Answer:
The manager got up from the bench and urged his team to attack more vigorously, for he knew the championship title was at stake if they did not win.
D) stake is your answer.
~
Answer:
A). Dissociative fugue.
Explanation:
'Dissociative fugue' is elucidated as the dissociative psychiatric disorder in which the patient suffers from severe amnesia which might be the product of a psychological trauma or illness. In such a disorder, the person loses his/her sense of identity and other associated autobiographical information about himself/herself.
As per the given description, <u>option A</u> correctly describes Verna's disorder as her loss of awareness about her past experiences('how she ended up in her current surroundings') implies that she suffers 'amnesia' and her comfortable and non-concerned attitude to know about her past reflects that 'she is attempting to escape/dissociate the stressful conditions(which might have led her to the present situation). Thus, this strengthens the conclusion that she is experiencing <u>'dissociative fugue'.</u>
There are two ways to organize a comparison/contrast essay:
A) Block Approach. This organizational pattern is most effective when used on short essays,
such as in-class essays. The body of such an essay is organized by discussing one subject, point
by point, in complete detail before moving on to the next subject. The writer should select points
by which both subjects can be examined. The number of body paragraphs will be determined by
the number of points discussed in the essay.
B) Point-by-Point Approach. This organizational pattern is most effective when used on longer
essays, such as a comparison of two articles, short stories, or novels. The body of such an essay
is organized by discussing one point at a time and how it applies to each subject before moving
on to the next point. For long works, at least three points should be examined if not more.
It would be Organic chemistry
This is an opinion question, so I gave an explanation on both sides. Yes has 169 words, and no has 174!
YES:
Yes, I believe that TV ads promoting junk food should be banned. They actively promote unhealthy foods in a subtle way. Younger kids watching TV can see the ads with popular faces (Their favorite cartoon character, actor, or other people they look up too), then falsely assume that the junk food is going to be good for you. After they take in the mentality that junk food or unhealthy food is good for you, it will be implemented into their mindset and as they grow up- this will stay with them and promote an unhealthy eating habit. If we banned these ads, there would be advantages and disadvantages. Some advantages would be that the younger generation could possibly grow into healthy eating habits in an easier way or the ads also mess up our body’s way of understanding how hunger feels and can trigger mindless eating. Some disadvantages will be a decrease in junk food ads, less commercial jobs for actors, and a less popular demand for the foods.
<h2>
-----------------------------------</h2>
NO:
No, I do not believe TV ads for junk food should be banned. Kids from the ages 5-14 should not have to worry and be scared about their intake of food, if we do ban those ads it will promote insecurities in eating foods and not only be scared of eating the food for health reasons, but for being shamed or bullied by society. Not only are junk foods when eaten in moderation not detrimental to health in most kids, but when they're going to be taken away it will cause the kids who've become dependent on them for snacks for when they can't cook and don't have help cooking all the time to have to struggle to find something to eat. Of course, banning the ads will have pros and cons, but I truly believe that the cons outweigh the pros. The pros such as promoting a healthy eating habit, showing kids to eat healthy, etc., is VERY important, but there are many many ways we can do this without banning the ads.
<h2><u>
If I helped, please remember to thank, rate, and mark my answer as brainliest if seen fit.</u></h2>
