input question: I read this background article the other day: When you go to the dentist to get a tooth pulled, you really don't want to feel any pain. The dentist injects an anesthetic into your gum and it eventually becomes numb. One theory as to why anesthetics work deals with the movement of ions across the cell membrane. The anesthetic gets into the membrane structure and causes shifts in how ions move across the membrane. If ion movement is disrupted, nerve impulses will not be transmitted and you will not sense pain at least not until the anesthetic wears off. I am facing a new situation today: Two men in the Vietnam War needed to have their arms amputated. Unfortunately, the men were not able to be knocked unconscious for the operation. The doctor asked each patient if they wanted anesthetic injected into their arm or not. Marco replied that he wanted some, and Luke declined any anesthetic. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which person's ions will be able to move across the cell membrane????
output answer: Luke
I read this background article the other day: Sometimes muscles and tendons get injured when a person starts doing an activity before they have warmed up properly. A warm up is a slow increase in the intensity of a physical activity that prepares muscles for an activity. Warming up increases the blood flow to the muscles and increases the heart rate. Warmed-up muscles and tendons are less likely to get injured. For example, before running or playing soccer, a person might jog slowly to warm muscles and increase their heart rate. Even elite athletes need to warm up ( Figure below ). I am facing a new situation today: Two teams were competing in a 5 km race. White team warmed up before the race, but Blue team arrived with a bus late and didn't have time to warm up properly before the race. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which team had more athletes with increased blood flow to the muscles before the race?
----
Answer: White
Q: I read this background article the other day: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. I am facing a new situation today: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which friend takes more statins?
A: Brad
Question: I read this background article the other day: Tropical forests (rainforests) receive more insolation and rainfall over longer growing seasons than any other environment on earth. With these elevated temperatures, insolation and rainfall, biomass is extremely productive leading to the production of as much as 800 grams of carbon per square meter per year. Higher temperatures and larger amounts of water contribute to higher rates of chemical weathering. Increased rates of decomposition cause smaller amounts of fulvic acid to percolate and leach metals from the zone of active weathering. Thus, in stark contrast to soil in forests, tropical forests have little to no podzolization and therefore do not have marked visual and chemical contrasts with the soil layers. Instead, the mobile metals Mg, Fe and Al are precipitated as oxide minerals giving the soil a rusty red color. I am facing a new situation today: John was studying the characteristics of tropical forests. For that, he chose forests in Laos. To compare the forests in Laos with the temperate zone forests he chose forests in Ireland. He could clearly see that how they differed in important ways. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Would forests in Ireland see higher or lower rates of chemical weathering than the forests in Laos?
Answer: lower
[Q]: I read this background article the other day: Catalytic converters in cars increase the rates of several important reactions. Unburned hydrocarbons can more easily be converted to carbon dioxide and water in the presence of a catalyst. Additionally, carbon monoxide (a harmful gas produced by incomplete combustion of fuel) is further oxidized to carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide compounds (which contribute to smog and acid rain) are transformed back into nitrogen and oxygen gases. By passing car exhaust over these catalysts before their release into the air, the emissions from a combustion engine are made into much less harmful substances, resulting in a much cleaner atmosphere. I am facing a new situation today: Daniel drives a new car that uses catalytic converters. His best friend Kelvin however driving an older car. His car does not use any type of catalytic converter. They decide they want to go on a road trip together but dont know who's car they should take. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Given a family wants to buy a new car that causes less pollution, should they buy a car with catalytic converters or without?
****
[A]: with
Problem: Given the question: I read this background article the other day: In the U.S., the majority of electricity is produced by burning coal or other fossil fuels. This causes air pollution, acid rain, and global warming. Fossil fuels are also limited and may eventually run out. Like fossil fuels, radioactive elements are limited. In fact, they are relatively rare, so they could run out sooner rather than later. On the other hand, nuclear fission does not release air pollution or cause the other environmental problems associated with burning fossil fuels. This is the major advantage of using nuclear fission as a source of energy. I am facing a new situation today: Us and Canada are two friendly countries. Canada uses alternative methods to produce electricity while the US use more coal and oil. Both countries recently participated in a Global Warming Council. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which country causes more air pollution?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
US