Cons of a bioassay

Cons of a bioassay 1. Cons of a bioassay- firstly the response to a hormone by a specific tissue may not reflect the in vivo response. For example, a hormone may be modified by another factor within the tissue before it acts on the tissue. Furthermore, the hormone that you are testing i.e the number of contractions in uterine tissue in response to a specific oxytocin concentration, may not be entirely be due to oxytocin i.e. PGF2a is also psent in uterine tissue which acts locally to cause contractions also(Callegari et al, 2005). Also, an animal may need to be killed in order to isolate one organ only i.e. the uterus in mice. There is also biological variation between species i.e. human and mouse, and so the physical outcome in response to a particular hormone in mice may not reflect what the outcome is in man. Pros of a bioassay-allows you to determine whether a hormone is psent in a particular tissue and/or plasma. This gives you an idea of how the hormone may act in vivo and how the effects may be modified in a dose response fashion on a particular tissue. The outcomes on hormone responses observed in mice tissue might repsent the way the drug works in man(Bulletti, 2005). An unknown concentration of a particular hormone can be devised. You can also use a bioassay to configure the biological response of an exogenous substance, and to make comparisons of the variety of effects of different substances on different tissues. 2. According to Furchgott and Zawadzki (1980) the type of cut of tissue does not matter. As long as the section is carried out carefully so that the endothelial cells remain intact. The myometrium is part of an endothelial layer that contains the receptors for oxytocin. Basically the cut does not matter; however, the receptors need to remain intact. 3. We would automatically think that in the absence of any hormones the baseline activity will be zero. However, this is not the case i.e. if the cotton string was interfered with the baseline activity may be altered. Furthermore, the baseline activity probably is not a reflection of the absence of hormones. Therefore, it is very important to obtain a baseline bioassay measurement, to establish how psence of other factors in the tissue could interfere with subsequent measurements. 4. The greater the amount of oxytocin added to the water bath the greater was the frequency. However, the amplitude sid not change. In other words a greater amount of oxytocin added to the water bath-the greater number of contractions within the uterus, although the force of the strength of the contractions was not altered. 5. To quantitate the amount of oxytocin of the unknown (the amount of oxytocin in IU per g in mice pituitary tissue) the area under the curves for each concentration (1IU, 5IU, and 10IU) added to the water bath-the unknown was calculated. The area (uterine work) was figured by printing the curves on graph paper, cutting out the curves and weighing the paper in grams and dividing the weight by the weight of a 1cm2 piece of paper to give the uterine work (area under curve (cm2)). Subsequently, the value of the uterine work for each concentration including the unknown concentration plotted on the graph. Please see graph and calculation on the next page. Calculating the area in this way was a more simple option compared to calculating the work by using the amplitudes (which did not vary considerably) and the frequency, or by counting the number of squares underneath the curves. 6. Please see graph and calculation on following page. 7/8. This assay was not specific. In regards to the uterus in mice other hormones which affect the frequency of contractions are psent. For example, PGF2a which also acts on the myometrium of the uterus works to increases the amount of contractions. Furthermore, progesterone is responsible for making uterine muscle more contractile, while estrogen and relaxin causes it to relax(Blanks and Shymgol, 2007). In a pituitary, hormones such as progestins, estrogens, androgens, which alter uterine contractility, may be found. Additionally, vasopssin is secreted by the posterior pituitary and binds to a receptor very similar to the oxytocin receptor within the uterus (Furchgott and Zawadzki, 1980). At any one time vasopssin may bind to an oxytocin receptor stimulating the same response (Furchgott and Zawadzki, 1980). Therefore, depending on weather or not and how much of the above hormones were psent in the mice uterus and the pituitary- alters the effect of oxytocin acting alone. Also, other hormones such as prolactin, dopamine, inhibin, LH and FSH are found within the pituitary gland. 9. This bioassay was not good in terms of its specificity as mentioned in questions 7/8. However, it could be made more specific i.e. add antagonists of the hormones psent in both the uterine and pituitary tissues to the water bath except for oxytocin, or to isolate the oxytocin from the pituitary tissue first which is obtained by density gradient centrifugation of isolated pituitary tissue, subsequently adding it to the water bath. 10. Blanks, A., Shmygol, S. (2007). Myometrial function in pmaturity. Best Practice Research Clinical Obstetrics Gynaecology 21: 807-819. Bulletti, C., Zieglar, D. (2005). Uterine contractility and embryo implantation. Experimental Physiology 3: 265-76. Callegari, A.E., Furguson-Gotschall, S., Gibori, G. (2005). PGF2alpha induced differential expssion of genes involved in turnover of extracellular matrix in rat decidual cells. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinolgy 3:3. Furchgott R.F, and Zawadzki J.V.(1980) The obligatory role of endothelial cells in the relaxation of arterial smooth muscle by acetylcholine. Nature. Vol 288.

Consumer Behaviour Double Jeopardy Essay

The theory of Double Jeopardy is described as a behavioural phenomenon which relates to the size structure of a market (Bandyopadhyay, Gupta & Dube 2005). This indicates that in any given time a smaller brand typically has fewer buyers compared to those of a larger brand as larger brands often have a higher percentage of penetration and market share (Ehrenberg, Goodhardt & Barwise 1990). A brand with more market share indicates that consumers purchase these brands more frequently compared to other brands. There are a number of reasons why this occurs. For example firms offering products that a consumer perceives as better quality and value, will grow larger (Jacobson 1988). Also, a firm that creates power advantages by introducing inferior products which competitors cannot offer to customer’s also results in a higher market share. Careful analyses of all team members’ individual purchases over the tracking period, it can be noted that a large number of different brands were consumed. By viewing the Duplication of Purchases Table for fast food, out of all the 11 types of brands, McDonalds and Max Brennars were the most frequently purchased brands resulting in a higher percentage of penetration and market share compared to other brands. This is because McDonalds and Max Brennars have multiple locations within Australia which provides better access to customers, both brands participate in extensive television and both brands provide regular promotions in order to make customers more alert and aware. These facts all enforce the theory of the double jeopardy; larger brands have more buyers and have a higher market share. To review the occurrence of the Double Jeopardy effect, Ehrenberg et al. (1990) states that there exists two market level explanations. The first market level consists of the differences in consumer exposure to the market mix efforts (price, promotion, advertising, point of purchase display, discount) of a brand. If a brand has less consumer exposure, it is more likely to suffer (Ehrenberg et al. 990) because they have fewer buyers and lower repeat purchase. Looking at the DOP tables for fast food, TGI Friday’s and Koko Black displayed as the least frequently purchased brands. A reason why these two fast food outlets were the least purchased brands is because of their location as many customers may not have close access to it. Another reason is because there is not much advertising and promotion when compared to fast food outlets such as McDonalds and Max B rennars. The second market level relies on stochastic models of buying behaviour (Ehrenberg et al. 1990) which helps predict the Double Jeopardy trends for competitive brands. This is solely based on the heterogeneity in popularity such as the market share as earlier research shows that the average customer of smaller brands buys less, have lower favourable attitude and manifest lower loyalty than the average customer of larger brands (Ehrenberg et al. 1990).

Free Market vs Planned Economy

A market economy is an economic system where the factors of production, are privately owned, consumers and producers are motivated by self interest, the level of competition in the markets is very high and resources are allocated through the price mechanism. The definition is supported by Lipsey (1992) who also state that decisions about resources allocation are made without any central direction but instead as a result of innumerable independent decision taken by individual producers & consumers hence in the market economy the individuals or market makes the ultimate decision in allocation of resources. Whereas the planned economy is one in which the coordination of economic activity so essential to the viability and functioning of a complex social economy is undertaken through administrative means commands, directives, targets and regulations rather than by market mechanism. The dictionary. com defined this economic system as a socialist economic system in which production and distribution of goods and services are controlled by the government and industry is mostly publicly owned. Provision of public goods These are goods that are non rivalry in consumption and non excludability as alluded by Stanlake (2000) He also added the examples of public goods which includes national defences, the police service, flood control schemes, street lighting, pavements and public drainage hence they often have large external benefits relative to private benefits. In a market economy, production of public goods will not be provided or is limited because producers cannot withhold the goods for non –payment since there is no way of measuring how much a person consumes, there is no basis for establishing a market price. However in a planned economy there is provision of such goods because the government makes all decisions on what is produced. Hall (2010) mentioned that public goods cannot be provided privately because of their non diminishability and non –excludability that is consumers take a free ride since no one can be excluded from consuming them so it is almost impossible for a private firm to get anyone to pay for a public good. In a planned economy the state can finance the provision of public goods like defence and police service, by means of taxation and sometimes borrowing, local authorities provide street lighting and flood control can be provided by giving contracts to private sector firms. Production and consumption of merit and demerit goods According to Lipsey (1992), merit goods are those goods that the government compels or encourages people to consume, mainly because individuals are said to be unaware of the true benefits from consuming them. He also added that demerits goods are those goods which the state forbids people to consume mainly because individual are said to be unaware of the true harm they would suffer by consuming them. The best known examples of merit goods are health, education systems, insurance, inoculation and seat belts. The provision of merit goods in a free market economy tent to be under provided because spending on merit goods by the consumer would be determined by the private benefits derived from them. Like in United State of America where the free market is practised, the public health system compromised, people are advised to buy health insurance. The poor might not be able to afford this and some people might simply decide not to bother if they feel particularly health. In cases of seat belts consumers may fail to recognise their true private benefits hence less demand and less supply in a free economy. The demerit goods include cigarettes, alcohol and illegal drugs. These are over consumed in a market system because consumers may be unaware of the true cost of consuming them which includes negative externalities. As highlighted by Hall (2010) a planned economy there is an increase in the production and consumption of merit goods because the government considers them to be highly desirable for the welfare of the citizens. In this economic system the government has central authority to make decisions on the commodities to be produced hence emphasis will be placed on the production of merit goods and consumption of demerits will be reduced. The state can increase the production of merit goods by providing free state education and national health services. Contracts for services like refuse collection can be given to private sector firms. The government can also encourage the consumption of merit goods by providing information about the benefits of inoculation and passing legislation requiring vehicles to take and pass the vehicle inspection tests. In the command economy production and consumption of demerit goods is reduced with the purpose of reducing health problems for the economy. The government achieve this by taxing cigarettes and alcohol heavily and ban all dangerous drugs to prevent consumption. As well as roviding information about their harmful effects to the consumers. Consumer sovereignty Lipsey (1992:84) state that â€Å"market allocation are sometimes said to demonstrate consumer sovereignty that is to imply that the consumer is king and decides what shall be produced† This was supported by Stanlake (2000)who stipulates that the freedom of consumer choice is usually held to be the most important in the free econom y. It can be deduced that the consumer has the control, only the products that the consumer wants are produced. The more competitive the market structure, the more power the consumer will have. There is a higher level of consumer sovereignty in market economy than in planned economies. The government estimates the type of products it considers the individuals to want whilst in market economies producers are motivate by profit thus they have the incentives to respond quickly to change in consumer preferences. In a free market economy consumers benefit from lower cost goods and better services because business are forced to compete whilst in a planned economy there is no competition since the government is the only supplier. Equity in income distribution Equity is regarded as fairness. The market economy provides opportunities for people to earn income and acquire wealth but the opportunities for earning an income are no equally distribute. People do not have equal opportunities in education. Some are also limited in their capacity to learn or they may have acquired a skill only to find the demand for that skill is declining. If one starts a life with very little, and do not even get a good education, and then there will be very little protection from destitution. This discrimination in the free market economies distorts earnings and can result in people from minority groups and disabled earning less for the same work as able bodied. The market system does not guarantee that everyone will have the same opportunity to accumulate wealth and hence an inequality. It is argued that the planned economy can lead to more equal distribution of income and wealthy since the production factors are controlled by the state. A command economy mighty not have the efficiency and enterprise for the successful of many people but at least the government will try to make sure that nobody falls through the safety net. REFERENCES LIST Beardshaw,J. et. al (1998) Economics a student`s guide,5th Edition, Prentice Hall. Dictionary.com unabridged. Available at http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/market economy (accessed 3July 2013) Hall, R. and Lebierman,M.(2010)Microeconomic principle and application,5th Edition,Cengage learning Lipsey, R. and Harbury, C.(1992)Principals of economics,2nd Edition, Oxford: Oxford university press. Lipsey, R. and Chrystal, A.(1995)An introduction to positive economics ,8TH edition, London: Oxford university press. Stanlake, G. and Grant, S.(2000)Introductory economics, 7th Edition,London:Longman.

Ancient Rome vs. United States - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 1 Words: 438 Downloads: 10 Date added: 2017/09/22 Category Advertising Essay Type Compare and contrast essay Tags: Ancient Rome Essay Government Essay United States Essay Did you like this example? Ancient Rome vs. United States If someone were to ask me the question of whether Ancient Rome and the United States were similar, my first reaction to their question would be to answer, â€Å"Yes†. Both of the empires have similar strengths and weaknesses. So with reason, I would say that the United States, being that it is so similar, might eventually fall as Rome did, mainly due to the same problems. Ancient Rome was a great empire with great citizens, much like the United States of today, but like Rome we too have similar downfalls and strengths. First, let’s start with the system of government. Ancient Rome was a republic, a form of government much like our system of democracy. Romans that were seeking office had to gain approval of the public just like our Presidents do. However there is one small difference. Ancient Romans were more of robots under the Emperor, and often described by the officials as the â€Å"mob†. Second, there is much similari ty in recreation and entertainment between the two empires. In Ancient Rome, the public was obsessed with the gladiatorial games and the theatre. Those gladiatorial games are merely only more violent versions of our football games or wrestling matches, which we seem to have to same unhealthy addiction to ourselves. In Rome, they went to things called â€Å"baths† to work out and relax. These baths are what today we would call our version of a health club. Especially today when the focus of beauty is on the body, health clubs are almost as popular as Ancient Rome’s baths. Lastly, the Roman way of thinking is very much like the American mentality of today. Whether one would admit it or not, America has a slight case of imperialism. Also, the attitude of being better or superior to others and other countries is very much like the attitude of the Ancient Romans. For example, when the tiny country of Carthage became even the smallest threat, the Romans made sure to st omp them out. The United States has this kind of power too. We always make sure that we are on top. There are so many similarities between Ancient Rome and the United States that I could not even begin to cover them in a one page paper. The United States resembles Ancient Rome in things from government, to entertainment, to population and cultural make-up. So if things keep going they way they have been in the Unites States, and we continue to share the many similarities of the ancient city, we might just end up like the great ancient city of Rome, extinct. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Ancient Rome vs. United States" essay for you Create order