The Student Room Logo
This thread is closed

The Cambridge Chat Thread

Scroll to see replies

Reply 6500
Scipio90
Yeah. While not being on the level of being able to study it at university, I was fairly good at languages, yet still did more work for french AS than I probably did for maths, further maths and physics full A-level combined.


Ditto to this (save with arts subjects, not maths). German took about twice as much effort for me as any other subject, even though I was pretty good at it and enjoyed it a lot.
Reply 6501
Zoedotdot
But Maths, F Maths and Physics are your strengths, Spanish was mine. I always found that I could do the work pretty quickly and didn't find the exams hard.

Oh, this is turning into boasting :frown: I'm just trying to say that in terms of quantity and difficulty of work, English Lit and History were way above Spanish for me.


Yeah, I guess it does depend on your individual strengths. However, even attempting to ignore the bias that it's my kind of thing, I really do think maths is one of the easier A-levels: there are about 5-6 topics per paper, and only about 3 or 4 questions they can ask on those topics, so once you've done all the past papers there's not going to be much in an exam that can surprise you, whereas for a language there's always the possibility a question will be based on an area of vocab you're weak on, or will hinge on a word you've never heard of.
Reply 6502
jcb914
... and it would be great if you could share that at some time. I form my opinions from objective information provided by publicly available research, and agency certified reports and studies. Well its not publically available necessarily. You need access to journals through an institution (such as Cambridge). Its basically a friend of mine who is a massive health geek and reads journal articles as bedtime reading :rolleyes: I've read some of the stuff myself, but alot of it is him summarising the content of the studies he reads. But when he has time he says he'll gather some links together.

And I think our ideas of 'disastrously unhealthy' are quite different. You seem to be thinking of it like I mean poison or something. I'm comparing unhealthy foods and their effects on the body to healthy foods. In terms of the many detrimental effects that sugars, carbs, grains etc have on the body it is disastrous when you compare it to other foods a person could be eating which conversely lead to high improvements in health. Apart from carby foods actually being linked to slowing down metabolism, studies have also found them to be anti-nutritious in the sense that they inhibit the ability of the body to store or utilise vital micronutrients like key vitamins or minerals, and they weaken the body's immune defence (this is all off the top of my head from many of the articles he described to me recently) those are only a few details too - I'm not mentioning alot of the significant diseases which its strongly correlated with. Conversely hyper nutritious foods often bring significant advantages like enabling the uptake of vital substances or the synthesis of vital substances in the body. Its pretty clear that most people are happy to go on eating or living in a certain way even after they've been presented with reliable mainstream evidence that it makes them susceptible to health problems. An example is salt, which people hate to give up even though they know its linked to blood pressure and heart disease along with other things. But you wouldn't say that salt is disastrously unhealthy, despite the fact that I would say that it is. And comparative health studies with groups of people who've cut it out and groups who haven't would show the second group developing all sorts of problems which one generally wants to avoid in life. Disastrous enough for me, certainly!

And on the sweetner and insulin spike thing, again I see it as 'disastrous' in comparison to the impact of other healthier foods on insulin, whereas I'd imagine that regulatory bodies compare the spikes caused by sweetners to some sort of measure of 'how high can this person's blood sugar increase and drop without it risking their life?' As I mentioned before, they approve of diabetics eating starches and complex carbohydrates (not to mention fruit) which are the sorts of food that cause the insulin issues that the research I refer to has linked to loads of major health problems.
In terms of what you said about it being less calories - yes I agree that that is a benefit. In my first reply to you I clearly delineated between ways in which it is not like sugar and therefore is better, but there are also sides in which the body responds to it as it does to sugar, and in those specific senses it will be harmful.
Zoedotdot
Cotto's on East Road is really nice. Three courses for £30 per person, and the food is gorgeous :smile:

And Alimentum's meant to be amazing too, but I've never been.


Alimentum looks really nice, too bad it's in the middle of nowhere...
Reply 6504
Craghyrax
Well its not publically available necessarily. You need access to journals through an institution. Its basically a friend of mine who is a massive health geek and reads journal articles as bedtime reading :rolleyes: I've read some of the stuff myself, but alot of it is him summarising the content of the studies he reads. But when he has time he says he'll gather some links together.

And I think our ideas of 'disastrously unhealthy' are quite different. You seem to be thinking of it like I mean poison or something. I'm comparing unhealthy foods and their effects on the body to healthy foods. In terms of the many detrimental effects that sugars, carbs, grains etc have on the body it is disastrous when you compare it to other foods a person could be eating which conversely lead to high improvements in health. Apart from carby foods actually being linked to slowing down metabolism, studies have also found them to be anti-nutritious in the sense that they inhibit the ability of the body to store or utilise vital micronutrients like key vitamins or minerals, and they weaken the body's immune defence (this is all off the top of my head from many of the articles he described to me recently) those are only a few details too - I'm not mentioning alot of the significant diseases which its strongly correlated with.

And on the sweetner and insulin spike thing, again I see it as 'disastrous' in comparison to the impact of other healthier foods on insulin, whereas I'd imagine that regulatory bodies compare the spikes caused by sweetners to some sort of measure of 'how high can this person's blood sugar increase and drop without it risking their life?' As I mentioned before, they approve of diabetics eating starches and complex carbohydrates (not to mention fruit) which are the sorts of food that cause the insulin issues that the research I refer to has linked to loads of major health problems.
In terms of what you said about it being less calories - yes I agree that that is a benefit. In my first reply to you I clearly delineated between ways in which it is not like sugar and therefore is better, but there are also sides in which the body responds to it as it does to sugar, and in those specific senses it will be harmful.

Fair enough. As I said, I was talking about it as a sugar substitute. I assume that, since you think sucralose is "disastrously unhealthy" you also think that sugar is, too. In which case, we are arguing over nothing since, like I said, I was talking about it only in the sense of it being a substitute for sugar. :smile: Thus, if someone is deliberating over whether to choose sucralose-based product or sugar, choosing the former is NOT "disastrously unhealthy" compared to the latter.
Reply 6505
BigFudamental
Can anyone recommend a decent restaurant in Cambridge that isn't a national chain or Teri-Aki? The kind of thing you might go to if a parent or rich friend were coming to visit...

The Cambridge Chop House is my favourite. After that, both Chez Gerard and Edwinns are superb.
I just lost the ability to listen to another high pitch. That seems like one a night.
Reply 6507
But really this just seems to prove my suspicion about schools being so much different. It sounds like you all had programmes and teachers which really made a meal out of A levels, whereas our college just gave the five hours of teaching and then totally left us to our own devices, which really did result in very little time at school. I had one full day free most of the time and another half day, and we could work out exactly how much time we wanted to put in towards our subjects, with no expectation from the teachers.
Biology and Chemistry had homework and lab write ups. The Chemistry was a nightmare. I was so bad at it, it chewed up all of my time. But the Biology was all really straightforward. Occasionally I'd read a bit extra in a huge text book my parents had bought back when I did it in SA (just because I found that they gave really overly simplifed and basic descriptions in the lectures which made mechanisms harder to understand than reading about it properly) but most of it was fairly simple.

And for English they didn't really ask for any homework! We were encouraged to begin working on the one bit of coursework straight away, and that was it!
I much prefer it that way. I find arbitrary homework so irritating - especially if you're already fully on top of the subject and don't need to practice it.

jcb914
Fair enough. As I said, I was talking about it as a sugar substitute. I assume that, since you think sucralose is "disastrously unhealthy" you also think that sugar is, too. In which case, we are arguing over nothing since, like I said, I was talking about it only in the sense of it being a substitute for sugar. :smile: Thus, if someone is deliberating over whether to choose sucralose-based product or sugar, choosing the former is NOT "disastrously unhealthy" compared to the latter.

Yes. Apologies if I didn't make that clear.
Reply 6508
Craghyrax
But really this just seems to prove my suspicion about schools being so much different. It sounds like you all had programmes and teachers which really made a meal out of A levels, whereas our college just gave the five hours of teaching and then totally left us to our own devices, which really did result in very little time at school. I had one full day free most of the time and another half day, and we could work out exactly how much time we wanted to put in towards our subjects, with no expectation from the teachers.F]Yes. Apologies if I didn't make that clear.

It sounds like this was good preparation for Cambridge, though?

My school was the complete opposite. I had timetabled lessons all day and they were in small groups of 8-12 so were quite immersive. There was lots and lots of teacher support. It was easy to ask questions and the programme of study and homework was really well structured and clear. This, in my opinion, was an amazing way to learn and definitely got me the grades I achieved, BUT was really bad preparation for Cambridge. I now realise just how spoon-fed I was at A-Level (as if they're not obvious enough..). We were told exactly what to learn, copied it down - and learnt it. I miss the structure and support that I had at school so much here, and find it difficult to self motivate myself above the bare minimum needed to get by. It's obviously a personal problem so I can't completely "blame" my school, but nonetheless it didn't help.
Reply 6509
jcb914
It sounds like this was good preparation for Cambridge, though?

My school was the complete opposite. I had timetabled lessons all day and they were in small groups of 8-12 so were quite immersive. There was lots and lots of teacher support. It was easy to ask questions and the programme of study and homework was really well structured and clear. This, in my opinion, was an amazing way to learn and definitely got me the grades I achieved, BUT was really bad preparation for Cambridge. I now realise just how spoon-fed I was at A-Level (as if they're not obvious enough..). We were told exactly what to learn, copied it down - and learnt it. I miss the structure and support that I had at school so much here, and find it difficult to self motivate myself above the bare minimum needed to get by. It's obviously a personal problem so I can't completely "blame" my school, but nonetheless it didn't help.

I'm not sure. I was kind of assuming that because they had more work set for them and more involved teachers that they were also being given more exam technique training and guidance, and being spoon fed in that sense.

I really liked my situation because I was 18-20 at the time, and really didn't have the patience for somebody trying to ram a programme down my throat that didn't fit me. I was happy to have the freedom to work out for myself how best to tackle the course. But I got seriously bit in the behind because I came from a different country and the Cambridge exams I'd done had heavily emphasised original thinking and understanding, whereas focusing on understanding lost me major grades in AS. I only realised later that the mark schemes were ridiculously restrictive - I boosted my grades in A2 by switching tactic from reading around the subject alot to actually memorising mark schemes instead :rolleyes:
I wouldn't say that school had much effect on how motivated I am as a person. I think I've always been that way because of having a perfectionist nature. In my A2 year, my study partner got B, I got A and the rest of the class got D or below. The only difference is that we had gone out of our way to do a bit of the reading and to revise a little for the exams :s-smilie: But I liked that nobody there cared, which made it about my ambitions and needs and not about fitting into their agenda and target, and making a school look good. That would have really annoyed me.
Sorry if replying on the subject of curry is, erm, 12 hours out of date...
Craghyrax
Please not the India House

Ditto.

I've been to India House a few times. The food is far too oily (common with curry houses in Cambridge) and the student deal is not as good as it looks because the portions are tiny. And though I've only been to the Mahal once (and I can't remember it - I guess that's how it's supposed to be) I think TSR might be a bit too civilised for that...

Admittedly, I haven't been to that many curry houses in Cambridge. I tend to wait for curry till when I'm back in Birmingham, because, frankly, Cambridge curry is a bit **** in comparison. Best place in Cambridge I've been to has been Meghna on Victoria Road, though I can't remember what the prices were like and being all that way out it's probably way off the map of most students.
Craghyrax
The Cambridge Chop House is my favourite. After that, both Chez Gerard and Edwinns are superb.

Edwinns no longer exists, it's currently undergoing refurbishment into a Côte Bistro, which I think is a chain. And there's also The St. John's Chop House behind John's where Prezzo used to be, which apparently has a subtly different menu to the one on King's Parade (I've only been to the John's one though, which was very nice although they have a grand total of one vegetarian main if I recall correctly).
Reply 6512
It's probably worth noting that the amount of insulin produced isn't only related to the amount of carbohydrate in the food. This site gives some foods along with their glycemic scores and insulin index (data from here, which also gives pretty pictures). Pasta (boiled for 8 minutes) and some cereals compare quite favourably (though the difference isn't significant) to beef (grilled) and white fish (steamed) if we assume that we don't want to produce much insulin.

(Source seems reliable, though I've not bothered to look into it.)
Scipio90
I guess in everyday speech, "or" does often mean xor, but it's not as if "You need the permission of A or B" could possibly be interpreted as "if A and B both give permission, you cannot do it".

This, but the XOR meaning is only implied and so can be canceled and doesn't hold in some contexts. Generally this extra meaning is considered to be part of pragmatics rather than semantics (more specifically, what's usually called a generalized Gricean implicature). And/or is a way of stressing that you mean OR rather than XOR, which can be useful if the context would otherwise imply XOR.
just back from a swap and Churhill's pav. Not bad I have to say, though it is true that it would be much better when pissed... :frown:
How much is the TSR formal? I've used the search function and looked through the past Facebook messages but I can't find the amount. I'll give Craggy the cheque tomorrow, though. Looking forward to it :smile:
Reply 6516
I found Baileys in Sainsburys today for £10 :eek: I couldn't pass it by :o:
Chess Piece Face
How much is the TSR formal? I've used the search function and looked through the past Facebook messages but I can't find the amount. I'll give Craggy the cheque tomorrow, though. Looking forward to it :smile:

£7.15
Craghyrax
...

Just as a possible forewarning, I've pointed two Peterhouse boys in your direction since they might be getting into some trouble with college, and I thought you might be able to give them some sensible advice on what to do ("know your limits" would be a start!)
BigFudamental
Can anyone recommend a decent restaurant in Cambridge that isn't a national chain or Teri-Aki? The kind of thing you might go to if a parent or rich friend were coming to visit...


On the education issue, I did the IB outside the UK so can't really comment on how hard A-levels/sixth form are. I certainly did more work for the IB than subsequently at uni though (pre Cam). In had about 26 contact hours per calendar week, and several essays (2 @ 750-1500 words typically) and assigntments due each week.


Browns - it's on Trumpington Street, just a bit down from the Fitzwilliam Musuem.
Lovely food, lovely atmosphere, quite posh but not ridiculously expensive :smile:
Reply 6519
Must write essay, I don't care how **** it is.

Latest