Author Archives: Robin Wang

Thoughts on the Rose Scholar’s Program

Posted on by

As a returning Rose Scholar this year, I have enjoyed the program very much. I sincerely appreciate the opportunity being a Rose Scholar has given me to expand my intellectual horizons and get to know guests/students in smaller, discussion-promoting settings who I otherwise would never have known. I also admire the great diversity of visitors we have hosted at our Rose Cafes, many being professors/scholars hailing from universities of different countries with educational/cultural systems quite different from our own, and it is very eye-opening to learn about their unique journey in academia. Moreover, blogging about the events has helped me better reflect on my experience and consolidate my questions/reaction that I did not have the adequate time to do so during the event. I think the Rose Scholars program has taken a considerable step towards creating a sense of membership within the Rose House, one of the primary goals of the program, but more importantly, cultivated a sense of community and engagement within the residential system.

My biggest suggestion for improvement, especially pertaining to the goal of creating a sense of house membership, is to incorporate social opportunities with the primary goal of encouraging Rose residents to get to know each other better in informal settings. Although I agree that the Rose Cafes and Table Talks/discussions have been very beneficial intellectually, I find that students are not able to connect with each other very much during these events. Becoming familiar with each other/recognizing friendly faces as a member of Rose House is a precondition to creating a sense of belonging within a house. Another suggestion relating to events would be to conduct a pre-semester survey of Rose residents on their interests and what they seek to get out of the program. This feedback could be incorporated when organizing events, for example, when choosing discussion topics for Monday’s dinners or Friday’s films. This would be a relatively easy way to both bolster event attendance and give residents a larger voice in the creation of their own academic/social environment.

Brazil: Growth vs. Increasing Inequality

Posted on by

At Rose Cafe last Wednesday, Professor Simoes, an Agricultural Economist at the Mato Grosso do Sul State University interested in farm management and economic issues that affect Brazil, came to lead a discussion about his work. Although Professor Simoes did not end up discussing his research and academic pursuits very much, we still had a very enjoyable and informal discussion about Brazilian culture and society. To start, Professor Simoes pulled up Google Maps to remind us that Brazil’s geography is not just one big rainforest/tropical, as movies and popular conception would encourage you to believe, but consists of several geographically-distinct regions. Professor Simone’s also spoke in depth about his upbringing in Brazil and the education system. It is interesting to note how Brazil’s education system differs from ours, for example, state universities are considered most prestigious because they attract the top faculty, whereas here generally private universities tend to attract top faculty.

Another fact is that Brazilian society suffers from high income inequality. Long ago, I learned that the Gini index is a widely used measure to evaluate the degree of income inequality in a country, with 0 meaning perfect equality and 100 perfect inequality- the United States has a Gini index of around 45, representative of fairly high income inequality. After the talk, I was surprised to look up and find that Brazil is ranked 19 based on the Gini index in the World Facebook. I immediately thought about the negative press surrounding the Rio Olympics, how the city’s poor were forcibly displaced to make room for new Olympic venues, and the staggering inequality hiding beneath the billions spent for the show. As an emerging county, Brazil faces the challenge of countering corruption and balancing sustainable growth against increasing income inequality.

As a Rose Scholar, I always look forward to hearing the unique experiences and stories of our Rose Cafe visitors, hailing from countries all across the world. I feel lucky to share in this conversation, it is a humbling reminder of the great diversity of experiences we hold as an institution and as a much smaller residential community.

What Inspires You?

Posted on by

Last Wednesday at Rose Cafe, Sam Beck came to introduce the Urban Semester Program with Engaged Cornell. Professor Beck is Social and Cultural Anthropologist with extensive field research experience in countries such as Iran, Austria, and Romania. The students in attendance probably expected Professor Beck to lead an overview of the Urban Semester Program and talk about his own experiences in experimental leaning; however, Professor Beck was more interested in learning about us, turning the conversation over to the students as we went around the room introducing ourselves and our major/future aspirations. It was especially nice to learn about the aspirations of the students of Rose House, it makes me realize again how diverse our interests are and the unique perspectives each person brings.

I thought I would take this opportunity to share where my interests have led me during my time here at Cornell. I am currently a junior in the College of Arts and Sciences majoring in economics, and I hope to go to medical school upon graduation. I am pursing medicine because it is a field dedicated to serving others and human compassion: it is amazing to think that at the end of the day, you could be somebody else’s hero. To me, there is no other field as diverse and dynamic as the field of medicine in the individual lives it touches and in its inexorable march towards progress through curiosity and research. As I am pursing medicine with a strong economics background, I am intrigued by the insights and tools economics offers to investigate questions relating to health, especially in the design of policy that affects health outcomes and the way our healthcare system runs. I hope to integrate my passions in both medicine and economics as a physician contributing to health economics scholarship.

(Ecologically) Good Fats Versus (Ecologically) Bad Fats

Posted on by

Wednesday night at Rose Cafe, Professor Robins lead a discussion about fats. I half-expected a nutrition talk on good fats versus bad fats, but was pleasantly surprised that our discussion centered on something completely different, that is, the history of fats and the ecological implications of their use. What stood out to me was how various types of fats gained and lost popularity over time as a function of evolving popular opinion surrounding nutrition standards, largely driven by company politics and profit. For example, saturated fats were invalidated in the past as companies switched to using trans fats, and now the standard is that trans fats are “bad” and, coconut oil, a saturated fat, is even touted as a “health” food. Palm oil, due to its versatility, is making a comeback as well.

When a student asked Professor Robbins which fats were “good” and “bad”, he was hesitant to apply this label on any one fat, as opposed to what the media would like to ingrain in your mind, “saturated, unsaturated, trans, monounsaturated, omega-3s..” To Professor Robbins, there are only ecologically good fats and ecologically bad fats. Plant-based fats are probably a more sustainable replacement for animal-based fats, yet large-scale production requires large amounts of land, therefore contributing to deforestation. However, some plant-based fats are much more efficient to produce: palm tree oil yields much more oil per acre, meaning a lower cost of labor and land, compared to coconut oil.

When I think about fats, the production and global supply chain that brought the fat to be in my food, and the implications of their use on the environment is not the first thing to come to mind. Although my consumption habits will probably not change by much, I do appreciate how now I am more conscious about the role fats I consume on a daily basis play in the global market.

Should Vaccines Be Mandated for Schoolchildren?

Posted on by

The topic of discussion at Table Talk this week was vaccines. In light of the controversy surrounding vaccines and school mandates, I thought this would be an particularly interesting discussion. Although the 1998 paper blaming thimerosal preservatives used in vaccines for causing autism had long been disproved in many subsequent studies, the anti-vaccine camp has grown increasingly vocal since. Understandably, people do not like being told that they must vaccinate their child. Moreover, vaccines are not 100% effective and have a non-zero probability for serious side effects. But the vaccine mandates debate pertains not only to an individual’s health: it concerns the health of everybody who interacts with that individual as well. With 100% vaccination, everybody can benefit from herd immunity. Perhaps it is a right to refuse vaccination, but is it also a right to put other’s health at risk in the name of freedom?

Our discussion then transitioned to the pharmaceutical industry. Patients usually find that vaccines are not very expensive because most insurance plans  cover them: a wise decision as the cost of disease/loss of life can far exceed drug costs. But why do vaccines/drugs have such high wholesale prices? As an economics major who took Pharmaceutical Management and Policy, I was familiar with this question. Vaccines are goods that have very high fixed costs (in research/development), but the marginal cost of production may be very low. If companies were required to only charge for the cost of production, then they would not be able to recoup the enormous R&D costs and lose profit. There would then be no incentives for vaccine innovation and no new vaccines on the market. Patents give drug firms an opportunity to recover these enormous costs and make a profit. The challenge we face in policy is to find a balance between controlling drug prices/saving money now and future innovation.

Superbugs?

Posted on by

Yesterday I participated in Table Talk: Germs, Superbugs, and Antibiotic Resistance. I had previously known about the debate surrounding antibiotic overprescription and the discovery of superbugs, and I was excited to learn more about the current state of debate. An interesting question Cynthia posed was how prevalent are deaths from superbugs, really? I rarely hear of superbug deaths in the news, so I estimated that it is not very common, and that would be correct. But given that it is not very prevalent, why are we worrying about it now and pressuring doctors to prescribe less antibiotics?

I was not aware before that the prevalence of superbugs has been growing at a high pace in recent years. In fact, just this week, the WHO issued a list of the top 12 most dangerous bacterial threats to humans, resistant to antibiotics. Although superbugs have not posed a huge threat in the past, if we continue with daily life hand sanitizer/antibiotic use without thought, we will be creating the potential for stronger and stronger superbugs. But we should be able to design new antibiotics to treat these superbugs right? Another interesting point is that the development of new antibiotics has slowed, partly because developing antibiotics is not as profitable for drug companies as committing to a potential blockbuster drug used in chronic diseases. There is simply not enough profit potential of an antibiotic intended for a few weeks use to justify the enormous R&D costs. Given this precarious situation, as a society, it is important to stay vigilant and take action now to combat the growing threat of antibiotic resistance. We can take steps in the present to eliminate potential future catastrophe.

What Matters: Two Notes

Posted on by

When Dr. Hill asked us to blog about something that “matters to you”, my first reaction was to find another event because it would be too difficult a blog to write- I wouldn’t know where to even start or how to answer. Although I do not think I will ever be able to produce an answer satisfactory to myself, the following are two aspects which have been especially relevant to my current journey.

One is the importance of appreciating those things that make life great, but easy to take for granted. Academics, clubs, research, etc- of course they all matter very much to me. And with a full schedule, sometimes it can feel like I am constantly working towards my next goal, and it becomes easy to lose touch with those things that are best. Because in the end what is most important to me are the relationships that stay with you for life: through joy and struggle, my family and friends are there for me and I am here for them. If I didn’t have anything, I would have the relationships I have built and the people I love.

Another aspect is the importance of mindset. I read a piece by David Foster Wallace called “This is Water” a while ago, and the lessons echoed in the piece are relevant to many aspects of college life and beyond. The main message is quite simple but the implications are profound: we ultimately shape the world we live in through the way we think; by being more aware of how we view the world, we can gain more from life. Our “default setting” is our own brain-dead megaphone, yet “better” thinkers are those who have one fundamental characteristic: empathy. This piece has been a great lesson to keep in mind, it inspires me to always be optimistic and open-minded. Because we create the ocean we swim in, it is enhanceable with new modes of thinking and openness to variety of perspectives. Another take: as one can choose to to be bitter or defeated come inevitable setback and disappointment, alternatively, one can consciously choose a growth mindset and take setbacks as an opportunity  for improvement in the future.

Political Labels and Conversation

Posted on by

Last Wednesday at Rose Cafe, Professor Peter Enns led an engaging discussion on the current state of politics. Overall, I found the Cafe very engaging, and learned a lot from the perspectives of my peers who are very knowledgeable about history of politics in America. One topic that stood out to me in particular was our discussion of partisanship, especially in light of the recent events. Professor Ems asked an interesting question: Think about your stance on controversial issues. How many of your beliefs are in line with your party’s beliefs, and ask yourself if you would have come to the same conclusion independently apart from your label as a “Democrat” or “Republican.” This has made me realize that sometimes it is difficult for me to differentiate between my personal views and the views of the party I associate with, and if I believe in certain policies just because of the “liberal/Democrat” or “conservative/Republican” label.

A big problem today is that politics has become more and more like rooting for a sports team, where constructive conversations has given way to the “my group” versus “your group” mentality combined with blind support. This makes dialogue more difficult and brings progress to a standstill. It is also very telling to think that the extreme polarization and Congress’s lack of efficiency we have accustomed to/expecting of now was not characteristics of the political landscape just a couple decade ago. Even traditionally non-partisan issues are now being voted in partisan lines and you can predict views on complicated issues such as education, spending, and abortion just based on partisanship when you could not do this in the past. Many times, politicians are pressured to say things/believe in things because of party loyalty, sacrificing what they truly believe in as a person, and this is an unfortunate consequence of how polarized our political landscape as become.

The recent events have no doubt caused disagreement and tension among both parties. But it is important to remember that the goal of conversation should not be to attack and question opinions, but to plant ideas and find common ground. Regardless of political beliefs, it is important to have conversations inclusive of all viewpoints as our country becomes increasingly partisan. Yet this type of conductive dialogue is easier said than done, but recognition and having an open mind is a step towards progress.

Women and Cornell’s Rich History

Posted on by

Last Wednesday at Rose Cafe, Eileen Keating, University Records Manager, spoke to us about Cornell’s history: in particular, the origins of the College of Human Ecology from Eleanor Roosevelt’s campaign for home economics education for women, resulting in Cornell as an emerging leader of the movement and in the construction MVR hall as we know today.

Despite being in my third year at Cornell, I admittedly do not know too much about Cornell’s history, or how certain colleges came into being. It was fascinating to hear stories about correspondences between Martha Van Rensselaer, Flora Rose, and Eleanor Roosevelt, women who played prominent roles in increasing the empowerment of women through education in home economics. Their activism and passion would change the lives and opportunities available to women across America. It is mind boggling to think that not too many years ago, the social order was completely different, of the little opportunities available to women and the rarity of education.

In addition, it was nice to put put a face to the names spoken by West Campus residents everyday as Keating passed around pictures of Martha Van Rensselaer and Flora Rose together at Cornell, the benefactors/names of our residential buildings. I was also not fully aware of our rare manuscripts library, housing treasured artifacts from all across the nation. As Cornell students, we ought to learn more about the rich history of our school, stemming from a visionary leader during a period of social change and reform for women. Keating’s talk has inspired me to further explore the collection this semester.