When interest rates are increased, borrowing money becomes more expensive. This translates into both individuals and buisnesses having to slow down their enconomic growth, because financing their activities or production also becomes more expensive.
The Federal Reserve has the <u>double-task</u> of keeping prices manageable in a flourishing economy while keeping unemployment as low as possible. When there's inflation, it's been proven that slowing down the economy by increasing interest rates, tends to reduce inflation. That's why it's a good option. We have to keep in mind, however, that this will raise unemployment as a collateral effect.
As you can see, there's no easy answer when it comes to balancing all factors at the same time.
Hope this helps!
Answer: Because they had never developed immunities to the disease
Answer:
the Olympic Peninsula
Explanation:
In the northwest the Olympic Peninsula borders the Pacific Ocean south of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.
I know it isnt one of the choices but this is what i got hope it helps, stay safe :)
In spite of its seeming insignificance in a time of major empires, what major part did Austria play in stabilizing Europe, Austria helped to stabilize Europe by helping with land and defeating the Ottoman Turks. seemingly insignificant to this time period of great empires, Austria provided a great contribution when they halted Turkish advances into Europe, pushing them <span>out of the Balkans.</span>
The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the African American Male is the longest nontherapeutic experiment on human beings in medical history, as noted by Arthur L. Caplan (1992). Begun in 1932 by the United States Public Health Service (USPHS), the study was purportedly designed to determine the natural course of untreated latent syphilis in some 400 African American men in Tuskegee, Macon County, Alabama. The research subjects, all of whom had syphilis when they were enrolled in the study-contrary to the “urban myth” that holds “black men in Alabama were injected with the virus that causes syphilis” (Walker, 1992)-were matched against 200 uninfected subjects who served as a control group.
The subjects were recruited with misleading promises of “special free treatment,” which were actually spinal taps done without anesthesia to study the neurological effects of syphilis, and they were enrolled without their informed consent.
The subjects received heavy metals therapy, standard treatment in 1932, but were denied antibiotic therapy when it became clear in the 1940s that penicillin was a safe and effective treatment for the disease. When penicillin became widely available by the early 1950s as the preferred treatment for syphilis, this therapy was again withheld. On several occasions, the USPHS actually sought to prevent treatment.
The first published report of the study appeared in 1936, with subsequent papers issued every four to six years until the early 1970s. In l969, a committee at the federally operated Center for Disease Control decided the study should continue. Only in 1972, when accounts of the study first appeared in the national press, did the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) halt the experiment.
At that time, 74 of the test subjects were still alive; at least 28, but perhaps more than 100, had died directly from advanced syphilis. An investigatory panel appointed by HEW in August 1972 found the study “ethically unjustified” and argued that penicillin should have been provided to the men. As a result, the National Research Act, passed in 1974, mandated that all federally funded proposed research with human subjects be approved by an institutional review board (IRB). By 1992, final payments of approximately $40,000 were made to survivors under an agreement settling the class action lawsuit brought on behalf of the Tuskegee Study subjects. President Clinton publicly apologized on behalf of the federal government to the handful of study survivors in April 1997.
Several major ethical issues involving human research subjects need to be studied further. The first major ethical issue to be considered is informed consent, which refers to telling potential research participants about all aspects of the research that might reasonably influence their decision to participate. A major unresolved concern is exactly how far researchers’ obligations extend to research subjects. Another concern has to do with the possibility that a person might feel pressured to agree or might not understand precisely what he or she is agreeing to. The investigators took advantage of a deprived socioeconomic situation in which the participants had experienced low levels of care. The contacts were with doctors and nurses who were seen as authority figures.