Answer: E. Carcinogen
Explanation: The formation of cancer is often termed as carcinogenesis. Carcinogenesis is caused by carcinogens which can be a substances in air, radiation which could cause carcinogenesis, carcinogens may also be used to describe factors such as environmental, chemical or etiquettes which could result in the formation of carcinogenic cells.
Hence, carcinogen is any sort of substance or condition that can directly result to cancer. It could be a chemical substance, a virus, or medications and radiation used in the treatment of cancer.
I think you forgot to give the options in this question. based on my research and knowledge, i will answer this question and hope that it comes to your help. Stocks are one of the devices that imparts ownership in a corporation. If a person has more than 51% of the stocks of any company in his or her name, then he or she would be the major share holder and decision maker of the company.
Answer:
It's A neither
Explanation:
During the renaissance ships sailed the Atlantic ocean
Prior to the Industrial Revolution, which began in Britain in the late 1700s, manufacturing was often done in people's homes, using hand tools or basic machines. Industrialization marked a shift to powered, special-purpose machinery, factories and mass production.
Answer: Ultramares corporation v. Touche established Ultramares doctrine. Hochfelder v. Ernst & Ernst ruled that scienter is required before CPAs can be held liable.
Explanation:
All the options except the above are true. Ultramares corporation v. Touche did establish the Ultramares doctrine.
United States v. Natelli sentenced two CPAs to prison for a year, in addition to fines, for violating the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Bily v. Arthur Young did not uphold the restatement doctrine. The restatement doctrine restatement doctrine makes an auditor liable to people who rely on the quality of his work be they his clients or third parties. Two high courts ruled that auditors are not liable to third parties who use their work but only to the party that contracted their work.
However, Hochfelder v. Ernst & Ernst ruled that an allegation of scienter (an intention to deceive) is not required before CPAs can be held liable as long as the actions constitute actual deception.
While rule 10b-5 of the Exchange Act states the presence of scienter as a requirement to commit an offense, the court ruled against the statute by eliminating the Scienter clause from criminal statute and ruled against Ernst & Ernst.
