The factors have impacted the ability of humans to live longer lives differ from in male and female. Male and female longevity are significantly impacted by differences in education, employment prospects, lifestyle choices, social mobility, and the larger local environment.
<h3>What is Longevity?</h3>
- While "life expectancy" is always defined statistically as the average number of years left at a particular age, the phrase "longevity" is occasionally used as a synonym for "life expectancy."
- However, the term "longevity" is sometimes meant to refer only to, especially long-lived people of a population. Male and female longevity are significantly impacted by differences in education, employment prospects, lifestyle choices, social mobility, and the larger local environment.
- Due to a number of causes, including decreased infant mortality, improving living standards, improved lifestyles, higher education, and improvements in healthcare and medicine, life expectancy at birth has increased significantly over the past century.
- Life expectancy at birth has been steadily rising over the past century as a result of economic development, improvements in some environmental circumstances (such as in many urban areas), improved lifestyles, and advancements in healthcare and medicine, including lower infant mortality.
Know more about longevity brainly.com/question/9874118
#SPJ4
Answer:
The Ten Commandments denote the precepts used in the Hebrew Bible that according to Judaism and Christianity were given to the people by God through Moses. These precepts have also influenced societies in which an Abrahamic religion became dominant.
These commandments were moral and ethical principles that, based on the obligation that its religious character imprinted on it, were adopted by the Hebrew society as the prevailing norm at the legal level prior to the political and social organization in nations with defined governments and democratically established laws. Thus, the Jews adopted the commandments as rules of conduct that, if breached, resulted in a sanction, not only religious, but also earthly.
Answer:
True!
Explanation:
During the Second World War (1939–1945), India was a part of the British Empire, with the British holding territories in India that included over six hundred autonomous Princely States. British India officially declared war on Nazi Germany in September 1939.[1] The British Raj, as part of the Allied Nations, sent over two and a half million soldiers to fight under British command against the Axis powers. India also provided the base for American operations in support of China in the China Burma India Theater.
Indians fought with distinction throughout the world, including in the European theatre against Germany, in North Africa against Germany and Italy, in the South Asian region defending India against the Japanese and fighting the Japanese in Burma. Indians also aided in liberating British colonies such as Singapore and Hong Kong after the Japanese surrender in August 1945. Over 87,000 Indian soldiers (including those from modern day Pakistan, and Bangladesh) and 3 million civilians died in World War II.[2][3] Field Marshal Sir Claude Auchinleck, Commander-in-Chief, India, stated the British "couldn't have come through both wars [World War I and II] if they hadn't had the Indian Army."[4][5]
Viceroy Linlithgow declared that India was at war with Germany without consultations with Indian politicians.[6] Political parties such as the Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha supported the British war effort while the largest and most influential political party existing in India at the time, the Indian National Congress, demanded independence before it would help Britain.[7][8] London refused, and when Congress announced a "Quit India" campaign in August 1942, tens of thousands of its leaders were imprisoned by the British for the duration. Meanwhile, under the leadership of Indian leader Subhash Chandra Bose, Japan set up an army of Indian POWs known as the Indian National Army, which fought against the British. A major famine in Bengal in 1943 led to 3 million deaths due to starvation, and a highly controversial issue remains regarding Churchill's decision to not provide emergency food relief.[9][10]
Indian participation in the Allied campaign remained strong. The financial, industrial and military assistance of India formed a crucial component of the British campaign against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.[11] India's strategic location at the tip of the Indian Ocean, its large production of armaments, and its huge armed forces played a decisive role in halting the progress of Imperial Japan in the South-East Asian theatre.[12] The Indian Army during World War II was one of the largest Allied forces contingents which took part in the North and East African Campaign, Western Desert Campaign. At the height of the second World War, more than 2.5 million Indian troops were fighting Axis forces around the globe.[13] After the end of the war, India emerged as the world's fourth largest industrial power and its increased political, economic and military influence paved the way for its independence from the United Kingdom in 1947.[14]
The answer for Ali is a diathesis-stress model, for Ayse is the sociocultural model. The diathesis-stress model pertains to the reason that genetic factors are the cause why we acquire mental disorders. The socio-cultural model points out that society and the culture play important roles as to why we develop mental disorders.
the right answer is: that educating adolescents about how to make better choices to avoid the consequences of risky behaviors does not reduce the number of risky behaviors committed by adolescents.
Because according to studies on the peer influence of adolescents and decision making says that moving past research center investigations of age contrasts in "cool" psychological procedures identified with hazard discernment and thinking, new methodologies have moved concentration to the impact of social and enthusiastic factors on immature neurocognition. When teenagers invest an expanding measure of energy with their companions, explore recommends that peer-related boosts may sharpen the reward framework to react to the reward estimation of dangerous conduct. As the intellectual control framework step by step develops through the span of the high school years, teenagers develop in their ability to facilitate influence and insight, and to practice self-direction even insincerely stimulating circumstances. These limits are reflected in progressive development in the ability to oppose peer impact.
