Recent orders
Answers
Homework 2
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Tittle
Professor’s Name
Date
Answers
The discovery in the year 1953 of the dual helix, the twisted-ladder structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), by Francis Crick and James Watson created a milestone in the account of science and resulted in contemporary molecular biology, which is majorly concerned with comprehending how genetic factors control the biochemical actions within cells. The discovery of the shape of the DNA produced groundbreaking understandings into the protein synthesis and genetic code (Satyavolu et al., 2019). Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, it aided to yield novel and great scientific practices, especially genetic engineering, recombinant DNA research, monoclonal antibodies, and rapid gene sequencing techniques on which nowadays multi-billion dollar biotechnology business is established. Great current progresses in science, to be precise the mapping of the human genome, genetic fingerprinting and contemporary forensics, and the promise, yet unsatisfied, of gene psychotherapy, all have their roots in Crick and Watson’s brilliant work. The double helix’s idea has not only remodeled biology, but it also has to turn out to be a cultural representation, symbolized in visual art, sculpture, toys, and jewelry.
Chargaff’s rules articulates that the DNA from whichever species of whichever being ought to have a 1:1 stoichiometric ratio of purine and pyrimidine bases and, more precisely, that the quantity of guanine need to be equivalent to cytosine and the quantity of adenine need to be equivalent to thymine (Fariselli et al., 2020). This arrangement is found in all strands of the DNA. The Chargaff’s rules were discovered by Austrian native chemist Erwin Chargaff in the late 1940s. Erwin Chargaff projected two significant rules in his days, which were applicably termed Chargaff’s rules. The main and greatest known accomplishment was to illustrate that in natural DNA, the quantity of guanine entities is equivalent to the number of cytosine entities, and the quantity of adenine entities equivalents the number of thymine entities.
Frederick Griffith was reviewing Streptococcus pneumoniae, a bacterium that passes on a disease to mammals. He used two strains of the Streptococcus pneumoniae, a harmless R (Rough) strain, and a virulent S (Smooth) strain to show the transfer of genetic material. The R strain, which does not have the shielding capsule, is overpowered by the host’s immune system, while the S strain is bounded by a polysaccharide capsule, which shields it from the host’s immune system. In 1952, Martha Chase and Alfred Hershey placed this uncertainty to rest. They convincingly proved that DNA is the hereditary material. Chase and Hershey put into practice the T2 bacteriophage, a virus that infects bacteria, to demonstrate this fact. A virus is principally DNA (or RNA) bounded by a protein covering. To replicate, a virus needs to infect a cell and use the host cell’s mechanism to produce several viruses, a replicative development identified as the lytic cycle.
Cancer is basically an illness of mitosis. The typical checkpoints controlling mitosis are overridden or ignored by the cancer cell. Cancer starts when a particular cell is changed or transformed from an ordinary cell to a cancer cell. Faults in mitosis result in the creation of daughter cells with too few or too many chromosomes, a feature called aneuploidy. Almost all aneuploidies that result due to faults in meiosis or in the course of early embryonic development are fatal, with the distinguished exemption of trisomy 21 in humans (Levine & Holland, 2018). Mitotic mistakes can activate the triggering of p53. Errors in cell division normally lead to triggering of the cancer suppressor protein p53, which inline prompts a cell cycle apoptosis or senescence.
Turner syndrome is caused when the condition outcomes from monosomy X. The chromosomal disorder happens as an unsystematic occurrence during the development of generative cells, including eggs and sperm in the pretentious individual’s parent. A cell division mistake known as nondisjunction can predict outcomes in reproductive cells with an irregular quantity of chromosomes. Mistakes can happen all through meiosis generating gametes with missing or an extra chromosome. The results of this subsequent fertilization rely on the chromosomes that are affected. Frequently the embryo is not feasible, but several of these mistakes can result in sex chromosome disorders or trisomy disorders.
Polyploidy is the existence in cells of more than a particular duo of each chromosome. It may be the consequence of an unprompted increase of a plant’s hereditary material or by hybridization and is very common in domesticated plants. This condition comes as a result of the complete nondisjunction of chromosomes in the course of meiosis or mitosis. It is more common in crops and has been, in reality, the main source of speciation in the angiosperms. Principally significant is allopolyploid, which implicates the replication of genetic material in a hybrid plan.
Reference
Fariselli, P., Taccioli, C., Pagani, L., & Maritan, A. (2020) DNA sequence symmetries from randomness: the origin of the Chargaff’s second parity rule. Briefings in Bioinformatics
https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbaa041Levine, M. S., & Holland, A. J. (2018) The impact of mitotic errors on cell proliferation and tumorigenesis Genes & development, 32(9-10), 620-638
Satyavolu, N. S. R., Loh, K. Y., Tan, L. H., & Lu, Y. (2019) Discovery of and insights into DNA “codes” for tunable morphologies of metal nanoparticles Small, 15(26), 1900975
https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.201900975
Enterprise Risk Management in Aviation
Enterprise Risk Management in Aviation
Name
Course
Professor
Date
Enterprise Risk Management in Aviation
Airlines charge a fee for baggage carried by passengers on the flight. The fee usually varies with airlines depending on the size and weight of the baggage. Passengers are also charged according to the number of bags they have. American Airlines charges $ 25 for the first checked bag and $ 35 for the second bag with a limit of 50 pounds weight each per passenger flying within the United States (Powers, 2012). The passenger is also allowed carry-on luggage weighing 40 pounds which is normally not charged. Some airlines may not limit the size and weight of carry on luggage depending on the capacity and size to which the plane is filled. Carry-on luggage contains items that the passenger may require at hand such as medication and items such as jewellery, cameras, phones and laptops. It consists of a sizeable bag and a personal item for example a purse or a laptop. Frequent fliers such as business travelers and military personnel have different arrangements (Powers, 2012).
With the current charges for checked baggage, passengers are carrying more in their carry-on baggage to reduce the amount of fees they pay on the flight (Harris and Muir, 2005, p72). They also carry more on board to reduce the hustles of checking out from the airport once they land as well as reducing the incidence of their baggage getting lost and misplaced (Philips, 1997). Airlines are also increasing the capacity of overhead bins to take in more and larger carry on items. This includes airlines such as United, Delta, American and US Airways (Powers, 2012). According to the Detroit News (2012), airlines are offering larger overheads bins to address issues of over packed carry on bins and the stress and delays that occur as a result of lack of room in overhead bins. Because carry-on luggage is rarely weighed, it adds to the element of uncertainty to the pilot’s weight-balance calculations (Flight Safety Foundation, 1997, p8).
The increase in the size of overhead bins has several advantages. These include enabling the passengers to have their luggage closer to them during the flight and hence can be easily removed while getting off the plane (Freed, 2012). It also allows them to be more relaxed during their flight as they can keep the location of their luggage in sight. Airlines should, however, have stricter check in procedures to ensure passengers do not bring more carry-on luggage than allowed on the plane due to the availability of room. Another advantage is that airlines that have bigger overhead bins in their planes will have competitive advantage compared to the others among passengers who have a bulkier carry-on luggage and among business travelers who tend to favour airlines with room for their carry-on luggage as they are able to put it all in one place.
Despite these advantages, the large overhead bins also introduce several safety issues while flying. Most of these risks are in relation to the excess carry-on luggage that the passengers will be encouraged to bring to the plane (NTSB, 1982, p3). These include the risk of luggage falling on passengers and the crew members during the flight or after when the passengers are pulling out their luggage. When the plane hits turbulence or get into bad weather, the luggage may be hurled out and harm the occupants.
In 1981, the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) did a study and found out that about 78% of the accidents and incidents involved failure of overhead furnishings such as the overhead bins. According to the report, the basic designs and/ or failures of the overhead bins allowed stored items stored in them to fall during the crashes causing injuries to the passengers (Brooks, 1986).
According to an NTSB (2012, p1), on August 10, 2012, Aires Airline flight 8250, a Boeing 737-700, HK-4682, crashed short of the runway at San Andreas Island Airport. 2 occupants were fatally injured, 15 sustained serious injuries, and 66 sustained minor injuries. On examination of the airplane after the accident, it was found out that Passenger Service Units (PSU) was found hanging in the seat rows or lying in passenger seats or in the aisle and most of the overhead bins were dislodged from the airframe (NTSB, 2012, p3). Some of the passengers sustained head injuries and skull fractures which could have been as a result of the PSU and overhead bins hitting them on the head during the crash. In the Boeing 737 plane, the passenger service units and the overhead bins were built as per the Boeing specification and were considered effective and safe (NTSB, 2012, p5).
Another risk associated with carry-on baggage is the obstruction it causes during the evacuation of people from the plane in the event of an emergency such as a crash landing. The fall aisle and make it difficult to move during the evacuation. As a result of this, people who would otherwise have survived the accident end up dying or being completely disabled. With larger overhead bins built to accommodate more and larger carry on items causing even more obstruction than before. For example in the above mentioned accident, most of the PSU and overhead bins were found in the cabin aisle causing an obstruction in the rows and the aisle especially at the emergency exits and could delay emergency evacuation of passengers and cabin crew members from the plane (NTSB, 2012, p9). This is likely to be similar in other similar accidents.
There is also a risk of passengers carrying out prohibited items in their carry on luggage especially if they are not aware of the regulations put in place in the airplane. Such items would include cigarette lighters and things that would cause a fire in an airplane. According to the Civil Aviation Authority (2007, p2), customs officers found a passenger’s baggage contained 48 long
fireworks (roman candle type), 32 packets of friction ignition (match style) fireworks and 2 cigarette lighters, all packed in the same bag. All these are not allowed into the aircraft as they cause a risk to the passengers and generally to the airworthiness of the plane. They are part of the prohibited dangerous goods in the FAA regulations and airline workers should have been able to detect them and remove them from his possession and were a potential security risk to everyone on the flight (FAA, 1997).
There is also a risk of damage to the items carried in the carry-on luggage due to more items being put in the overhead bin especially electronics such as phones, cameras and laptops (Muir and Thomas, 2004, p483). When more stuff is put in the bins, things are squashed and bumped against each other during the flight. Passengers may find some of their valuable commodities destroyed at the end of the flight some of which may be expensive. This was a bit less when the overhead bins were just big enough to fit sizeable hand luggage, coats and hats. Some of this may be damaged if they fall due to the lock not being properly secured or if they fall when they are being removed.
When overhead bins are made larger, it may cause more delays and commotion during the boarding and while leaving the plane than before (Transportation Safety Board of Canada, 1995, p4). This might happen when passengers are trying to fit their entire carry-on luggage in the overhead bins and also as they remove them after they land. There is also a risk that passengers can hurt themselves if they have heavier hand luggage and they try to lift it to the overhead bins. This is especially risky for elderly passengers.
Flight attendants are also at risk of injury due their work in the cabin of the airplane (Friend, 1997). According to the Association of Flight Attendants (1997), carry-on injuries mostly occur while the flight attendants are carrying, lifting and stowing passenger bags in the cabin. The report further states that the members of the association have reported injuries such as one flight attendant hurt her back and was disabled for three months as she attempted to put a bag which weighed over 40 pounds in the overhead bin. According to Vincent (2012), Flight Attendants have to help the passengers and this makes them more vulnerable.
Risk Assessment Matrix
FREQUENCY OF OCCURENCE HAZARD CATEGORIES
1
CATASTROPHIC 2
CRITICAL 3
SERIOUS 4
MINOR
(A) FREQUENT 1A 2A 3A 4A
(B) PROBABLE 1B 2B 3B 4B
(C) OCCASSIONAL 1C 2C 3C 4C
(D) REMOTE 1D 2D 3D 4D
(E) IMPROBABLE 1E 2E 3E 4E
Unacceptable
High
Medium
Low
In the risk assessment matrix, the numbers represent the severity of the situation. 1 represents death or disability and irreversible damage to the plane; 2 represents severe injury to a person; 3 represents injury requiring occupants to go for medical attention and 4 represents possible injury or damage to the plane.
The letters on the other hand represent the frequency of occurrence with A representing if the hazard was expected to occur frequently; B represents whether it will occur several times; C represents if it is likely to occur; D represents if the hazard is unlikely to occur while E if it is likely the experience is not likely to occur.
The red zone represents the hazards that occur and cause death, permanent injury or cause the victims to seek medical attention and happen several times. The yellow zone represents hazards that are not so severe compared to those in the red zone. They lead to the above but only happen once or twice. The hazards in the orange zone are frequent but cause little or no damage to both the occupants and the plane itself and are minor. These include damage to items in carry-on luggage in the overhead bins. The blue zone represents the hazards with the least probability of occurrence as well as causing the least damage even when they occur occasionally.
Hazards that may be in the red zone include falling of items from the overhead bins and the PSU during a crash as they may cause death and/or permanent disability to those involved. Obstruction of rescuers during evacuation may also be in that zone if it leads to death of a passenger and flight attendant during evacuation especially in case of a big crash. Hazards in the yellow zone also include the above as well as carrying prohibited items which though occasional may cause serious problems (Hicks and Morrison, 1997). Damage of items in the carry on may be frequent but only cause minor damage hence is in the orange category. The risk to flight attendants is frequent and is normally minor but can also fall in the red category if it is really serious by causing severe injury.
In conclusion, there are some commercial benefits being sought by the airlines increasing the capacity of the overhead bins to take in more and larger carry-on items. They will attract more passengers to their airlines compared to the other airlines with smaller overhead bins. This will increase the revenue collected especially if they attract the business travelers who fly frequently.
Another advantage of the large over head bins is that it provides more room for the passengers in the place. There is more room for everyone to put their luggage. They also allow the passengers to be able to have their luggage near them during the flight hence reducing their anxiety as they can be able to keep track of their luggage during the whole flight (Freed, 2012). Passengers also reduce baggage fees charged by airlines as they are able to carry a sizeable amount of baggage as carry-on.
However, in order to effectively implement this, several safety procedures should be put in place. The overhead bins should contain strong latches to ensure that they do not open up during the flight and hence ensure the passengers are kept safe from falling items. Airlines should also ensure that strict check-in procedures are followed to ensure that there are no dangerous and/or prohibited items carried on board the plane (NTSB, 1992). This is done as a security measure.
It is also important so that the airlines are able to check whether the luggage is in line with the weight requirements of the airline and prevent the passengers from carrying in heavy luggage as carry-on. Airlines should also have efficient loading and off loading procedures to ensure that everything is safely kept and well secured before the plane starts to taxi on the runway (Flight Safety Foundation, 1997, p11). A specific person should also be assigned the duty to check whether all carry-on luggages are properly stored before take off. Overhead bins should also be built with greater consideration for safety ensuring they are built to withstand high impact so that they do get fall on especially in case of a light crash causing more damage (Muir and Thomas, 2004, p482).. Airlines should also look into abolishing carry-on luggage altogether so that passengers are only allowed a light bag in the airplane cabin. This will help ensure that heavy items and bags do not fall on people even in the case of an emergency.
Works Cited
Freed, J., (2012). Airlines expand size of luggage bins: Passengers carry on bigger bags to avoid high check-in fees. [Online] Available at < HYPERLINK “http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120306/BIZ/203060357/1001/biz/Airlines-expand-size-luggage-bins” http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120306/BIZ/203060357/1001/biz/Airlines-expand-size-luggage-bins > [Accessed 16 April 2012]
Harris, D. and Muir, H.C., 2005. Contemporary Issues In Human Factors And Aviation Safety. Hampshire, London: Ashgate Publishing. Pp 72-75
Muir, H. and Thomas, L., 2004. Passenger safety and very large transportation aircraft, Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 76 Iss: 5, pp.479 – 486
NTSB. Safety Recommendations A-92-11 through A-92-15. March 18, 1992
Philips, D., 1997. An unchecked Problem: Fliers put Bags before Safety. The Washington Post
Powers, M. (2012). HYPERLINK “http://www.bbb.org/blog/2012/03/airlines-offer-more-room-in-carry-on-overhead-bins/” Airlines to Offer More Room in Carry-On Overhead Bins. [Online] Council of Better Business Bureaus. Available at < HYPERLINK “http://www.bbb.org/blog/2012/03/airlines-offer-more-room-in-carry-on-overhead-bins/” http://www.bbb.org/blog/2012/03/airlines-offer-more-room-in-carry-on-overhead-bins/> [Accessed 15 April 2012]
Vincent, B.H., 1997. Presentation at a Conference sponsored by the Association o Flight Attendants. Washington D.C
Brooks, R., 1986. ‘The Safety Implication of the Carry-on Baggage Issue’ Proceedings of the Flight Safety Foundation 39th Annual International Air Safety Seminar. Arlington, Virginia: Flight Safety Foundation.
US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). 1981. Special Study: Cabin Safety in Large Transport Aircraft. Report No. NTSB-AAS-81-2. Washington D.C: NTSB Pp 3-4
US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). 2012. Safety Recommendation. Washington D.C: NTSB, pp 1-12
Federal Aviation Administration. 1997. Petition for Rulemaking to Require Airlines to Screen and Limit Carry-on Luggage. Washington: FAA
Flight Safety Foundation. 1997. Cabin Crew Safety: Increased Amount and Types of Carry-on Baggage bring New Industry Responses. Alexandria, VA: Flight Safety Foundation, pp 1-12
Friend, P.A. 1997. Presentation at a Conference Sponsored by the Association of Flight Attendants. Washington D.C
Hicks, B. and Morrison, R., (1997). Passenger Related Safety Hazards. [Online] Aviation Safety Reporting System. Available at < HYPERLINK “http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/directline/dl9_pax.htm” http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/directline/dl9_pax.htm> [Accessed 16 April 2012]
Transportation Safety Board of Canada, 1995. A Safety Study of Evacuations of Large, Passenger-carrying Aircraft. Report No’ SA9501. Pp 4-8.
Historical Essay
Historical Essay
Introduction
The book by Rachel Maddow brings out a debate about how America has rose to a military power status via her humor and wit similar to her news show on the television. Rachel’s appeal rests in her transition from a comedian to possibly what can be described as a wonk. On the television, she takes us through graphs and charts and lengthy, twisting fact moment, not afraid of getting audiences bored since she has her funniness at hand. The links the small fact to fact dots, simple statistics to reliable policies and along the way a plethora of jokes rise up.
Mylanta, Tis of TheeThe tough decisions that formed the basis of the Gulf war in Iraq are on focus. Colin Powell stood by his decisions to have open American public support prior to participating in war, together with the required machinery to do it well. Powell had spotted some emerging debate within the Whitehouse regarding if to or not commit in the war, and to him the American solders sent to the Persian Gulf War deserved a sincere and actual contemplation by their national leaders CITATION Rac12 p 135 l 1033 (Rachel 135). A section of Powell’s intentions, by seeking up front for many solders and standing on the idea to call up guardsmen and reserves within the Abrams Doctrine Umbrella, was to compel the president to at least be pragmatic regarding the expenses of the war and to factor in the American people into the discussion.
A huge debate was witnessed in the public and the congress at the time when the first group of troops we summoned up. Rachel recounts some debate that involved Ron Dellums, from there forty five House members filed a lawsuit requesting the Washington federal court to compel the president to send an official war declaration to the congress for discussions and members vote prior to sending troops to the battlefield. Ron said that “The Constitution is intended to trouble one person from leading us to war. War is a very somber and sobering and unusual act and should not be entitled to one person.” Some reporter did see that some persons were alleging that Ron was not holding the president captive; you are disheartening his ability to carry out an effectual policy within the Persian Gulf. Ron countered to undertake something rather than what we are proposing here is to breach the United States Constitution. This is not the sole prerogative of the president CITATION Rac12 p 141 l 1033 (Rachel 141).
On this aspect, the White House perception was that the executive was not obligated to consult the congress to get a go ahead for war, they only needed to seek their consent in obtaining support to fund it and convince the public. In a dire mockery of the constitution, the executive who was founded on the principle that the war question did not only lie on the legislature. The expenses of disseminating benefits for American solders families, particularly kids, shifted money away from extravagance, efficient military together with technological material. This lead to the formation of a task force to out source support functions with the wish that it would be efficient and cheaper to privatize. This revolves around the constitution, the prerogatives of the president and the role of the legislature within the US government.
Doing More with Less (Hassle)Much focus here is the huge privatization of military support functions together with missions. LOGCAP a private contractor, had been previously been called upon on smaller invasions within the Bush Senior regime, but then the involvement of the Balkans during Clinton’s regime was the first instance of private contractors full involvement in all support functions thus the LOGCAP drew more attention. But then a misfortune happened while they were disseminating support services which they were contracted for, they witnessed huge expense over dues, poor system and employee oversight, corporate malfeasance and criminal activities such as trafficking of sex which could not be prosecuted within the Bosnian or US laws because of lack of power over employees under private contracts within foreign nations. Furthermore, the bad behaviors of the employees in foreign nations blackened the better actions by the US troops in the Balkans. The shift to private contractor employees also emerged as US Defense Department’s biggest expenditures, with a bill figure of close to $300 billion by the end of Clinton’s regime.
To some extent, this benefited the government, by outsourcing support services and a few missions to contractors from the private sector; it could avoid handling any politically sensitive matters regarding the activation of reserve and guard forces successfully circumventing the public, Abrams Doctrine and the Congress.
Rachel asserts that by 2001 when Clinton left office, an operation aside from the War, as commonly referred to by the Pentagon forces, could go on infinitely with no genuine political expenses or consequences, or even a notice to the civilians. The power of the president to kick start and wage military contests without consultation of the Congress was initiated. Even the US military peacetime budget was past half the total cost of other budgets of the world militaries combined by 2001. The advances of Abrams doctrine that civilian life interference is the cost of admission for war were surely wrecked CITATION Rac12 p 187 l 1033 (Rachel 187). Despite freeing the American people from all the restrains and hassles pinning them down, they still had an imperial presidency to deal with relating military issues.
One Hell of a Killing MachineWe also have the focus on the American intelligence and military lethal training elucidations. Rachel fundamentally showcases the transitions of the spy services of America to brand, non uniformed military branch, applying its drone secret programs. The drones program secrecy, like decisions on who dies who shoots and under what rules, also amounts to secrecy about its costs on the budget.
The fact that Americas CIA still holds briefs on some members of the congress intelligence on its undertakings, the Joint special operations command have unrestricted powers on terror wars, travel anywhere under the president’s command without giving notice to anybody. JSOC has in many times been deployed during the Obama and Bush regimes.
The expenses of all such overwhelming lethality, the budget and the workload to the US military, is splendidly distinct from all times in Americas history one percent or less of Americas adult population have been summoned to serve in the persistent wars since 2009 to 2011. The American population seems not interested anymore in wars. They have resorted into some mechanism of indulging in war that have less political risks and as a substitute of requesting the American population to commit into sacrifices via taxes, they simply prolong the combat days of troops already serving, employ more contractors from the private sector and committing into expenses.
They have manipulated all those in uniform, to their limits, and costs have not been any objects. The validation to persistent combat, some believe that solders must at all times be called upon in combats, not in any peaceable measures. It is clear that the drift between military and civilian life, there are no more solders who are citizens anymore, and the pressure on all American people during war that was witnessed only a few generations back is an unrealistic memory to those alive today.
Suicide, unemployment among other socio-emotional and budget matters among veterans is treated as a military issue, not a civilian issue. When there is a death of a private military contractor, as opposed to a trained military solder who may have been doing that job, the American people mourns literally at the loss. There are no more regular updates about them. For the government, the massive deployment of private contractors shifts the American people from the expenses and war load much more.
What is happening in America today is a superbly trained and military power that is experienced, perhaps the most trained in today’s world. And it is not simply as such to surrender. New recruits want to be involved. Army commanders are in a bid to base on that progress, apply those skills, and sustain that combat standard readiness. Politicians are avoiding being termed non patriotic by suggesting budget adjustments or back scaling overseas military action, despite the requests from pentagon. But then there should be a balance between the expenses and the workload of the Americas military equipment and sustaining readiness and skills.
It is therefore imperative to state that America has gone through some history with regard to the laws on the constitution regarding military personnel deployment, the president’s prerogative and the public interests during war times. Subsequent amendments should therefore be conducted to bring in all stakeholder interests.
Works Cited BIBLIOGRAPHY Rachel, Maddow. Drift – The unmoorng of american military power by Rachel Maddow. New York : Crown, 2012.