I saw this article in the New York Times today, and it got me thinking about how misleading the concept of "junk DNA" is for the general public. It isn't really a good descriptive term because junk signifies that the DNA isn't needed, when really researchers just don't yet know what that DNA does. It isn't part of the exome (part of the genome that codes for proteins - which make all the substances of your body) but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have a role. I think its a term that people should avoid using because I think it causes more confusion than it does good.
In other news, today was my first full day in Wisconsin. I saw my apartment and met my roommate Francis, and she seems really awesome so that was exciting. I spent all day waiting for my boxes to come from UPS (which arrived at 6:45pm and ripped open, of course) but they finally came so that made me happy. Tomorrow we'll try to actually set up the apartment since my stuff is literally just dumped out all over the place. There is a definite lack of storage so we'll have to try to fix that, but overall the apartment is really nice and in a great location.