A. Introduction to background information about erythrocytes in general and membrane structure, composition, and the fluid mosaic model
B. Experimental goals of the lab.
C. What use, clinical or research, could the information from these types of experiments be put to?
D. Brief descriiption of the general procedural approach used for each goal.
II. Materials and methods: (1 page)
Give a BRIEF synopsis in paragraph form of just the essential concepts of each procedure. Explain it as if you were trying to explain what you did to a scientist who already understands the techniques involved. Do not give a narrative of how the procedure was performed or a numbered list of the steps: DO NOT just retype the lab handout procedure. Include important specific information: blood cells, reagents, centrifuge g-forces and times, and what calculations were performed. Also, include any errors or changes to the procedures.
As briefly as possible, recount the methods used to:
i. Isolate Membrane
ii. determine surface carbohydrate (Hemagglutination assay)
iii. determine Lipid types (TLC)
iv. determine membrane protein asymmetry and types (labeling and gel)
v. lipid/protein ratio (gravimetric analysis and Lowry)
WRITE THE ANSWER TO THE INTRODUCTION AND MATERIALS/METHODS IN THE LAB REPORT ATTACHED. ALSO, I ADDED THE LAB MANAUL WITH FULL STEPS ON WHAT THIS REPORT WAS ABOUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.[supanova_question]
citizenship and build back better act
Write a one page op-ed article on the importance of pathway for citizenship and the importance of it being included in the build back better act.[supanova_question]
of the Grim Reaper
This is a case study that I have to present in class under 5 minutes that is why I need only a page. It is on Lonnie Franklin (Grim Reaper). I have to give background information on what happened,what did he do to the prostitutes, how did he get the name, how where they able to catch him, so be specific about the DNA evidence found. As well as the victim that survived and how we was convicted and die. I will give you the slide where my forensics professor lists the things it should have. I will also attach a voice audio of someone giving their presentation for reference as to what I am looking for.[supanova_question]
by John Stuart Mill
Writing Assignment Help The essay should explain in detail the way in the moral theory of Mill, Kant, OR Rawls can be used to decide what is right to do, either in a given situation or in formulating general moral rules for the construction of society. Don’t forget this is an expository essay! (Expository)
Section 1: You should begin by explaining in detail the way in which the author in question thinks we should decide what is right – explain their decision procedure for evaluating action. This section should draw heavily on the primary texts, and should be a third to a half of the essay.
Section 2: Apply this moral theory to the evaluation of TWO particular proposed actions or social practices. Present one action or practice that different moral theories or intuitions agree on, AND present one on which moral theories or intuitions disagree. (You don’t need to describe the disagreement or the opposing view at this point, merely mention that there is disagreement.)
–Be sure to describe each proposed action or social practice in detail.
–Then state how the moral theory you are examining would analyze that action or practice.
Finally, in a paragraph or two, state the strongest reason you can think of that another moral theory (such as those discussed in the “Moral Reasons” reading) or intuitions would give for disagreeing about the second case. (Use of the primary texts will strengthen this section.)
Please make this great I need a great grade thank you so much for your help![supanova_question]
to Texas Tech Essay
I want to gain admission to Texas Tech, with possibilities of majoring in Business or possibly a Mass Communication Major, in the realm of digital production with audio and video skill.
I have been a dedicated basketball player all four years, and a starter as a varsity player.
I have routinely made time for philanthropy (which was outlined in my application) and I have had a few different employers throughout high school as well.
I have ben a fan of Texas Tech, Lubbock, the campus and the people for years. I enjoy the diversity and the tight student community feel. My parents have taken me to several college campuses over the years and Texas Tech has always been the ideal match for me.
I know several successful people that jumpstarted their career at Tech, and I know that I can do the same.[supanova_question]
First, make sure to give your work a proper structure. Start
First, make sure to give your work a proper structure.
Start the paper with an introduction.
Briefly summarize the topic. Identify your thesis statement – what is the main claim you’ll try to support in the paper? Tell your reader. Tell your reader what you’ll try to achieve in the paper and how you’re going to proceed (this kind of introduction should begin all the papers you write in a philosophy class).
Next, carefully present and analyze Nagel’s argument. This should be the main part of the paper. Refer to the reading, to the PowerPoint, and to the questions asked in our class (1. Does our moral duty require us to be impartial? If so, how impartial should we be and how do we weigh our own self-interests against others’ interests?
2. Is morality universal? Even if it is, different people can have different motives for action which would, in turn, give them different reasons for action. If that’s the case, then there is no universal standard that guides our moral duty.)
Use citations, paraphrase the citations, discuss them, and provide references.
Remember not just to mention Nagel’s view/main claim – but to present his actual argument. Tell your reader what his claim (conclusion) is and what premises he provides in support of the conclusion.
Then, finally, apply similar reasoning to our example of hate speech.
But don’t just go with your intuition. Try to play devil’s advocate as well.
Don’t talk about your own perspective. You may think you have good reasons to avoid hate speech and that others should avoid it. But your perspective in the paper should be different.
Give a well-developed example of someone who has no interest in doing what morality requires. And who doesn’t care about how others treat him or her.
Explain: what WOULD IT MEAN for moral considerations to give a person a reason to avoid hate speech? According to Nagel, when do moral considerations give us reasons to avoid doing certain things? Refer to his view.
Then, explain what you think Nagel would answer to the question above – his answer will be your argument’s conclusion.
Construct the argument: how would the conclusion be supported? With what premises?
Finish the paper with a conclusion and a list of your references.[supanova_question]