I think it’s B
Hope that helped XD
Explanation:
Ethical doubts about genetic engineering motivate a view that many philosophers favour: that genetic therapy to eliminate disease and disability is ethically acceptable, given that the risks can be overcome.
But genetic enhancement is ethically problematic. The line between enhancement and therapy is difficult to draw.
Studies show people who are physically attractive are likely to earn more than those considered to have below-average looks. Does this mean “ugliness” is a disability that ought to be corrected by genetic engineering?
Or, similarly, is having a below-average IQ a disability, something that should be subject to change through gene-editing?
riding a bicycle without your helmet
C) Animal vector; Lyme disease ( it's spread by animals or bugs )
B) Direct contact; Staphylococcus ( could get it from touching someone that has it )
A) Sexual contact; Human papilloma virus
Good luck! (:
