibly rewarding and entertaining. So doing things that you love doing also counts as a source of fun. Just when all of those things have hard deadlines within the week do I stop enjoying them and freak out. That’s where juggling, watching a movie or just talking to someone comes in handy, and it really works.