GASA02H3 Lecture : You're welcome

68 views2 pages

periwinklellama58

28 Jan 2011

School

Department

Course

Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Epigenesist vs. preformation (grows from one thing, to the finished product vs. Planted the finished product, it grows until it"s big enough. Reading 2. 1 (6-7 century) indian (no mention of religion in this reading) The three dosas (harmful forces, but when they are in balance, they provide perfect health) Before you were born, you have perfect health, but after, you depend on dosas. A woman pregnant for 1st time, comes in contact with an unclean woman (whose baby have died), she might be accessible to the childsnatcher. *contact means anything the unclean woman might have used or touched. Reading 2. 4 buddhist religious text (robert kritzer, garbhavakrantisutra) Normal pregnancy: the foetus is aware of agony in the womb, and past birth on birth, the memory of its past births disappears as it is being squeezed out. Birth of the buddha: queen dreams of a white elephant, buddha comes out and walks its first steps.

Related Questions

Some aspects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) (2010) may impact the health production function in the following ways: a) An additional 30 million people in the U.S. would move from being uninsured to insured b) PPACAâs emphasis on wellness and prevention c) Grants and technical assistance to employers will be provided to establish wellness programs for workers d) Chain restaurants and food sold in vending machines will be required to provide information regarding the nutritional content of each item sold e) Establishment of accountable care organizations may help to replace the fragmented health care system with a more integrated one Provide an explanation of what these measures are aiming in terms of improving peopleâs health status according to human capital theory (Grossman, 1972 in Santerre & Neun, 2013) by relating the aforementioned specific policies to the associated variable in the health production function.Based on Bodenheimer and Grumbach (2009) and your related readings (especially Santerre & Neun-chapter 4 & 6)

Evolution naturally produces better features: stronger muscles,teeth and minds. Killing the weakest, evolution wipes defectivegenes out of populations.

The mutations are necessary for advance. However, they arerandom and, thus, mostly negative. Right? How does the natureeliminate them from the population?

I see that one mechanism is polygamy: male have higher mutationrates. They tend to reproduce as much as possible. Female havelower mutation rates, they couple with only with best men andcontribute much more to their offsprings. So, men generate as muchrandom solutions as possible, whereas the role of female is toconserve the best of them. This means that the most of the male(bad mutations) die unreproduced. This eliminates the bad mutationsand favours the progress of good qualities. The higher animalsstarted to form harems and tournaments over their ownership. Thisfurther fosters the elimination of weak men and profileration ofstrong genes. However, human monogamy has disabled this selectionmechanism. Best men are dedicated to only one woman. Other womencannot mix their genes with other good genes from previousgenerations. They are forced to look at the low quality men, whocarry degenerate mutations. Might be it is monogamy that makes ushuman but it implies that all genes reproduce.

Yet 100 years ago it was not a big deal since we still hadanother filter: our grandfathers were born in families that hadnormally 10 children (I am speaking about Russia) and only 2-3survived until reproduction (the population increased reallyslowly). I bet that those who survived had really good health:thanks to the bad health and immense selection pressure, thenegative mutants are eliminated immediately and populationmaintains a perfect genome (aka biologic health). Killing moreweakest in the current generation improves the health of nextgenerations.

However everything has changed during the 20th century. Theadvances in economy and medicine have almost eliminated theselection. The selection pressure has relaxed to essentially zeroso that everybody survives and leaves the same amount of offspring(and some scientists are even concerned that degradatoryindividuals leave more offsprings than the prosperous ones). Wehave even eliminated the infant mortality. We use baby incubatorsso that the people with the weakest health could survive andreproduce as normal and we are proud of it. It may sound strangebut the mutation rate has not changed at all. Does it mean that thehuman genome is in danger?

I see the situation like you have inherited a perfect mechanismand decided not recovering it from the inevitably adverse action ofentropy, that degrades it constantly. There is a constant chance,d, that every good gene is affected by a mutation. It is afraction of healthy genes that will fail passing to the nextgeneration. This will leave only (1-d) genes healthy inthe next generation. The fraction of healthy genes will melt like1, (1-d), (1-d)

Ch. 10 Case Study: Hospital Tests Babies Al and Victoria are in their early 30s and had been married for 5 years when their first child was born. Victoriaâs pregnancy was perfectly normal, and she had continued working until one week before the babyâs birth. She had never felt better. At birth, Al and Victoriaâs son appeared perfectly normal. A few days after they took the baby home, the doctor called to say that the baby needed more tests. He asked that both parents come to them office visit because he wanted to talk to them. In his office the doctor said that a blood test done in the hospital showed that their child had a genetic disorder called phenylketonuria (PKU). If their child was not treated using a special diet, he would become mentally retarded. Al and Victoria had never heard of PKU and this news upset them. They immediately called around to family members and found that only a few relatives on either side of the family had ever heard of PKU, and none knew of any family member with the disorder. Al and Victoria wondered how a genetic disease that no one in their family had could suddenly appear in their child. They made an appointment for another visit with the doctor, and in the meantime began reading about PKU. 1. Why was Al and Victoriaâs baby tested for PKU in the first place? 2. Neither Al nor Victoriaâs family has a history of PKU. Should Al and Victoriaâs baby have been tested at all? Explain. 3. Should Al and Victoria have the right to refuse this testing for their child? Why or why not? 4. PKU is a treatable genetic disorder. Affected children must follow a strict diet that prevents many of the conditionâs symptoms. Does this information change your opinion about testing the baby? 5. Testing newborn for PKU is done in every US state; some states offer more extensive testing for newborns. Al and Victoria live in one of these states. Should they have been notified of the testing? Why or why not?

GASA02H3 Lecture : You're welcome

Document Summary

Get access

Related Questions