Author: best-essay

For practical 1, these are the protocol to follow; Methods Organ bath set-up (already done): 1. The 2L beaker (the reservoir) is filled with Tyrodes solution and placed in the rack provided above the organ bath. The warming coil and organ bath are filled with Tyrodes by establishing a siphon by the use of a 60ml syringe to suck the solution through the tube. 2. Thread cotton through eye of needle ready for use. A Petri dish is filled with Tyrodes and the ileum is cut into 1-2cm length. Two loops of cotton are tied through each ends of the ileum and secured one loop to the metal support and placed the organ bath. A gentle flow of air is allowed to run through the bath. Dose-response to cholinesters: 1. Start the Chart on the computer monitor (the computer is set up to run Chart software). Do not touch any other settings. 2. Wait for about 1-2 minutes to record a stable baseline. 3. Apply drugs to the organ bath by adhering to a 90s time cycle as follows: add a low concentration of drug (10l of 10g/ml Ach) by pipetting just below the surface of the Tyrodes, but not directly onto the tissue. 4. Leave in contact for 30s, then wash out the bath by using the taps above and below the bath to fill and empty. 5. Wait 60s and then apply next dose (double previous dose, 20l). 6. Repeat this cycle by doubling the volume every time until a maximum response is reached (i.e. on increasing the dose, the response fails to increase), then stop adding Ach to the organ bath. 7. Repeat the same steps (3-6) with the remaining 3 drugs, BuCh (1mg/ml), MCh (10g/ml) and CCh (10g/ml). Work with the drugs in the following order, Ach, BuCh, MCh and CCh. 8. For Ach, MCh and CCh the starting volume should be 10l, but with BuCh start with 80l. Results 1) Using the generated data, plot the size of the responses (g) to Ach, BuCh, MCh and CCh against the log concentrations on the same graph. 2) Determine the maximal response or efficacy (intrinsic activity), and potency (EC50) in ng/ml and convert to Molar units. 3) Produce a report in your laboratory notebook following the guidelines: Methods section should describe the equipment, reagents and solutions used in the practical. Results section should include the curves generated and the calculations of the values determined (i.e. Maximal response, EC50, pD2 and relative potency). Do not forget to use the appropriate units. Graphs should be properly labelled and should have adequate descriptive legends. Discussion section should include the importance of the values calculated and the relevance of the practical and the results. For Practical 2; Practical 2: what to include in your lab book Introduction: Results: Trace of results Calculation of final drug organ bath concentrations Table of responses against organ bath concentrations Plot the log concentration-response curves for MCh and nicotine on the same graph. Use Molar concentrations. Discussion: What can you conclude about the selectivity of each of the antagonists, and the receptors present in the preparation? Draw a diagram of the suggested location of each of these receptors in the guinea-pig ileum. Define the following terms: tachyphylaxis, selective antagonism, and competitive antagonism. State the reason for using molar concentrations rather than ng/ml for MCh and nicotine NOTE; For the practical 2, there are no response for Nicotine during the practical hence why there is no need to plot graph for the for the nicotine but other response need to be plotted. If there is any question please do not hesitate to contact me.

Explain why texas was good location for camps during the civil war three major discussion points such as treatment of prisoners,conditions for prisnors within camp, medical treatment prisnors had access to. sources: The Last Prison by Danial Francis Lisarelli

demonstrate knowledge of the key concepts in water quality and water pollution; familiarize yourself with the various strategies used in point and non-point source water pollution management; examine the key challenges in Lake Winnipeg water quality and how this pollution affects the food web and trophic interactions as a response to this problem; and consider and evaluate various watershed management strategies that offer solutions to improve the water quality of Lake Winnipeg.

What are the functions of a Chief Technology Officer and a Chief Information Officer?

The intent of your effort is to alert Troop B communities about issues associated with waste. When creating your effort be sure to present the source/cause, contaminant, associated toxicology related to exposure levels, mitigation options, and prevention options. Please see the Announcements for the specific topic focus as this will change seasonally. Group C will create a social media effort. The social media campaign will follow the guidelines you defined in the M1 Modes of Outreach Worksheet and should be comparable in scope and depth to a trifold. s For all projects, links to additional information must be included. QR codes need to be included in all trifolds and research briefs. The QR Codes do not need to be active, but you must indicate to which website it is linked. Competencies: 2. Analyze quantitative and qualitative data using biostatistics, informatics, computer-based programming and software, as appropriate. 3. Interpret results of data analysis for public health research, policy, or practice. 6. Advocate for political, social, or economic policies and programs that will improve health in diverse populations. 7. Select communication strategies for different audiences and sectors. 8. Communicate audience-appropriate public health content, both in writing and through oral presentation. 9. Describe the importance of cultural competence in communicating public health content. 10. Perform effectively on interprofessional teams. 1. Explain the general mechanisms of toxicity in eliciting a toxic response to various environmental exposures.
Hide

Thus, the absolutist tells us that we must interpret the moral rightness or the wrongness of an action as holding for all times and all situations, and we must look at people as improving morally whenever they “discover” an objective moral truth and use it as a guide for behavior. For example, under the principle of moral absolutism, if the statement, “Slavery is morally wrong,” is a true judgment, then it is just as true within periods of history and within cultures which accept slavery as it is within cultures and periods of time when slavery is condemned. The absolutist would say that slavery did not become ethically wrong when the world began to reject slavery. They would say that slavery was always wrong and that the world has slowly come to “see” this objective moral truth. In contrast, the principle of moral relativism says that the only truth that is possible regarding morality is a “cultural relative truth.” This means that a sentence which says something like, “Slavery is morally wrong,” is merely telling us that, this culture judges slavery to be morally wrong. In other words, the relativist principle says that any statement about morality can only be a statement about current cultural traditions and beliefs. Moral absolutists get very upset by this view, for logically is implies that slavery could be moral, if some culture somewhere generally accepted it as moral. Absolutists tell us that slavery was not morally acceptable when it was a widespread practice, any more than the world was flat at the time that this was a common belief. The principle of absolutism says that just as people were at one time ignorant about the shape of the world, they were also ignorant of the moral wrongness of slavery. The “moral fact” is just as true for the absolutist as the “empirical fact.” They are both facts that can be discovered by the light of reason. The relativist say to this that calling cultural traditions that are different from ours “ignorant” is an example of ethnocentrism, which is the practice of judging other cultures by the standards of one’s own culture. For the relativist it is the ethnocentrist who is ignorant, or at least narrow minded, because he or she cannot accept that other cultures can have their own truth, just as our culture has its own truth. And this can lead to the imperialistic practice of one culture imposing its traditions and beliefs on another culture in the name of “morality.” *** Where do you stand in this debate? It is one thing to say that “some” traditions and beliefs are culturally relative, such as the practice of eating with your fingers, or the belief that tattoos look cool. But how about the practice of slavery, or wife beating, or having sex with young kids? Is our culture’s rejection of these things an example of moral progress toward truth, or just cultural change, no different, in principle, than the change in cultural attitudes toward tattooing that has occurred over the past 50 years? Moral Egoism Moral Egoism (often referred to simply as “egoism”) is an example of a consequentialist type of moral theory. This means that a Moral Egoist will focus on is the consequences of rules, laws, policies, and actions, and not the intentions behind the formation of these things. They tell us that a moral person uses reason to examine whether or not a particular action, rule, law or policy promotes or detracts from the egoist’s self-interest. And if an action does nothing to promote one’s self interest, we have no moral duty to perform this action. Simply put, good actions are those that benefit me; bad actions are those that limit or interfere with benefits to me; and actions which have no effect on my interests one way or another are morally neutral to me. Is this true? Is it the case that the only moral duty we have is to ourselves? Natural Law Theory Natural law theory is a type of moral theory that claims that a correct moral action is one which conforms to an absolute and universal moral standard. According to natural law theory, such standards exist as “laws of nature,” or, as natural laws. They are laws that exist as part of the general order and design of the universe. Once we come to know them, they can serve as absolute standards for our behavior. In simple terms, whenever our behavior conforms to the laws of nature it is morally right. And whenever our behavior violates nature it is morally wrong. For natural law theory, nature is seen as an absolute good and the standard by which all else is measured. In this context, the term “nature” must be taken in its broadest meaning, and not simply as a term, which refers to rivers, forests and wild animals. Within natural law theory, the term “nature” refers us to an order, essence, and design to things, which is not created by human beings, and cannot be altered by human beings. They might be laws created by, and given to us, by God. Or they might just be part of the way things are, like the laws of nature discovered in the science of physics. According to natural law theory, the laws that define right and wrong actions are not legislated or invented by human beings. Instead, they are discovered (literally to uncover what was always there) by human reason, just like the laws of nature are discovered within physics and chemistry. But unlike the laws of nature, which are discovered within these sciences, the laws which define moral action do not tell us how things are so much as they tell us how things ought to be. Although we should follow these laws, if we are to be moral, human beings have the freedom to ignore and/or violate moral laws. Thus, for natural law theory, morality is a matter of one’s intention to do the right thing, rather than the consequences of one’s actions. As long as we are sincerely trying to do what is right, we are moral. Is there really a “nature” to morality? For example, are actions such are assault, rape and murder morally wrong because they violate nature? For example, a natural human right to life and dignity
Hide

Your tour of a nation, whose repressive regime is putting down a rebellion among its people, takes you into a village in time to witness the army lining up 30 villagers to be shot. The officer in charge informs you that these 30 have been chosen at random for execution to pacify the rest. Even though this is a different country from yours, with different customs and manners, you are shocked at what you are seeing. Upon discovering that you are a foreigner, the first ever to visit the village, the officer does you an honor as a guest. He says, “You can shoot one of these swine yourself — and to mark the special occasion I’ll let the others go free.” If you decline the “honor” there will be no special occasion, and the officer says that all 30 will die. He hands you a pistol. Once again, you are shocked. But before you can open your mouth you realize that if you do decide to kill someone, there is a strong possibility that you will be tried and punished for murder in your own country. If this happens, and you are found guilty, you could be sentenced to up to 20 years at hard labor. You are given one hour to decide what you are going to do. At the end of that hour you must provide an answer to the following question: What is the Morally Correct thing for you to do? You are allowed to discuss the situation with two philosophers/advisors. Choose any two of the philosophers from Chapter Eight as your advisors. Your assignment is to write a two to three page paper (from 700 to 1000 words), which tells what happened in the conversation that you had with the two philosophers. Your paper should be organized into the four sections described below. Please use the section headings, Part One, Part Two, Part Three and Part Four, within your paper. Part One: Area of Philosophy. Write an introduction to your paper, which clearly identifies a general area of philosophy, within which the philosophical problem that you will be exploring can be found. Refer to Chapter One if you need to review these areas. Do you think that the question posed above place your discussion within Metaphysics, Theory of Knowledge, Ethics, Political Philosophy, and/or Philosophy of Religion? Part one of your paper should be brief and concise. No more than 50 to 100 words maximum. Part Two: Argument Analysis: Present the points of view, and the arguments supporting those views, from the two philosophers you have chosen to discuss these philosophical questions with you. Summarize and pick these arguments apart a little. What are the main premises of their arguments? Does they make any important assumptions? What evidence do they present that is factual and verifiable? And what evidence do they present that is more a matter of speculation and/or interpretation? In this section of your paper you are merely analyzing, or, picking apart the arguments. Do not draw any conclusions as to whether or not these arguments are valid and/or sound. This section of your paper should be at least 250 words. Part Three: Argument Evaluation. In this section present and defend some judgments about these arguments. Are these premises safe to accept? Are there any questionable assumptions made? If we do accept them do they take us logically to their conclusions? Your evaluation should make explicit use of concepts such as assumption, soundness and validity, as these are presented within Chapter One of the text. This section of your paper should be at least 250 words. Part Four: Conclusion. Draw your own interesting and relevant conclusions about the philosophical problem you are exploring. Do not merely offer a set of “feelings” or an opinion. Instead, build your own argument, regarding the questions above. If you find that you are in agreement with some of the philosopher’s ideas, then you can use these as part of your own argument, so long as you do not merely reiterate what they are saying. This part of your paper should be 300 words minimum. Citing the sources You need to cite the author and page numbers that you use to write your essay using some method of in-text notation, e.g., provide in-text references to the source used and you are required to provide a list of sources you read and used for your essay e.g., a Works Cited page.
Hide

Part II: Listen to a Utah Court of Appeals or Utah Supreme Court case in person or on-line You can listen to a past case (search the UTCourts.gov website for recordings). Provide a summary of the arguments made by both parties (or their attorneys). Include your observations about the court, the judges, and the attorney’s. Make sure to identify the case name. Part III: Watch the movie Michael Clayton. Identify the legal and/or ethical issues explored in the film; write up a film critique with the legal/ethical issues as the main emphasis of the critique. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the film from a legal/ethical viewpoint.

In The Peacemaker, Ken Sande lays out 6 different responses that he labels personal peacemaking or assisted peacemaking. How do you prefer to handle conflict? Do you lean toward personal peacemaking or assisted peacemaking?

How can businesses benefit from the Internet?Please provide examples of companies when possible and ensure that you justify your response.