Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
This week we issue a correction, joining other science publications issuing the same correction. That's kind of an obvious answer to the question of "Is science always right?" So in this episode we explore that question, as well as what happens when science isn't right. And why that's NOT a bad thing.
#068
This week we issue a correction, joining other science publications issuing the same correction. That's kind of an obvious answer to the question of "Is science always right?" So in this episode we explore that question, as well as what happens when science isn't right. And why that's NOT a bad thing.
NEW MERCH AVAILABLE NOW <- only until November 30!
How to start a podcast. <- Check this out if you've got a podcast idea you want to make happen!
References from this episode
Find us on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook @ChemForYourLife.
Email us at chemforyourlife@gmail.com
And check out our chill, simple little website at https://chemforyourlife.transistor.fm/
And seriously, we love using Transistor. Check it out to be sure your podcast makes a bang.
A podcast that helps you understand the fascinating chemistry hidden in your everyday life.
Have you ever wondered why onions make you cry? Or how soap gets your hands clean? What really is margarine, or why do trees change colors in the fall? Melissa is a chemist, and to answer these questions she started a podcast, called Chemistry for your life!
In each episode Melissa explains the chemistry behind one of life’s mysteries to Jam, who is definitely not a chemist, but she explains it in a way that is easy to understand, and totally fascinating.
If you’re someone who loves learning new things, or who wonders about the way the world works, then give us a listen.
Hey. I'm Melissa.
Jam:I'm Jam.
Melissa:And I'm a chemist.
Jam:And I'm not.
Melissa:And welcome to chemistry for your life.
Jam:The podcast helps you understand the chemistry of your everyday life.
Melissa:So, normally, I'd ask you how you're doing today, but we just finished a 2 hour meeting where we discussed a ton of podcast details.
Jam:Yeah. Absolutely. It was overdue, though.
Melissa:It was overdue. We had been running by the seat of our pants for a while. Yeah. But that included this stuff for our holiday merch, so that is really Exciting. Mhmm.
Melissa:And we're gonna have some new designs, so get ready for that merch campaign. As soon as it goes live, go check it out. I think You guys will not be disappointed.
Jam:Yeah. Just keep an eye on our, you know, social media, Instagram. Just like that. And there's some cool merch brewing that we hope you guys will love.
Melissa:I already do love it. I'm very excited. So this episode is gonna be a little bit of a weird episode. You know? Sometimes I like to mix it up.
Jam:Yes. I do know that about you.
Melissa:So this is inspired by a few things.
Jam:Okay.
Melissa:The first of which was Doctor Moon wrote in, and she talked about the chemistry of Eugenol and Mhmm. Isoeugenol. They're very close molecules, and one smells like Clove and one smells like nutmeg.
Jam:Mhmm.
Melissa:And when she wrote in about that, we read it on the q and r episode. Oh, yeah. Mentioned That also we see that this happens with lemonade. 1 is a left handed molecule, one's a right handed molecule, and it smells like oranges and lemons. Mhmm.
Melissa:I've talked about this on the podcast a few times before.
Jam:Mhmm.
Melissa:Unrelated, I was looking on the American Chemical Society website, and I Found out that that's wrong.
Jam:The left hand, right hand for lemon and lime Or whatever.
Melissa:Specifically, what I said about limonene is not true. Woah. I know. I know. So the American Chemical Society was posting a video correction.
Melissa:They have a reactions page where they talk Similar to this, they talk about topics, how they relate to everyday life. Their approach is really different.
Jam:Mhmm.
Melissa:Short tidbits, and They're a good resource, and I have linked to them before because the American Chemical Society is a reputable source.
Jam:Mhmm. Mhmm.
Melissa:They are a peer reviewed journal. I trust them to do their homework. They're they are something that I use regularly. Yeah. So I saw this video correction to a post they had made about lemonade Uh-huh.
Melissa:And they said, that's false. So they made that correction, and now I'm gonna make a correction.
Jam:Okay. Interesting.
Melissa:So this is a pretty easy mistake to make. There are left handed and right handed molecules Mhmm. That smell different. That does happen. Mhmm.
Melissa:However, in this case, That is not true. K. So they don't I don't think the left hand and right handed molecule of lemonade smell exactly the same.
Jam:Uh-huh.
Melissa:But in lemons and oranges, they are present in the primarily in one form, either the left or the right hand. We'll just say left hand.
Jam:Mhmm.
Melissa:And that's the majority, maybe around 97%. Uh-huh. And then about 3% is the other hand.
Jam:K.
Melissa:And it's present in that roughly the same proportion in both lemons and oranges.
Jam:Okay. Got it.
Melissa:So the proportion of the left and right handed molecules in both of those is the same.
Jam:Mhmm. Mhmm.
Melissa:But it's such a persistent myth because all the way back in 1971, in the journal Science, which is a really high quality journal Mhmm. They Published a story about this, some food scientists did.
Jam:Okay.
Melissa:And it it's, like I said, a really easy mistake to make because there is often Different hidden molecules have slightly different properties.
Jam:Mhmm.
Melissa:They can smell different. They can interact with our body differently. We talked about that in the artificial our episode. Mhmm. So because of all of that, it's a very understandable mistake to make.
Melissa:And further, smell is very subjective. You know? It's hard to do smell science.
Jam:Right.
Melissa:But, ultimately, what they talked about in the reactions video on the American Chemical Society website, and we're gonna link to that in our references. We always link to those videos in our references if we use them. Really, there are probably hundreds of compounds, organic molecules that make up the smell that we associate with both lemons and oranges, but lemonade solely is not responsible for it.
Jam:So I
Melissa:think this is really important because it shows something that's key to the scientific mindset. Mhmm. And this is why I decided to make a whole whole episode about this instead of just a q and r correction.
Jam:Okay. Okay.
Melissa:Is sometimes there are misconceptions that get spread around in the field of chemistry or any other science. In fact, someone I know teaches an entire class on chemistry misconceptions that have been taught wrong for so long that then the instructors learn it Learn it wrong, and then they teach it wrong.
Jam:Oh, wow. Dang. That's crazy. There's a class on that.
Melissa:Misconceptions. Yeah. It's crazy. I did I didn't get to attend it, but One of my current advisers, her old boss taught that class, which I would love to be in that class. Mhmm.
Melissa:Mhmm. But also sometimes there's just new evidence or new information that we have to assimilate into our worldview.
Jam:Uh-huh.
Melissa:So that's your little mini chemistry lesson. Uh-huh. But then I have some other examples of this and why I think this is so important from science history. So do you wanna maybe Take a shot at at talking back to me about that, and then we'll kinda go into some other examples.
Jam:Yeah. So it it sounds like I mean, I guess there's not really the chemistry piece of that is The handedness of molecules, and the fact that, I guess in some of the research related to how that played into specific things,
Melissa:in this case with Lemon what is it again? It's lemonines. Some people call it limonene.
Jam:Yeah. So lim with lemonine, there was some early You could say, you know, wrong research, maybe some theories that weren't able to be proven. Something someone had a misconception about How that played out in real life in lemons and oranges and how it made a difference in our So able ability to sense, the handedness, whether it was smell or taste or something like that. Basically, just
Melissa:Right.
Jam:They had maybe they had a theory, and it ended not being true. Or some of the research that they did and the findings suggest it's something that ended up Being able to be found not to be that case later on.
Melissa:Right. Mhmm.
Jam:Just the fact that over time, Naturally, we're going to be better at Mhmm. Investigating things or revisiting things that we've, you know, already looked at or found, And we're naturally gonna maybe find that something was not right. In this case, it was wrong, and it got taught a lot and got spread pretty far
Melissa:Yes.
Jam:Without a lot of correction, or maybe even was corrected pretty soon, but it's hard to chase down Information Yes. And a correction like that. Especially in the pre Internet era, you've got books that have it written one way or something that are out there.
Melissa:Yeah. And one thing that I really liked in the video, the American Chemical Society video, the narrator said, this myth that we found Everywhere. Like, it really has spread so pervasively that experts in the field, reputable websites, Checked their sources, and that's what they found. Mhmm. But someone wrote in and said that's not right.
Melissa:And there was I don't know if there's a journal article, but some Scientists who specialize in smell basically tracked down the beginning of the myth. And, again, the sense of smell is tricky. It can be really subjective. It's a very easy mistake to make.
Jam:Right.
Melissa:If you have the those, left and right handed molecules are really difficult to separate from each other. Just very difficult to separate from each other, and some kinds of molecules can interconvert back to the Other one Mhmm. When it's in a solution, it's wild. Mhmm. And so if you had a tiny bit of contamination of 1 with the other, It's possible that the whole sense of smell would have been altered.
Jam:Yeah. Wow.
Melissa:So Yeah. It really was an easy mistake to make, and that's the Importance of replicability in science. That's where we publish our methods and tell people what we did to ensure that they get the same results that we do.
Jam:Got it. Got it. So this is a pretty long standing it took a while before this one really started being corrected. Right? I mean, that's, like, 50 years or so of a lot of people thinking the same thing the wrong way.
Melissa:Yeah. Even me. Yes. Definitely. It it seems like it's been about 50 years, and they may have published the correction, but maybe the correction just didn't get the traction.
Jam:Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Melissa:So and I think this is an example of the scientific system working because these other scientists maybe tried to repeat this or maybe, Who knows? I didn't look into their paper, but maybe they were trying to do something else with these, and then they realized this wasn't the findings they were having. So they went back to the original paper where this first came up, tried to repeat it, couldn't do it, and then they published their findings. You know? Is the scientific system working.
Melissa:Uh-huh. That is why we have journals where we publish. That's why we have our methods. That's why we have the system in place that we do. And another example of this system working is how we came to our current model of the atom.
Melissa:So An early model of the atom is a very commonly known and seen model called the Bohr model.
Jam:Mhmm.
Melissa:There are several people who were building up models of the atom, but The Bohr model of the atom is the idea. It's the one that we've seen Mhmm. Is that there's a nucleus in the middle, And that nucleus is surrounded by electrons that orbit.
Jam:Right.
Melissa:And there was a lot of people who came before him, discovered electrons, did all kinds of stuff. You know? I don't understand how they did that back in the day. That's incredible to me that people were smart enough to figure out how to find that stuff out
Jam:Right.
Melissa:Without the technology that we have. I mean, Mind blown, but that's okay. So this idea, it reminds me kind of of a planet almost. You have the nucleus, and then there's Electrons in bigger and bigger and bigger circles are gonna rotate around it.
Jam:That's what's gonna say.
Melissa:Of the atom.
Jam:They're always running we have in school too, just, like, thinking it was like a moon Or or multiple moons, you know, orbiting a planet.
Melissa:Right. And, actually, Bohr's motto was right, But only for 1 atom, and that's the hydrogen atom.
Jam:Okay. Is that the one he was looking at to, like, make that Model in the 1st place, or was he
Melissa:I think so. Okay. Although I don't I don't have the that Hermitian stored in my brain. Mhmm. So for a hydrogen atom, there's 1 electron that Circle is the nucleus, theoretically circles.
Jam:Mhmm.
Melissa:And it really does hang out in an orbit around the nucleus.
Jam:Okay.
Melissa:But beyond that, when you get more than 1 electron, they start behaving very differently. Mhmm. So there was just a lot of holes and questions about what was going on that they didn't have answers for.
Jam:Mhmm.
Melissa:So then someone else came along after that with, I believe, the Schrodinger equation. Mhmm. And they discovered that really rather than orbits of per perfect circles, there's more of areas of electron density where an electron is likely to be. Mhmm. And they call those orbitals instead of orbits.
Melissa:So there's, Okay. Our first 1 and 2 electrons are probably going to be in a spherical shape somewhere around the middle Around the middle, around the nucleus. Uh-huh. But as you go out, those shapes aren't perfectly circle. They start to get shaped more like dumbbells and Weird, crazy things that almost look like the stuff they make balloon animals out of.
Melissa:You know? You get kinda crazy shapes going on. And so they basically updated the model with the new information. They they had new explanation, new evidence, And then they updated the model, and it made a lot of sense. So, ultimately, even though Bohr was wrong the first time, he wasn't completely wrong.
Melissa:He gave a foundation for more evidence to be looked into, and this corrected model has been really useful. Plus, the Bohr model is still used to teach in chemistry classes today about the model of the atom. So I think if we, as scientists, had decided back then, we, I wasn't a part of it, you know, when Bohr was figuring out as well for the atom
Jam:Yeah.
Melissa:Had said, no. This is the best and right one, and we're not gonna change our minds. That could have done a great disservice to generations of scientists afterwards. But because they Saw the gaps, admitted the shortcomings in their theories, and took steps to learn more and assimilate that into their model, we've come up with the model that we use today.
Jam:Right.
Melissa:I suspect that we'll even learn more about the atom and have to keep assimilating new things into our worldview as we keep going as scientists.
Jam:But, yeah, that makes sense. We it seems like We hear all the time about a really cool new discovery that was made possible by some, you know, new technology that was maybe sort of around, but was too expensive or has just been improved a lot in you know, over the decades. And It makes sense that that would really allow us to to look at something like the atom more closely and learn more. I mean, it's already so mysterious. You know, I think it makes kinda sense that we would learn more over time and that we wouldn't have, like, Had it totally figured out back in whenever that was.
Jam:I don't know.
Melissa:Right?
Jam:4 was a lot. But yeah.
Melissa:Yeah. And so I think that That's something I'm really passionate about as a scientist, that a key mindset for a scientist is the humility to be able to say, My research, I thought it said one thing. I misinterpreted that. With more data or with more information or with more evidence, I've come to conclusion that actually this is what is true. And that humility and ability and willingness to change, I think, is really important to any scientist.
Melissa:Mhmm. And I think when science starts to fail is when researchers get so dug in to their way of thinking that they can't assimilate new information.
Jam:Mhmm. Mhmm.
Melissa:And I think this is also really important to talk about Because this is relevant to what we're seeing happen today in our world with COVID. Mhmm. So I know this can be a really hot button topic issue, but a scientist, I've seen some of these stances change over the past 7 months. Mhmm. And I have taken every one of those and thought, yeah.
Melissa:That makes sense because they are learning new stuff about this novel virus that's never existed before. Yeah. They made the best models and theories and conclusions that they could come up with with the information they had based on other coronaviruses and stuff like that. And they applied it to this new COVID nineteen novel coronavirus. And as they learn more about this specific virus, you saw the CDC and the World Health Organization change some of their approaches.
Melissa:And that is good science, in my opinion. And I think that that's really important, but I worry that some people who maybe don't know The about the process of scientific discovery as much could misinterpret to that to mean that they don't know what they're doing or that they're wrong. Whereas I see that as this is good science. This is honest and trustworthy science that they're willing to change their stance.
Jam:Got it. Yeah. It's been really interesting as a layperson, nonscientist, to be just watching and in listening to new findings throughout the COVID nineteen pandemic because Yeah. A lot of them, we just don't get visibility into that process. I know that it's happening all I'm on journals and stuff where there's a journal release, and maybe somebody, you know, released another one later as a correction, or it just is a slight adjustment or whatever.
Jam:I'm sure that in the science community, it's just it's just so common. But for us Mhmm. As laypeople, it's pretty strange to see something be publicly announced or shared, and then to have, maybe 1 or 2 or 3 weeks later, Something really different publicly shared that is urging the public to do something different. And I think that's just so
Melissa:Right.
Jam:So unusual for us. It's not something that We've had to experience very much before. There's been things like that that really would be more like, hey. New findings suggest that, you know, something something is bad for you. That's we hear that, but that's not quite the same as there's a urgent new thing, and there's new information every week, And we're telling you the things every week.
Jam:And, obviously, there's many things about COVID nineteen that are very unusual Yes. And are very out of the ordinary for us.
Melissa:Right. Like, maybe it's easier to swallow if it comes. 1 year, we hear this, and then another year, there's new information justice, but the COVID situation has been kind of in a pressure cooker. Yeah. And so we're seeing this lots of people are working on this, and it is Sped up really fast, and we're getting new information at a much faster rate than we did about, say, plastics.
Melissa:Mhmm. You know? But it's a it is the same process for sure.
Jam:Yeah. So it's been really interesting, and I and I haven't really experienced that before. I know a lot of us haven't. So it's kinda helpful to hear your perspective on on this and other examples about Now this has happened in chemistry for, you know, long time or even really recently with, you know, lemonade.
Melissa:Right. I I wanted to do this as a whole episode because I think I've started to see that in my own mindset that I'm I think, oh, are you willing to admit that you're wrong? That's the mark of a good researcher. That's kind of my mindset, and I've tried really emphasize that. If I find out that there's something I'm wrong about, I as soon as I find that out, I try to put it on the next q and r episode or wherever I can fit it in, And I try to really emphasize, I'm not an expert in everything that ever happened.
Melissa:Mhmm. I'm an expert in organic chemistry. And even in organic chemistry, I can get things wrong. If I was taught wrong or just because I'm a human, I made a mistake, I'm remembering it wrong. There there are mistakes, but we do have Checks and balances in our system of scientific research and discovery to try to catch those as much as possible.
Melissa:Right. And So I just wanted to take this opportunity to address a wrong thing that I have said on multiple occasions in This series of podcast episodes. But, also, I wanted to use it as a moment to communicate that I think admitting that you're wrong And taking new evidence to give the best information that you have at the time is the best thing we can do as science researchers and communicators. And part of what inspired that was I had a visit from a friend, and her sister is in town. Her sister is also a chemistry major.
Melissa:Got some kiddos in school, and one of their teachers has this philosophy as they're all trying to go to Zoom school together that we're all learning and we're all learners, and learners can make mistakes, and that's okay. But as soon as we find out that we made a mistake, We're gonna work to fix it. And I think as she was talking about that, I thought, yeah, that's so important to science, and we haven't address that explicitly in the show, and I just wanted to take the chance to do that because I think it's important. I think it's relevant to what's going on today, and I think it's always a great chance for me to be able to say I'm wrong. Yeah.
Melissa:Yeah. So Yeah.
Jam:And I think it gives me a lot of confidence to think about this stuff and kinda get a little bit of perspective of you know, inside perspective of What scientists and chemists and stuff are trying to pursue, it it I think the idea of, oh, yeah. They're all trying to pursue the best possible science that can be arrived at at the time. Mhmm. And so if I ever hear somebody correct themselves, really, that should be Maybe good news to me because it means that they're pursuing a goal of the best possible science. And in you know,
Melissa:Where
Jam:they'd rather just have, like, a perfect perfect track record of, like
Melissa:Mhmm.
Jam:Never having been wrong. It's it shows that they're, like actually, Their bigger goal is the collective, you know, progress of science rather than their own report card
Melissa:Right. Which
Jam:is a good thing.
Melissa:Definitely.
Jam:That's kinda cool to to think through a little bit.
Melissa:Yes. I absolutely admire scientists who are willing to, Based on evidence, not just wishy washy would change around, but based on evidence, see that they were incorrect about something and change it. So I was really excited when I found that ACS video. I thought, that's crazy. And I really trust them to have done their research, and I just thought that that was a fun, cool example of science at work, science working well.
Melissa:So Yeah. Good job, American Chemical Society. Way to go. They have awesome resources. I use them a lot.
Melissa:And if you have kiddos at home and you want some experiments to do at home, they have a a lot of great experiments more than we could ever hope to cover on our chemistry at home episode. So definitely check those out if you wanna learn more. It's an awesome website and resource. Alright. Well, that's it.
Melissa:That's all I have for you this week. Just a little bit about how I was wrong and how a bunch of chemists are probably wrong about this, And, but that's okay and even good sometimes to be wrong.
Jam:Nice. Nice. I like it. That was a helpful reminder And pretty pretty relevant, but definitely cool to have an inside look into the scientific mindset.
Melissa:Well, on the theme of being wrong about things, I'm here to admit that I was wrong about the show Survivor. I'm here to admit it.
Jam:Oh, no.
Melissa:I know. You're not gonna approve of this, and that's okay. We can disagree because this is an opinion, not a fact. So
Jam:Yeah. That's true.
Melissa:A long time, I was about art. For a long time, I was really mad about Survivor because I hated to see people hurt each other's feelings and lie and betray to each other because I really hate Lying. Mhmm. I'm really mad about it. Mhmm.
Melissa:But my roommate started watching it, and it just sucks you in. I mean, you're dying to know what happens next, and the challenges are interesting. And it's fun to sit around and speculate about How you do, I would do very poorly. I don't think I'd come off well in first impressions. I would get voted off quickly for people thinking that I think I'm better than them.
Melissa:I already know how I come across. It's fine. But it's really fun. It's it's been fun to watch with my roommates. I really enjoyed it.
Melissa:And the 1st time they got on a survivor kick, I was mad about it and playing the whole time. And this time, I am interested, and I am now maybe considering myself a fan I'm survivor, but not the lying and hurting each other part. I don't like that. That still makes me really sad.
Jam:Yeah.
Melissa:And I like the people who just say what they're gonna do and do it and still somehow win all the way through, and don't lie and cheat and steal and backstab. Yeah. So that's, my correction for my opinions. And I really wanted to give a shout out to your wife, Emily, who, loves survivor and Yep. Laid the groundwork for me to make this transition, so thanks.
Jam:Well, the other half of you'll be glad to know that I Am still right about how I feel about survivor, which is that it is garbage. So
Melissa:well, Well To any of you who are worried about I'm gonna say I'm just 20 years late to the, survivor party, so I hope you guys will welcome me in open arms. And the rest of you who are like, oh, no. Is everything changing? Are are these people, like, crossing over? If you're one of
Jam:the non survivor people, then don't worry. I'm not gonna give in. I'm staying strong.
Melissa:I just wanna say one thing is if any of you listening or planning on going on Survivor, just learn how to make fire before you go on. I don't know why people are still showing up on that show, and they don't know how to make fire. You know that you're gonna need to know how to make fire with or without a flint. Just figure it out before you go on. That's the one skill you really should have.
Melissa:Okay. Just wanted to share that. Okay. So that's my thing for this week that I've been enjoying hanging out and watching that show with my roommate. So what about you, Jim?
Melissa:What do you have for this week?
Jam:Nice. Very nice. Okay. Let's see. I kinda wanna, like, enlist something I was wrong about too to see if I could go on that theme.
Jam:So I'm gonna share something. It's not super recent, but along the theme of what you're talking about, something that you've discovered you're wrong about and you changed your mind about.
Melissa:Yes. That's a good theme for this this week's episode.
Jam:So one thing so Mohsen and I actually have had many discussions about This topic a little bit, specifically about reality TV.
Melissa:Mhmm.
Jam:So I do not like reality TV at all. One of the big reasons for that is that I studied documentary films. Like, it's kinda my one of my main emphases when I was in school. And To me, it's, how do I say this nicely? It is They certainly, documentaries gave birth to reality TV in a way.
Melissa:Yes. Definitely. I could see that.
Jam:Nonfiction Film, which is the broadest category that documents are inside of, nonfiction video content. And I think it's a Mutation in a way that has given rise to the ability of nonfiction to actually be pretty oftentimes deceptive And unrealistic, which is so funny because it's called reality TV. And in when I was in school, I learned about all the, you know, Beginning motivations for documentary film, they're so good. It's like, let's it's very journalistic. You know?
Jam:Very let's tell real stories. Let's show Things that people aren't able to see. Not everybody can be over here in this part of the world and see this thing. So let's let's tell them. Let's show them.
Jam:I think those Really, really good motivations to start it out in the documentary world. So I don't like reality TV at all. And I know I'm very much in a camp that is not the biggest camp.
Melissa:Right.
Jam:With that. However, the change that I have made, not recently, but, you know, a couple of years ago or whatever, is that I really like the show Queer Eye On Netflix.
Melissa:Yes. Because it's so nice.
Jam:Mhmm. It's so nice. And there is a lot of setup involved, so it's not Completely honest in the sense that they they they're very straightforward, though, about the fact that they have, like, selected somebody. They've set certain things up on purpose. They shortened the time frame.
Jam:You know, they didn't accomplish everything in one day. It's like
Melissa:Right. Right.
Jam:Some of that's pretty obvious, but the reason that I changed my mind about it is because the clear goal of what they're trying to do is, I think, very good and positive.
Melissa:Okay. That's a good reason. Yeah.
Jam:And it's noncompetitive. I am not interested in competition, especially ones that I think are pretty frivolous Mhmm. And greed driven. In this case, if anything, the competition is about, like, helping other people.
Melissa:Yeah.
Jam:And and there's not a competition at at really at all. It's really
Melissa:just collaborative. Yeah.
Jam:Collaborative. And You get a lot of story, which is a huge part of documentary, seeing into people's lives and hearing about challenges they've had. And they pick really Interesting people who really could use some help and some some loving and some, you know, A boost of positivity. And I so I really like it. I feel like it just is a net positive for that show to exist.
Jam:I do I don't have that same level of confidence about other those in that genre.
Melissa:Right. Yeah. Well, let me just stir this in there for you just to consider. Uh-oh. The Great British Bakers I knew
Jam:you were gonna say Great British Bakers.
Melissa:Similar, but They are competing for just literally, like, a plate, nothing else. And they are really nice to each other, and they lift each other up. And sometimes they hurt themselves and stop working on their stuff to help other people. You know?
Jam:Uh-huh. Uh-huh.
Melissa:So that one, I think, has a really good it does have competition, but that one is another one that I leave that Show feeling like there's good in the world.
Jam:Yeah. I I think that one's probably not one that I have any reason to launch any arguments against. It just Yeah. Doesn't draw me into it. I think just a big part of not
Melissa:being into baking sense. Really. Yeah. Mhmm.
Jam:And I think people might at least get hooked a little bit by the competition and then stay for the positivity.
Melissa:Maybe so. Yeah.
Jam:And so the idea of, like, Just saying it's really positive. It's not that cutthroat. Okay? It's a baking show. I'm already, like, not interested.
Jam:Not that I think it's bad. Just like Yeah. I don't think I'm gonna get as much out of it as
Melissa:Yeah.
Jam:Somebody else, especially Melissa who does a lot of baking and challenges herself to make New cakes and stuff. So
Melissa:Yeah. I think that was the 1st reality show that I ever really liked because all those other ones are, like, Crazy baking. You gotta make cupcakes out of seaweed or whatever. Mhmm. But that doesn't seem realistic or fun, and they're mean to each other.
Melissa:I don't like watching people be mean to each other. Yeah. It's not fun. So this one where it's got happy classical music and there's scenes of baby sheep and beautiful landscapes. And If somebody is upset, everybody's sad.
Melissa:Whenever anyone goes home, they all cry. Mhmm. They all hug the person who did well. It just feels like a show that Showcases the beauty of human Mhmm. Relationships.
Melissa:I really enjoy it. So
Jam:Yeah. That's not that vibe typically of, like, an American,
Melissa:No.
Jam:Reality show, especially a competition show. It's like yeah. Very cutthroat is much more A common approach to American competition. So
Melissa:Yes. You
Jam:you go British show.
Melissa:Well, thanks, Jam, for enlightening us about your your your expertise. We get to hear about your expertise for a change, which is always fun. And thanks to all of you listeners for coming and listening to us make a correction and for listening to us talk about the scientific method and how Learning about mistakes and correcting them is scientific progress. I really am thankful that we had the opportunity to share about that.
Jam:And thank you for teaching us. That's really relevant and cool to hear and, get the inside scoop on that process and some examples of how that happens. Moe and I have a lot of ideas for topics of chemistry in everyday life, but we wanna hear from you. So if you have questions or ideas, you can reach out to us on Gmail, Twitter, Instagram, or Facebook at chem for your life. As chem, f o r, your life to share your thoughts and ideas.
Jam:If you like to help us keep our show going and contribute to cover the cost of making it, Go to kodashfi.com/chem for your life and donate the cost of a cup of coffee. If you're not able to donate, can still help us by subscribing in your favorite podcast app and rating and writing our review on Apple Podcasts. That also helps us to be able to share chemistry with even more people.
Melissa:This episode of Chemistry For Your Life was created by Melissa Collini and Jame Robinson. References for this episode can be found in our show notes or on our website. Jame Robinson is our producer, and we'd like to give a special thanks to Em Coppell and s Flint who reviewed this