Good Heavens, Miss Yakamoto! You're Beautiful!

So here's a science ethics question for you:

The seven year old and two of her classmates decided to do an experiment on bacterial growth for their science fair project this year. The first part of their test was comparing the relative cleanliness of not washing hands, washing hands and wiping them on disposable paper towel and washing them and wiping them on a communal hand towel. The second part of the test was to compare the cleanliness of various kitchen surfaces - the countertop, the fridge handle and so on.

For this, a couple weekends ago we duly got together a half-score of sterilized babyfood jars and filled them with a gelatin mixture to act as a nutrient base. Then the gel and her cohorts went about swabbing the various test surfaces and rubbing the swabs across the nutrients. Two of the jars were not swabbed, serving as "controls" for each of the tests.

So far, so good. A couple days after the gel and her friends did the tests, bacterial growths began to sprout in some of the jars. The appearance and level of growth in each jar was duly examined and recorded by the junior scientists when they came back to review them the following weekend. The science fair was to have taken place last Wednesday. The gels had their little presentation all prepared, and the jars were to be the central attraction.

Well, because of the lingering effects of the Valentine's Day ice storm, the science fair had to be postponed. (Parking at St. Marie of the Blessed Educational Method for an event of this size requires the use of a large field, which at that point was still ice-covered.) It was to have been rescheduled for tomorrow night. However yesterday, following this past weekend's additional snowfall, it was decided that the fair should be postponed until a week from tomorrow.

In the meantime, all of the jars, including the two controls, have become saturated with thick growths of mold and bacteria of various disgusting sorts. There is something between little and no difference among them now.

Here's the question. As I say, the gel and her friends have already recorded their observations. Do we:

A. chuck both the jars and the data and start all over? (Probably not enough time for this);

B. keep the data, chuck the original jars and try to fadge up some kind of representative substitute; or

C. simply put out the originals and explain, perhaps with the use of a small placard, the disruptive effect of the delay on the visual demonstration. (The observations made two weeks ago would still be included in the presentation.)

Personally, I'm inclined toward C. It may not be the most effective demonstration of comparative cleanliness of surfaces and hygiene practices, but it is at least honest. Also, the jars are sufficiently disgusting now to captivate an elementary school audience. Never underestimate the "Ew, gross!" factor.

Fortunatelly, the eldest Llama-ette is doing a demonstration of electrical conductivity. My only concern with her is that she's going to wear out the battery we rigged up in a simple circuit to a flashlight bulb by playing with it so much.

Okay, you knew this was coming from the title of the post, so here goes: