Class material was not too difficult, mostly memorization. Lecture lacked clarity but course reader was clear.

Grade Distribution:
Exam 1 - 100 points
Exam 2 - 100 points
Discussion quizzes - 40 points
Discussion attendance and participation - 10 points
Final Exam - 180 points
Total - 430 points

Professor Esdin:
Esdin is a very great professor. You can tell how passionate he is about teaching and how well he knows his stuff. His lectures in the second half of the course were more organized than Friscia's in the first half. They also are mostly pictures, so you really have to listen in lecture to fill in the gaps. His lectures aren't podcasted, but he allows you to record. This is absolutely necessary. He covers a lot of information in a short amount of time, so you need to go back and make sure you got everything he said in your notes. There is no textbook for this class that is necessary, so just rely on lectures to study. I went to office hours a lot and I thought that was pretty helpful. We basically just sit in a room and he stands and answers our questions. You can ask clarifying or out there questions, and he's happy to answer all of them. I really liked Esdin. I would recommend him.

TA Jeanette Alcaraz:
Discussion sections were pretty helpful with going over material. Though at the end of the quarter, we didn't cover the material as in depth as the beginning of the quarter. But either way, Jeanette is very sweet. She knows her stuff and is very approachable. I would recommend her as a TA.

Exam 1 Grade: 87/100
This first exam covered all of Friscia's half. It was around 30 or so multiple choice questions with a couple few short answer questions. On the back of the test, there were a lot of fill in the blank questions. And stupid me didn't turn the test over, so I lost a good amount of points because of that. The test was pretty fair otherwise, Just pay attention to things he says out loud in lecture. Because there are some questions on that stuff that isn't explicitly in the notes.

Exam 2 Grade: 82/100
The average for the second exam was 72.4. It was unanimously considered significantly harder than Friscia's midterm, though it's noncumulative. This round contained Esdin's lectures. This had a similar format to the first midterm. A good amount of multiple choice with some short answer. No fill in the blank though. Basically just study the lecture slides and listen to recordings. Let me just say that he loves his action potentials.

Discussion Quizzes Grade: 37/40
There are four quizzes in the odd weeks of the quarter in discussion on four papers posted on CCLE. They are mildly interesting, but mostly pretty dull. Just study it really well the night before and you should do fine. The quizzes are ten questions of multiple choice, fill in the blank, and true or false questions. Pay attention to details when you read the papers.

Discussion attendance and participation: 10/10
Attendance to lecture isn't mandatory, but you need to go to discussion to get participation points. Basically go every week and you should get these easy points.

Final Exam Grade: 144/180
The average for the final was 134.3. The final was cumulative, but Esdin took out most of his material covered in the second midterm. The final is primarily focused on the new material after the second midterm. The final was multiple choice and a couple short answers. It was a bit tricky, but doable. Again, just study all the lectures.

Overall Grade: B+ (360/430)
Overall, I did okay in the class. I felt like I earned a higher grade, but LS classes distribute grades on some sort of quota system with 20% As, 20% Bs, 40% Cs, and 10-20% Ds. It's a bit unfair. And to be honest, if I didn't fuck up on the first midterm, I may have gotten an A-. This is definitely not an easy class. It's a lot of information in a short amount of time. But if you study hard enough, you should do fine.

Esdin talks very fast. His slides are often sparse, but that's only because he wants you to attend lecture. He has a bit of an ego, but which professor doesn't. His tests are tricky, but if you study enough, you will do fine. A straightforward, albeit sometimes annoying, professor, and an okay class.

Professor Esdin is an awesome lecturer. He makes his lessons clear and concise, always transitioning from the big picture to the details of the topic. He does move at a fast pace, but going through the recordings of his lectures definitely helps. It's difficult to catch everything by listening to his lecture once, so I recommend recording his lectures and giving them a listen throughout the week. There were always a handful of people at his office hours, and although I only attended a few of them, Professor Esdin was always willing to help and answer any questions we had for him. Yes, his exams are challenging, but they're fair. He never asks students something he never mentioned in class. If students put in the time and effort, they will definitely obtain the grade that they want. I hope I see Professor Esdin in my future classes.

The content is interesting and the professor gives clear lectures. If you read the course reader, lecture is not necessary to attend, however he does keep a sign in sheet. The syllabus splits up the grading into participation, discussion. quizzes, a midterm, final, and a project. The project consist of a large part of the grade and is not very difficult. I have heard mixed reviews on the midterm difficulty level, because there is a lot of material to memorize in the course reader in preparation. Overall I would definitely recommend this class and its a pretty easy A.

This class was so interesting, all he cares about is for you to remember a few ideas for your own health. There is one project that assesses your diet and physical activity, but everything is mapped out for you, and almost everyone gets a good grade on it.

I've heard a lot of good things about this class, and I also needed the GE requirement fulfillment so why not.

First off, this is class is not as easy as it seems. It was already difficult because it was a 9am class. Attendance is required, unless you have someone to sign you in. Lectures are not as interesting as many says. It's literally him throwing information at us and expects us to understand everything. He doesn't stop because obviously there is a lot to cover. I didn't learn much in lectures and I sure as hell did not learn much from the readings. The readings are purely information (very long and detailed). The tests are basically random facts you should know from the readings, but if the readings are long, what are you supposed to know right? Exactly. It is purely memorization.

Lab: the TA has a heavy accent so it is difficult to follow. He talks fast and does not really stop. He does try to get people to ask questions, but everyone is confused about what he was talking about.

Overall, the class is basically the professor and TA throwing information at you and expects you to know it well. There may be perks in the class, but it doesn't make up for the fact that I didn't learn much from it.

Holy crap this class was hard.

I have heard so many good things about this class, some saying it is the "best and easiest GE you'll ever take." I think this class is extremely overrated.

"Easy A" is not the words to describe this class. If you put a lot of effort into this class and really do the work, then yes, this class is manageable. But don't think about taking this course as an easy A that will require minimal work. You won't do well.

He takes participation, has a workbook, project, discussion labs, two lecture quizzes, and three lab quizzes. And there are two exams.

The workbook and project are not hard, just time consuming. The discussion labs are easy, but the discussion quizzes are more difficult than you think. But he ended up giving everyone full points for everything related to discussion section, as long as you attended. These aren't the things that make the course difficult.

The exams are annoying. Literally every word in the course reader is considered "fair game" on the exam, and he'll put some of the most obscure questions that you either know or you don't. They'll be one small random fact from the entire chapter. You simply have to know everything. It is really annoying, and there is no way to really guess or just figure it out when you get to the test, because it is very very specific. You either know it or you don't. During lecture, he just spits out information, and you're expected to know it.

I got an A because I memorized everything like crazy in a short amount of time. If you read and MEMORIZE the chapters as you go through the quarter as he assigns it, you'll be fine. But don't do what I did. Its about 15-20 pages a week, which isn't too bad.

The class is not "easy." If you put in the work, its easy, but don't expect to be able to skim through the material, zone out through lecture, but still pull out an A no problem. You literally have to memorize all the information he gives you, and it's not as easy as it seems.

Materials
None!

Grading
Midterm 1 100
Midterm 2 100
Final 180
Quizzes 40
Discussion 10
There was a slight curve in our favor. I got a B+ with an 84.4% total. According to the syllabus, the rough distribution is as follows:
20% A
20% B
40% C
10-20% D

Lectures
Dr. Friscia's lectures were audiocasted, but Dr. Esdin's weren't. Everything tested was from the lectures. Friscia's lectures were boring, but he got the job done. Esdin, however, was a god. I loved listening to him, since the way he organized his lectures was impeccable. Each lecture felt like a narrative. Not only that, but he gave many examples to make this biology relevant to us. You could tell that he was truly an expert and lover of biology. Re-listening to his lectures before an exam did wonders for sorting out all of the information in my brain.

Discussion
We had four papers to read throughout the quarter and were tested on them on even weeks. While the articles constituted light reading, I suggest taking them seriously because the quizzes were tough. They were a mixture of fill-in-the-blank, true/false, and multiple-choice. Since they were written by TAs, who have little experience writing questions, they were tougher than they needed to be. For example, there was a fill-in-the-blank where we had to write the scientific name of some drug. I got a 30/40, and I feel like this was the difference between my B+ and an A- (assuming 85% was the A- cutoff).

Exams
These were tough. A bunch of multiple-choice followed by some short responses. Friscia's questions were easier than Esdin's, so for him, it was more a matter of organizing the information. Esdin's questions were tough because of the all the details that could confuse you in the multiple-choice. His short answers were kind of regurgitations of what he said in lectures, such as list the steps in this process. One of them was missed by almost everyone, which asked for an application of one little thing that he mentioned during lecture.
The medians were:
Midterm 1 82
Midterm 2 74.6
Final 138 (77%)

Tips
- Although Friscia's lectures were audiocasted, you should still attend lecture because he wrote notes on the projector that he wouldn't say out loud. One of the diagrams he made appeared on the exam.
- Friscia provided chapter review worksheets after every lecture. Some of the questions on them appeared on the exams.
- Record Esdin's lectures and marathon them before the exams.

tl;dr I regard Dr. Esdin highly and would consider it a loss in your UCLA career if you didn't take him. Dr. Friscia was fair and somewhat easy. Unfortunately, the exams are tough and there is nothing that you can do about it.