Ear Wax Project

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:13 pm

Hi,

I'm doing a project with a very unhelpful mentor so I need help. I'm testing to see what solution best cleans our ears from ear wax. Because there are many patients who go to the ENT clinic because of ear wax buildup which causes a bit of hearing loss. There's a new product on the market called Resultz which is a product for headlice treatement. This is supposed to be non-pesticide and really good. We want to see, since this product works so well, maybe it'll work for ear wax cleaning. Because Resultz destroys the wax around head lice then kill the lice. So we are testing that product Resultz, vs ear wax removal product (Murine), and a household common home remedie, glycerin. So my mentor obtained ear wax from a patient and it's very tiny. It's like 2 cm long. So I'm going to split it up into three, put it into testtubes then add 7 drops of the solution twice a day for 4 days. My problem is how I can make this accurate. How am I supposed to measure how much of the ear wax was removed? What the solutions do, like Murine, it attacks the ear wax and makes it softer and more like a liquid so that it falls out of our ears. So I want a way to compare the solutions' effect on the ear wax.

My science teacher suggested measuring the weight of the test tube. Then the weight of the ear wax. Then after the days I measure the weight of the solution and it's effect. My mentor told me that too. I don't think that makes sense at all. After adding the solution, the ear wax is supposed to change from solid to liquid... how can measuring the weight do anything? I need help! It wouldn't be an accurate experiment if I depend on my observations to see if the ear wax is broken up and dissolved or not. I need a way a bleep to compare the different solutions to draw a conclusion.

I need help ASAP because my project is overdue because of my mentor and I only have a short period of time of extension.

Please I need help!

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:25 pm

Oh and another thing! How much ear wax is normal? Because I want to compare my results with our actual ear wax. So if I only use 0.5 cm of ear wax... that won't be accurate. On the solution bottles it says to use 5-10 drops of the product twice for four days. How much should I use for my experiment?

Thanks

deleted-71670 · Post by **deleted-71670** » Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:33 am

Interesting project idea-I like your hypothesis about the lice treatment.

It seems to me that, if your hypothesis about turning solid to liquid is correct, then at the end of the experiment you should have more liquid and less solid, right? So--if you take the solid material out of the tube, and size or weigh it, it should be less, while the volume of liquid in the tube should be more. Did you weigh the wax, and measure the exact volume of liquid, before you started?

You mentioned that the treatment should make the wax squishier, so I wonder if you could find some way to test that, maybe by measuring how much force it takes to change its shape? Perhaps other experts can chime in with ways to measure a materials softness?

Good luck.

MelissaB · Post by **MelissaB** » Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:56 am

I'm afraid I can't help with measuring the softness, but I was wondering if it would be worth it to gently invert the tube after applying the treatment so that any loosened wax could fall out--but it depends on whether or not the wax sticks to the inside of the tube; if it doesn't then it will all fall out regardless of treatment. Anyway, this might make the experimental conditions more similar to the process you're trying to model.

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Fri Feb 29, 2008 5:28 pm

wow, I never thought of that before. I think that is what I'm going to do because they're no other bleep. I still have a problem. I've searched a lot and nobody knows the normal amount of earwax for each person because it is different and varies depending on the person. So, my sample is a very small portion compared to the real thing. Wouldn't that make it unaccurate? Also, since I have really small amount, does that mean I should use less solution drops? Because then itll be very concentrated. I don't know how to make this as realistic as possible. Also, would it be ok to use a food scale to weigh everything?

Thank you sooo much! I appreciate your help,

deleted-71670 · Post by **deleted-71670** » Fri Feb 29, 2008 5:33 pm

Because your experiment is "which treatment dissolves ear wax the best?" I don't think the amount you start with will matter so much. What you're doing is a model of the real thing, not the real thing itself, which is totally normal and acceptable in science. You can guess that the treatment that works best on your amount of earwax would probably work best on less or more.

I do not think a regular food scale would work for this--I imagine the difference will be in grams or even micrograms. Does your teacher or mentor have a more precise scale you could use?

Another thing to think about: Are you going to dry out the earwax before you weigh it? I wonder if the same volume of glycerin or treatment would weigh different amounts. Then it might confuse your results if the liquid was still clinging to the wax blob.

Good luck.

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Sat Mar 01, 2008 6:57 am

I'm planning to do my project in a lab, except i would still need bleep at home that I can monitor the earwax with. The earwax I have is like stone, really dry, very small. So I'm thinking it's going to take a while for it to become a liquid. So if I measure the weight, the earwax and solution wouldn't be sticking together as much.

That's another thing, the solutions will weigh different, so I'm planning to put the exact same amount of drops into each testube. So then I won't really compare the different solutions but the solution before and after. For example, if I started with 10 ml of solution, then I would come back after a while and see that it is 12 ml, then I would know it went up by two. So, I'm not really going to weigh the liquids, should I? I was thinking more of the volume and in ml.

So the treatement would be the best if in the end, the earwax sample weighs less than before, and the solution or liquid weighs more than before? How often would I have to weigh the earwax and solution? Because I'm putting 7 drops of solution in the morning and 7 drops at night. How many times will I have to check up on it and observe and take pictures?

Thank you!!!

Thank you,

deleted-71670 · Post by **deleted-71670** » Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:40 pm

I can't really answer some of those questions, since you're doing a new sort of experiment. You will have to decide for yourself how often to measure, and how long to let the experiment go. If you're not sure, it's probably best to err on the side of caution--check more often, and let it go longer.

I think you are on the right track, good luck.

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 3:33 pm

Hi,

I have a problem. I can't get access to a scale to measure the weight of the earwax. I can't find anyother way to test my project. So I'm going to test it by observations. Except if I only look at it and see which one worked the best, how can I make a graph or table to compare the different solutions scientifically? I need help ASAP!

Thanks

deleted-71670 · Post by **deleted-71670** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 3:38 pm

hmm--could you very carefully measure the length before you start, and then see if it is shorter afterward? (If you do this, you would have to compare dry to dry, or wet to wet, in case liquid swells the earwax.)

MelissaB · Post by **MelissaB** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:10 pm

You could also take photos of each stage, so that people can observe the changes for themselves. If you could take a photo with a ruler or bleep in it, you may be able to measure the size from the photographs (but like Amber says, it may depend on whether it ends up as a solid or a liquid).

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:47 pm

I started my project, I measured it with a ruler as careful as possible. Except when I came back half an hour later, the size changed but the solution didn't and after that it decreased again. So I think that it didn't change at all for the past 2 hours, and its just that I'm not measuring precisely. I'm not sure if this project is going to work at all! Oh, and for the checking and measuring, does it have to be at certain intervals each time? Or can I just check it at any time every day? For example say today I checked on it at half an hour intervals from 8:00 to 10:00. Tomorrow, can I do the same thing but from 4:00 to 6:00? Or does it have to be 8:00-10:00? Just wondering if that would be one of the controls.

Thank you!

deleted-71670 · Post by **deleted-71670** » Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:15 pm

How long are the earwax-softeners supposed to take to work? I think they recommend using for several days. You could base your time intervals on that--say, if it's supposed to take four days to work, maybe check at 12-hour intervals. Although, I think it is great that you are checking more frequently during the first part of the experiment, since you don't know how long it will take.

One idea occurred to me--if you took a digital image of the wax at each timepoint, you could blow up those pictures and measure the picture. It's sort of a way to get around the fact that your ruler may not measure really small changes well. But, if you wanted to do this you would have to take the pictures the exact same way, same focus, same distance from the camera, everything.

You said that the liquid didn't change. Do you mean its volume? Do you expect it to? From your previous description, it sounds like the earwax is pretty small, so a little bit of earwax might not noticeably change your volume.

One more thing to remember--ultimately, it's not so important if your experiment "works." What's important is that you came up with a hypothesis and a way to test it, and did an experiment. You have done all these things. When you present your project, you can discuss whether or not you got the results you expected, and how you might do the experiment differently if you did it again.

Amber

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 1:56 pm

It's not working! I've been checking it for 4 hours at an hour interval for two days now, today is the third. Except measuring with a ruler didn't do anything, the size of the earwax nor the volume of the solution has changed. So far I've been having the exact numbers every time. I've been keeping observations that are very detailed but how can I make that into a graph, or table? Because I have made observations that the earwax was starting to break up and seems to becoming less brown and a bit softer or flatter. But observations aren't numbers...

As for taking pictures and blowing them up, I've been trying forever! Except the it all comes out white because of the reflection of the test tube. And if I take the flash off, the picture is too blurry for me to actually measure it with a ruler. So that option won't work anymore.

I really can't tell which one is working the best. Another aspect that I should have controlled is the size of the earwax. For each test tube its a different size, that's because when I tried to cut it up and make it equal, some of it just broke off so I came out with one small, one medium and one large. Except I did record each one's length, one is 0.5 the other 0.6 and the other 0.7. Doesn't seem like much difference however they are each a different shape and width.

I really don't know how I'm going to make a conclusion, because the entire project and procedure was inaccurate. I wanted to do this project to prove that Resultz works except apparently it doesn't. So I'm afraid I'm doing bleep wrong because my mentor said that Resultz works amazingly!

Thank you so much!

deleted-71670 · Post by **deleted-71670** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 4:20 pm

You are doing nothing wrong. When I was a scientist, I can't tell you how many of my experiments didn't "work" or came up with the "wrong" results. And sometimes, the results just surprise you and you discover your hypothesis wasn't right after all! That may be what's happening with your project--maybe other remedies work just as well as Resultz?

Could you possibly develop your own scale for how broken-up the wax looks, maybe a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being "all the earwax is liquified" and 1 being "no change"? That would give you bleep to chart or graph.

geoffbruton · Post by **geoffbruton** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:41 am

Hi hayamhm!

With regards to taking digital photographs of your experiment, have you tried using another light source, rather than the built-in flash? If you are able to illuminate your sample so that it can still be in focus (using bleep like a table lamp, for example), this would allow you to eliminate the use of the flash so you no longer get light bouncing back into the lens. Just a thought!

If you give it a try, please let us know if it works.

Good luck!
Geoff.

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:25 pm

Hi!

Thank you for the suggestion Geoff. I would I have tried that except I finished my project yesterday. I realized that measuring with a ruler didn't work so I took another science buddy's suggestion and used rankings from 1-5. I just have one question, I ranked each day and each time I checked on the earwax from 1-5. Then I wanted to make an average of each product I used, can I just add all the rankings and divide it by the number of tests or is that inaccurate? For example, with the glycerin I did the average and it was 2.3. Is that ok in the scientific way? I heard bleep about a certain bleep of taking the average of rankings.

Thank you so much for your help!

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 4:30 pm

Sorry just remembered bleep! Do I have to find the average anyway? Because I want to know which product works the best on earwax, and well you're supposed to use the product for 4 days, so should I just compare the last day, the 4th and the last ranking I gave the earwax on that day? Because I ranked Glycerin 3.5 as the last ranking and Murine 3.2 and Resultz 2.5. Except when I did the average, glycerin was 2.3 but Murine was 2.5. But glycerin worked better! So what should I do?

your help is greatly appreciated!

deleted-71536 · Post by **deleted-71536** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:46 am

Hi hayamhm,

I want to commend you on a great project, and for sticking to it!

To answer your latest question, I think you should compare your last ranking rather than the average. There are a couple reasons for this. First, you say that the product instructions indicate that you should use the product(s) for four days. As Amber pointed out, this means that it could take that long to see the results you're looking for. Secondly, your final rankings are a CUMULATIVE effect, meaning that they are the result of all the time leading up to that point. Since you can expect the product to keep working over time, it's probably not correct to use the average anyhow.

Based on what you report, it sounds as if Glycerin worked the best over the 4-day period, but took a little longer to get there. Murine was second, but may have worked a little faster at first. That would explain the differences you saw in your 4-day rankings compared to the averages.

I hope this helps. Good luck with your presentation!

Heather

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:00 am

Hi,

Thank you Heather, I used your advice and I didn't add the averages. I presented my project at the school science fair and I got a medal and I'm going to regionals, all thanks to everyones help at sciencebuddies. I'm trying to improve my project for the regionals using the advice from the judges. One judge asked me why glycerin worked the best. I did research before and it said that glycerin is an excellent solvent. Except that didn't seem to be the best answer the judge wanted. I'm trying to find another reason except I can't. Why did glycerin work the best on ear wax? As for Murine, I said it worked well because it had carbamide peroxide in it which has hydrogen peroxide in it which is a good substance for ear wax. Do you know any chemical explanation? I need to have a better scientific explanation of why one product worked and the other didn't. As for Resultz, I simply said that Resultz didn't work because it is not meant to be a product for treating ear wax but for treating head lice. What other ways can I improve my project? And another thing, would science buddies be counted as mentors? For the regionals we have to write everything about our mentors and I mentioned that helped me except I wasn't sure if science buddies would count as mentors.

Thank you soo much! Your help is really appreciated.

deleted-71536 · Post by **deleted-71536** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:36 am

Hi hiyamhm,

Congratulations on your medal! That's very exciting!

One piece of advice I can offer is that you might want to make a graph that shows the different rankings over time. This will give the judges a visual way to compare how each remedy worked across all four days. In other words, it will allow you to compare not only the final rankings, but also how quickly each remedy reached its maximum effect.

I'm not sure what to tell you about why glycerine worked best. Note that Murine also contains some glycerine (http://www.murine.com/wax-drops.htm). One reason that glycerine worked well may be that glycerine is an organic liquid, meaning that it is composed of carbon chains with hydrogen and oxygen. Ear wax is also organic, so the use of an organic solvent may be helpful ("like dissolves like"). Also, the hydrogen and oxygen in glycerine make it a "hydroscopic" molecule, meaning it actually absorbs water from its surroundings. This may contribute to its success in breaking up ear wax.

While Wikipedia is not a primary source, it may help you dig deeper in your research:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earwax
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycerine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygroscopy

I do believe that Science Buddies counts for your list of mentors!

Please continue to keep us posted about your progress!

Best wishes,
Heather

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 3:58 pm

I'm sorry I haven't replied for a while...

I have already added a table to my board showing the ranking I gave the product every time I checked on it. It has a lot of data, and it compares the three products. Do you think I should still add a graph? If so, should it be a line graph or a bar graph? Because I had 19 "tests".

The fact that glycerin is organic and hydroscopic, should that be added to my conclusionn/disscusion? I know I'm going to mention it when I present my project but my conclusion is already a page and a half long

I'm having trouble with my board though. What exactly do I have to add to my board? I have my introduction which is a page long, and purpose, hypothesis, variables, materials, and Results (3 graphs, and two tables), and a conclusion. I think I should put all of this on my board, however that might not all fit and that would mean that I would have no pictures only writing and graphs. Is that ok? I'm trying to make it look as appealing as possible so I don't want it to look dull.

Would my project be considered life sciences or physical science? I need to know for registration.

Thanks!

deleted-71536 · Post by **deleted-71536** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 5:42 pm

Hi hayamhm,

I have already added a table to my board showing the ranking I gave the product every time I checked on it. It has a lot of data, and it compares the three products. Do you think I should still add a graph? If so, should it be a line graph or a bar graph? Because I had 19 "tests".

When you present data, you should always present it in a table OR a graph - never both. That said, my opinion is that time series data are best displayed as a line graph. However, a table is perfectly fine. I find graphs more visually appealing, but it's really all about preference.

If you do decide to make a graph instead, remember to replace your table (so you don't have the same data in two forms). However, feel free to keep your table.

The fact that glycerin is organic and hydroscopic, should that be added to my conclusionn/disscusion? I know I'm going to mention it when I present my project but my conclusion is already a page and a half long

You do not have to add the extra information about glycerine to your discussion, if you feel it is complete the way it is (and if space is limited). It's nice to have extra information that you can discuss with the judges, so you can impress them with your knowledge.

I'm having trouble with my board though. What exactly do I have to add to my board? I have my introduction which is a page long, and purpose, hypothesis, variables, materials, and Results (3 graphs, and two tables), and a conclusion. I think I should put all of this on my board, however that might not all fit and that would mean that I would have no pictures only writing and graphs. Is that ok? I'm trying to make it look as appealing as possible so I don't want it to look dull.

Science Buddies has excellent information to help you organize your display board:
http://www.sciencebuddies.com/science-f ... oard.shtml
Start there, and see if that helps you get on your way. You do want to include everything you listed, but often you can use pictures and graphs to tell your story in less space than it would take with a lot of text.

Would my project be considered life sciences or physical science? I need to know for registration.

You could make an argument for either category, but I think your project is most related to the life sciences, since you're examining ways to clean ear wax from human ears.

Good luck!
Heather

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:22 am

Thanks Heather, I never knew that! I've always thought that I had to have a graph and a table, well now I put the graph and it actually fits!

I looked at the science buddies tips for the board, they're really helpful. Except do I have to put a discussion and conclusion? Well I split my conclusion into a discussion as well, except where do I put the part about what I'd do if I did the project again? Under the conclusion or the discussion? As for the discussion, do I have to explain why Murine and Resultz didn't work, or just why glycerin did work? Because I don't know why Murine didn't work...And do you know where I can find a diagram of the hydrogen and oxygen molecules with the carbon chain? So that I can explain how glycerin is an organic liquid and ear wax is organic. Or would that be too much?

Thank you!

deleted-71536 · Post by **deleted-71536** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 11:25 am

Hi hayamhm,

do I have to put a discussion and conclusion? Well I split my conclusion into a discussion as well, except where do I put the part about what I'd do if I did the project again? Under the conclusion or the discussion?

You can lump the Conclusion and Discussion together, or separate them into two sections. Again, this is a matter of preference. If you do decide to split them into two sections, then each one contains a certain kind of information. The Conclusion is basically what you have concluded from your results - which remedy worked the best, and why. The Discussion is where you relate the conclusions to other research, and talk about what you would do to improve the project.

As for the discussion, do I have to explain why Murine and Resultz didn't work, or just why glycerin did work? Because I don't know why Murine didn't work...

This is more likely part of your Conclusion (though feel free to lump the sections to save space!). Either way, you should discuss all of your results. According to the data you provided, it does not look as if Murine didn't work; it just seems as if glycerine worked better. So, you should discuss why glycerine did work, and why Murine also worked, but not quite as well as glycerine. Does that make sense?

And do you know where I can find a diagram of the hydrogen and oxygen molecules with the carbon chain? So that I can explain how glycerin is an organic liquid and ear wax is organic. Or would that be too much?

To get you started, the Wikipedia link I gave you does have a diagram of the chemical structure of glycerol: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycerine You can also type "glycerol chemical structure" into Google Images. To get the chemical structure of ear wax, again refer to the Wikipedia link I gave you on ear wax to get started: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerumen This article gives the chemical components of ear wax: squalene, lanosterol, and cholesterol. You can look up their chemical structures, too. You can include these diagrams if you feel that it helps you explain the success of glycerine for cleaning ear wax. I don't think these diagrams are as important as your data, so you can omit them if space is an issue. However, visual aids do help, so feel free to include them if you have room!

Cheers,
Heather

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 2:02 pm

Hi,

Do you know anything about hydrogen peroxide and carbamide peroxide? I can't figure out why Murine worked. Is there a chemical reaction between these chemicals and the organic property of ear wax? Or maybe a link between the chemicals and the chemical compounds in ear wax, the fatty acids- squalene, lanosterol, and cholesterol? I've read about ways of cleaning your ears and they've said that commercial products are recommended only to soften the ear wax not as a complete solution to remove the ear wax. As for Results, I'm going to state a theory, my hypothesis. Because there's really no scientific reason why Resultz worked a bit, or is there?

I think trying to find a diagram might be just over my head, I'm only in grade 8 and I didn't take chemistry yet. However it would be interesting to learn. Except how would I make a diagram if ear wax is not a chemical. Glycerin has a formula, with HO OH OH. I've researched a lot and ear wax doesn't have one. So there's no way I can make a connection. So I can't make a visual aid.

Maybe to make my project less dull I'll take a picture of the test tubes using Geoff's advice. Or I'll put pictures of each product I used. Even though I would want to make my project look more scientific...

Thank you!

deleted-71536 · Post by **deleted-71536** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 2:55 pm

Hi hayamhm,

Do you know anything about hydrogen peroxide and carbamide peroxide? I can't figure out why Murine worked. Is there a chemical reaction between these chemicals and the organic property of ear wax? Or maybe a link between the chemicals and the chemical compounds in ear wax, the fatty acids- squalene, lanosterol, and cholesterol? I've read about ways of cleaning your ears and they've said that commercial products are recommended only to soften the ear wax not as a complete solution to remove the ear wax.

Here is the Wikipedia article on carbamide peroxide: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbamide_peroxide The active ingredient in Murine is carbamide peroxide, which contains hydrogen peroxide. This compound causes the release of oxygen from other compounds, which is probably how it helps to break up and soften the ear wax. It's true that commercial products are meant to soften the ear wax. You can use water to remove it once it is softened.

As for Results, I'm going to state a theory, my hypothesis. Because there's really no scientific reason why Resultz worked a bit, or is there?

The active ingredient in Resultz is isopropyl myristate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isopropyl_myristate It works to treat lice by dissolving the wax on the exoskeleton of the lice.

I'm sure this wax is not the same as human ear wax, but it may explain why Resultz had some effect on human ear wax.

I think trying to find a diagram might be just over my head, I'm only in grade 8 and I didn't take chemistry yet. However it would be interesting to learn. Except how would I make a diagram if ear wax is not a chemical. Glycerin has a formula, with HO OH OH. I've researched a lot and ear wax doesn't have one. So there's no way I can make a connection. So I can't make a visual aid.

Maybe to make my project less dull I'll take a picture of the test tubes using Geoff's advice. Or I'll put pictures of each product I used. Even though I would want to make my project look more scientific...

As I said before, I don't think the chemical diagrams are overly important. Don't worry about using those as visual aids. I think that Geoff's advice is good - it would be nice for the judges to see photos of the test tubes, so that they can see what you meant by your rankings. Giving a visual represenation of your rankings is scientific! It's good to be able to compare numbers, but the photos will show the judges what those numbers actually mean in terms of what happened to the ear wax. Go for it!

Cheers,
Heather

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 9:36 am

Thank you so much for the information Heather! I added all of that into my conclusion/discussion.

I tried what Geoff told me except it didn't work. There was too much light that it turned white. I tried many times to take pictures with different flashes but nothing works. So I had another idea, maybe I can bring the actual test tubes with me to the science fair. I read the safety and regulations and all it says is not to bring anything that tests humans, animals, that uses firearms or hazardous materials, DNA extract or biotechnology materials, chemicals, organic materials like animal parts and products, plants, vegetables, soils, etc., electrical equipment or equipment with moving parts. I don't think Ear wax fits into any of those categories. So do you think it would be ok to bring that with me? Because I don't think I can fit pictures on my board, so bring the actual test tubes might be better. What do you think?

Thank you!

deleted-71536 · Post by **deleted-71536** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:14 am

Hi hayamhm,

One way to fix your picture-taking problem is to turn off the flash, use external lighting, or take your pictures outside.

Perhaps you can try that first.

I read the safety and regulations and all it says is not to bring anything that tests humans, animals, that uses firearms or hazardous materials, DNA extract or biotechnology materials, chemicals, organic materials like animal parts and products, plants, vegetables, soils, etc., electrical equipment or equipment with moving parts.

Hmm... Technically, ear wax is an organic material - an animal product (since humans are animals, too). I don't think that ear wax is a hazardous material, but I'd hate to see you have problems.

If there's any way to use photos, I think that's the safer way to go. If there really is no way to get a good photo, then you could try bringing your test tubes with you, but be prepared to remove them if you are asked to do so.

If you do get good photos and can't fit them on your board, you could place them in front of the board as you would do with your test tubes, or on a "buddy board" (as described in the Science Buddies "Advanced Display Board Designs and Tips": http://www.sciencebuddies.com/science-f ... sign.shtml).

Remember that the photos aren't crucial. Another way to get the point across would be to define your rankings, by describing exactly what each ranking means. For example, you could say a ranking of 1 means "the wax is still hard and small, and has broken up very little," while a ranking of 2 means "the wax has swollen and started to soften, but has not broken apart." I just made up those descriptions

, but hopefully you see what I mean. While pictures and visual aids are nice, your real goal is to make sure the judges understand what you did, and see how cool it is.

Cheers,
Heather

hayamhm · Post by **hayamhm** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:43 am

Well I thought I shouldn't risk bringing in the ear wax, so I took pictures instead. I put the flash on but turned the light off so it was all dark, and when I took the picture it caused light but not much glare. So I'm really happy. I took tons of pictures and I made my text size 16.5 and everything fits!

And another thing, I'm in french immersion and my board is all in french, but not all the judges know french. I remember last year I had to present everything in english, so I take it for granted that there's going to be english judges and practice in english or should I practice in french just in case?

Thanks!

Ear Wax Project

Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project

Re: Ear Wax Project