Cell regulation doesnt seem to work in patients with Cancer
Answer:
See the answer below
Explanation:
<em>Both conclusions can be valid because they are based on valid data and scientific reasoning.</em>
In order for a data to be valid in making a conclusion, such data must have been collected through a scientific experiment that is devoid of subjectivism. In order words, the data must have been objectively collected via standard experimental procedures.
Once data have been collected, they are analyzed and used to make valid conclusions based on the hypothesis which must have been made earlier before the experiment.
Conclusions made from standard experimental procedures and scientific reasonings are valid and such experiments are reproducible.
<em>Hence, as long as the data from which the conclusions were made can be reproduced through the same experiments, the conclusions are valid.</em>
Answer:
Autosomal dominant pattern.
Explanation:
If the pattern of inheritance is same in the disease just like the model of colorblindness mutation so we can say that the disease has autosomal dominant pattern because the colorblindness mutation also occur due to the autosomal dominant pattern. Sometimes the disease is also inherited from their parents through genetically. So both diseases and the model colorblindness mutation are considered same if both have the same pattern of inheritance.
The number of amino acids that will be in the polypeptide chain produced by the normal DNA or MRNA sequence is usually 30 amino acids. Although the number of amino acids depends on the function of the generated DNA or RNA. The types of amino acids also differ depending on the function.
<span>The answer should be B. The results of a previous experiment are presented as an introduction to a new experiment.
Material that used for </span>presentation of background research should have a credible information. A<span>mazing new drug is described in a television commercial mostly false and it is not backed up by scientific study. Rumor from </span><span>second-hand accounts definitely not credible. A newspaper is not a scientific study and could give false information.</span>