Smoking and Cancer :: Argumentative Persuasive Example Essays

Perceived Risks of Heart Disease and Cancer Among Cigarette Smokers   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Cigarette smoking causes more preventable deaths from cancer than any other modifiable risk factor. Smokers who stop smoking increase the length of their lives substantially and reduce their risk of heart attack and cancer. However, many smokers still discount the increased risk they fact with continuing smoking. They are discounting their physician’s advice by being too optimistic that their chances of getting a life-threatening disease will be nil. There was a survey in 1995 of a probability sample of U.S. households to analyze smokers’ perceptions of their relative risk of experiencing a myocardial infarction (heart attack) and cancer in a nationally representative survey. Doctors Ayanian (Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Department of Medicine) and Cleary (Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass. Conducted the survey. There were 3,031 adults aged 25 through 72 years, including 737 current smokers (24.3%) that took part in this survey.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The eligible people had to fill out a subsequent written questionnaire and a telephone interview. There were 3,487 eligible people but only 3,031 participated (70%) in the survey. The people surveyed had no history of myocardial infarction (heart attack) (96.2%) or cancer (92.9%).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The participants were asked if they are a regular smoker; and if they are, what is the largest amount consumed by them ever in one day. The people with no history of heart attached (myocardial infarction) or cancer were asked, â€Å" ‘ Do you think your risk of heart attack (or cancer) is higher, lower or about the same as other (men/women) your age?’ â€Å"   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Of the 3,031 participants, 737 (24.3%) were current smokers and 868 (28.6%) were former smokers. The current smokers were younger and had a higher number of women than the former smoker group. This was the same with the men in the current smoker group, they were younger and had a higher number of men than the former smoker group.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The people who smoked in the survey were less likely to be married. They were also less likely to have graduated from high school than former smokers or non-smokers. The current smokers did not attend a regular check up with a doctor despite being in worse mental and physical health than a regular person. They also said that they had less control over their lives and less satisfaction with life than former smokers or non-smokers.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Among the current smokers, the findings concluded that less than half of them felt that they were at an increased personal risk of heart disease (29%) or cancer (40%).

Pest Control and Waste Management Essay

Pests cause a lot of destruction to the crops. Even though there are lots of chemical pest controls available to help reduce or remove the presence of these destructive pests, the non-chemical pest control is the most reliable and safest form of pest control. One of the most destructive pests that are encountered by many farmers is the beetle. Non-chemical pest control can be done in many different ways like applying balanced fertilizer to keep the crops and soil healthy and free from beetles, removing weeds from that may surround the crops, and using milky spore powder when dealing with Japanese beetles. In addition with these, according to HGTV, â€Å"planting pest-resistant species that contains insecticide in nature can also help in getting rid of these pests(â€Å"Non-Chemical Pest Control†, 2006). † The production of a healthy and productive crop system all depends on the supervision of the farmer itself. Nevertheless, non-chemical pest control is all about prevention. I will not be in opposition to the idea of having hazardous waste landfill, waste treatment plant, deep-injection well, or incinerator in our community. The waste of a community grows enormously as time passes by. These wastes can affect the health and livelihood of a community. The presence of hazardous waste landfill, waste treatment plant, deep-injection well, or incinerator in a certain community reduce the waste that may cause pollution and other negative effects on the residents of a certain community. The hazardous waste landfill keeps the hazardous waste from going into the soil and eventually to our body. Incineration is only an alternative to land filling. Incineration is not a very good way of waste reduction because it produces toxic air pollutants that can even cause a great problem to the health of the community. These systems are of great help in the reduction of waste although it is inevitable that wrong management of these waste management system may always lead to an unlikely consequences like the pollution that can be brought about by incineration.

Gravametric Quant Lab Report

Quantitative Analysis Gravimetric Determination of Iron as Fe2O3 Laboratory Experiment 2 February 19, 2013 Abstract: In the Gravimetric determination is the measurement of mass in two different forms precipitation and volatilization. In our experiment we will be using the precipitation form which isolates an ion in a solution by a precipitation reaction, filtering, purifying by wash method, conversion to product of known composition, and final weigh of the product comparing the mass difference of theorictal and actual. This method identified the weight percent of iron in an unknown sample.Three samples are taken to limit percent error. In the results of the three samples 1 had a percent of 10. 764 Fe (III), sample 2 had a percent of 11. 725 Fe (III), and sample 3 with a percent of 12. 216 Fe (III). The average sample percent was 11. 568 compared to given amount percent of 12. 90. In theory with a loss of 1. 332 this experiment was overall successful. Introduction: In this lab the pur pose was to use the gravimetric determination procedure to identify the weight percent of iron in an unknown sample. Three samples were collected and analyzed.Iron can be analyzed by precipitating the hydrated iron oxide from a basic solution. After the basic solution is hydrated the process is then followed by complete dehydration to give solid iron oxide. Methods and Materials: Needed in the experiment was; * Crucibles, Metal rings, Wire triangles, Burners, Funnels, Filter Paper, Beakers, Glass rod, Diluted ammonium hydroxide solution, Nitric acid solution, Silver nitrate solution, NH4NO3 solution, Distilled water. Below are some methods used in experiment. fig. 1 fig. 2 Experimental Procedure: This experiment was a multiple session lab.Obtain three crucibles and desiccator. Bring the three porcelain crucibles and caps to constant mass by heating to redness for 15 minutes over a burner, use fig. 1 for method reference. Place the heated crucibles in the desiccator to cool for appro ximately 30 minutes and weigh. This was left overnight and completed the second trial in the next session with successive weighing agreed within 0. 30mg. (Keep constant numbering with crucibles throughout experiment) We measured out 1. 5g of three samples of the unknown that was given to us. Each sample was dissolved in 10 mL of 3M HCl (with heating necessary). mL of 6 M HNO3 was obtained to filtrate, and boil for a few minutes to ensure that all iron is oxidized to Fe (III). The samples was diluted to 200mL with distilled water and add 3 M ammonia with constant stirring until the solution was basic (as determined with pH indicator paper). After solution becomes basic, digest the precipitate by boiling for 5 minutes and allow the precipitate to settle. We then decanted the supernatant liquid through coarse, ash less filter paper (Whatman 41 or Schleicher and Schuell Black Ribbon, as in fig. 2 -18 and 2 -19 in textbook. ). Keep liquid lower than 1 cm from the top of the funnel.Our pr ecipitate was first washed repeatedly with hot ammonium hydroxide solution, by miscommunication. Then washed with the corrected heated ammonium nitrate and left it to drain overnight until next session. We continued to wash supernatant until little or no Cl- is detected in filtered supernatant. Detect the Cl- by acidifying a few milliliters of filtrate with 1 mL of dilute HNO3 and adding a few drops of 0. 1 M AgNO3. If precipitate is observed, Cl- is present. After identifying that there was not any Cl- present we allowed the filter to drain overnight covered with ventilation.Carefully, the paper was lifted out of the funnel, folded (fig. 2), and transferred all dried substance to crucible and any substance that is not completely dry place into beaker and into the heater for half an hour. Those placed in beaker was then placed into the crucibles that were brought to constant mass. With the paper and substance in the crucible it was placed over a small flame with the lid off to start to char the filter paper. The flame temperature was then increased keeping the lid handy to smother the crucible of the paper flames.After the paper seems visibly charred ignite the product for full 15 minutes with full heat of the burner directed at the base of the crucible where oxidized iron is located. When the crucibles have briefly cooled in the air, we then placed them in the desiccator for 30 minutes. After the 30 minutes of cooling in the desiccator weigh the crucible and the lid, reignite, and bring to constant mass with the repeated heating within a mass of 0. 3 mg. We are now complete with the experiment. Calculate the weight percent of iron in each sample, the average, the standard deviation, and the relative standard deviation for your data.Results: Crucible 1: 0. 231 g Fe2O3 ? 1 mol Fe2O3159. 487g ? 2 mol FeOOH1 mol Fe2O3? 55. 845 g1 mol = 0. 162g Fe0. 162 g1. 505 g? 100=10. 764% Crucible 2: 0. 252 g Fe2O3 ? 1 mol Fe2O3159. 487g ? 2 mol FeOOH1 mol Fe2O3? 55. 845 g1 m ol = 0. 176g Fe0. 176 g1. 501 g? 100=11. 725% Crucible 3: 0. 268 g Fe2O3 ? 1 mol Fe2O3159. 487g ? 2 mol FeOOH1 mol Fe2O3? 55. 845 g1 mol = 0. 183g Fe0. 183 g1. 502 g? 100=12. 216% *Refer to appendix for sample mass table and calculation equations | Crucible 1| Crucible 2| Crucible 3| Weight percent| 10. 764 %| 11. 725 %| 12. 216%|Average| 0. 250 g| Standard Deviation| 0. 019| Relative Deviation| 0. 015| Discussion: Since the obtained and expected results are not 100 percent match we can conclude that during the experiment we encountered a loss of product, with an average percent of 11. 57 and an obtained of 12. 90 percent. In the experiment the precipitate was washed repeatedly with given solution to filter out any Cl- at this time we notice that some of the precipitate had gone through the filter through the sides from solution being held to high causing an overflow on the sides of the filter.This was notice by the orange tint in the beaker of the filtered solution. In the experime nt scales were also changed due to overuse. That could cause some flux in the measurement changes by small degree. Another error or issue during the experiment a lids on our crucible broke having to replace it caused a changed in our final weigh being that in the beginning we weighed our crucibles with the lid. Remaining constant in the lab is a must this does cut back on experimental error such as using the same analytical balances and labeling all equipment and crucibles.In the Gravimetric determination is the measurement of mass in two different forms precipitation and volatilization. Some of the underlying principles and theories of gravimetric analysis are law of mass action, reversible reactions, and principle of solubility product and common ion effect. Conclusion: The gravimetric determination procedure determined that we had an average of 11. 568% of Fe in our unknown solution, given the amount of 12. 90% of Fe. We experienced a loss of approximately 1. 332 %. This loss cou ld be included in instrumental and human errors.References: Lewis, D. 2013. Quantitative Analysis Lab Journal. Gravimetric Determination of Iron as Fe2O3. Vol. 1: Pages 4 – 5. Franklin, J. 2013. Quantitative Analysis Lab Journal. Gravimetric Determination of Iron as Fe2O3. Vol. 1: Pages 7 – 11. Bb Learn. 2013. Quantitative Chemical Analysis. Gravimetric Determination of Iron Lab Handout. Harris, Daniel C. 8th edition. Quantitative Chemical Analysis Textbook. Appendix: Calculation equations: Mean : Mean = Sum of X values / N(Number of values) Standard Deviation: Relative Deviation: 100 ? sxCrucibles| Mass of the Beaker (empty) (g)| Mass of the Beaker & Unknown (g)| Mass of the Unknown Sample (g)| 1| 144. 181 g| 146. 686 g| 1. 505 g| 2| 159. 328 g| 160. 829 g| 1. 501 g| 3| 167. 480 g| 168. 982 g| 1. 502 g| * Above are the measurements of the unknown samples obtained Crucibles| Mass of Crucible (g)| Mass Crucible & final product (g)| Mass of final product (g)| 1| 31. 752 g| 31. 982 g| 0. 231 g| 2| 33. 820 g| 34. 072 g| 0. 252 g| 3| 40. 802 g| 40534 g| 0. 268 g| * Above are the measurements of Iron found in unknown sample

Gravametric Quant Lab Report

Quantitative Analysis Gravimetric Determination of Iron as Fe2O3 Laboratory Experiment 2 February 19, 2013 Abstract: In the Gravimetric determination is the measurement of mass in two different forms precipitation and volatilization. In our experiment we will be using the precipitation form which isolates an ion in a solution by a precipitation reaction, filtering, purifying by wash method, conversion to product of known composition, and final weigh of the product comparing the mass difference of theorictal and actual. This method identified the weight percent of iron in an unknown sample.Three samples are taken to limit percent error. In the results of the three samples 1 had a percent of 10. 764 Fe (III), sample 2 had a percent of 11. 725 Fe (III), and sample 3 with a percent of 12. 216 Fe (III). The average sample percent was 11. 568 compared to given amount percent of 12. 90. In theory with a loss of 1. 332 this experiment was overall successful. Introduction: In this lab the pur pose was to use the gravimetric determination procedure to identify the weight percent of iron in an unknown sample. Three samples were collected and analyzed.Iron can be analyzed by precipitating the hydrated iron oxide from a basic solution. After the basic solution is hydrated the process is then followed by complete dehydration to give solid iron oxide. Methods and Materials: Needed in the experiment was; * Crucibles, Metal rings, Wire triangles, Burners, Funnels, Filter Paper, Beakers, Glass rod, Diluted ammonium hydroxide solution, Nitric acid solution, Silver nitrate solution, NH4NO3 solution, Distilled water. Below are some methods used in experiment. fig. 1 fig. 2 Experimental Procedure: This experiment was a multiple session lab.Obtain three crucibles and desiccator. Bring the three porcelain crucibles and caps to constant mass by heating to redness for 15 minutes over a burner, use fig. 1 for method reference. Place the heated crucibles in the desiccator to cool for appro ximately 30 minutes and weigh. This was left overnight and completed the second trial in the next session with successive weighing agreed within 0. 30mg. (Keep constant numbering with crucibles throughout experiment) We measured out 1. 5g of three samples of the unknown that was given to us. Each sample was dissolved in 10 mL of 3M HCl (with heating necessary). mL of 6 M HNO3 was obtained to filtrate, and boil for a few minutes to ensure that all iron is oxidized to Fe (III). The samples was diluted to 200mL with distilled water and add 3 M ammonia with constant stirring until the solution was basic (as determined with pH indicator paper). After solution becomes basic, digest the precipitate by boiling for 5 minutes and allow the precipitate to settle. We then decanted the supernatant liquid through coarse, ash less filter paper (Whatman 41 or Schleicher and Schuell Black Ribbon, as in fig. 2 -18 and 2 -19 in textbook. ). Keep liquid lower than 1 cm from the top of the funnel.Our pr ecipitate was first washed repeatedly with hot ammonium hydroxide solution, by miscommunication. Then washed with the corrected heated ammonium nitrate and left it to drain overnight until next session. We continued to wash supernatant until little or no Cl- is detected in filtered supernatant. Detect the Cl- by acidifying a few milliliters of filtrate with 1 mL of dilute HNO3 and adding a few drops of 0. 1 M AgNO3. If precipitate is observed, Cl- is present. After identifying that there was not any Cl- present we allowed the filter to drain overnight covered with ventilation.Carefully, the paper was lifted out of the funnel, folded (fig. 2), and transferred all dried substance to crucible and any substance that is not completely dry place into beaker and into the heater for half an hour. Those placed in beaker was then placed into the crucibles that were brought to constant mass. With the paper and substance in the crucible it was placed over a small flame with the lid off to start to char the filter paper. The flame temperature was then increased keeping the lid handy to smother the crucible of the paper flames.After the paper seems visibly charred ignite the product for full 15 minutes with full heat of the burner directed at the base of the crucible where oxidized iron is located. When the crucibles have briefly cooled in the air, we then placed them in the desiccator for 30 minutes. After the 30 minutes of cooling in the desiccator weigh the crucible and the lid, reignite, and bring to constant mass with the repeated heating within a mass of 0. 3 mg. We are now complete with the experiment. Calculate the weight percent of iron in each sample, the average, the standard deviation, and the relative standard deviation for your data.Results: Crucible 1: 0. 231 g Fe2O3 ? 1 mol Fe2O3159. 487g ? 2 mol FeOOH1 mol Fe2O3? 55. 845 g1 mol = 0. 162g Fe0. 162 g1. 505 g? 100=10. 764% Crucible 2: 0. 252 g Fe2O3 ? 1 mol Fe2O3159. 487g ? 2 mol FeOOH1 mol Fe2O3? 55. 845 g1 m ol = 0. 176g Fe0. 176 g1. 501 g? 100=11. 725% Crucible 3: 0. 268 g Fe2O3 ? 1 mol Fe2O3159. 487g ? 2 mol FeOOH1 mol Fe2O3? 55. 845 g1 mol = 0. 183g Fe0. 183 g1. 502 g? 100=12. 216% *Refer to appendix for sample mass table and calculation equations | Crucible 1| Crucible 2| Crucible 3| Weight percent| 10. 764 %| 11. 725 %| 12. 216%|Average| 0. 250 g| Standard Deviation| 0. 019| Relative Deviation| 0. 015| Discussion: Since the obtained and expected results are not 100 percent match we can conclude that during the experiment we encountered a loss of product, with an average percent of 11. 57 and an obtained of 12. 90 percent. In the experiment the precipitate was washed repeatedly with given solution to filter out any Cl- at this time we notice that some of the precipitate had gone through the filter through the sides from solution being held to high causing an overflow on the sides of the filter.This was notice by the orange tint in the beaker of the filtered solution. In the experime nt scales were also changed due to overuse. That could cause some flux in the measurement changes by small degree. Another error or issue during the experiment a lids on our crucible broke having to replace it caused a changed in our final weigh being that in the beginning we weighed our crucibles with the lid. Remaining constant in the lab is a must this does cut back on experimental error such as using the same analytical balances and labeling all equipment and crucibles.In the Gravimetric determination is the measurement of mass in two different forms precipitation and volatilization. Some of the underlying principles and theories of gravimetric analysis are law of mass action, reversible reactions, and principle of solubility product and common ion effect. Conclusion: The gravimetric determination procedure determined that we had an average of 11. 568% of Fe in our unknown solution, given the amount of 12. 90% of Fe. We experienced a loss of approximately 1. 332 %. This loss cou ld be included in instrumental and human errors.References: Lewis, D. 2013. Quantitative Analysis Lab Journal. Gravimetric Determination of Iron as Fe2O3. Vol. 1: Pages 4 – 5. Franklin, J. 2013. Quantitative Analysis Lab Journal. Gravimetric Determination of Iron as Fe2O3. Vol. 1: Pages 7 – 11. Bb Learn. 2013. Quantitative Chemical Analysis. Gravimetric Determination of Iron Lab Handout. Harris, Daniel C. 8th edition. Quantitative Chemical Analysis Textbook. Appendix: Calculation equations: Mean : Mean = Sum of X values / N(Number of values) Standard Deviation: Relative Deviation: 100 ? sxCrucibles| Mass of the Beaker (empty) (g)| Mass of the Beaker & Unknown (g)| Mass of the Unknown Sample (g)| 1| 144. 181 g| 146. 686 g| 1. 505 g| 2| 159. 328 g| 160. 829 g| 1. 501 g| 3| 167. 480 g| 168. 982 g| 1. 502 g| * Above are the measurements of the unknown samples obtained Crucibles| Mass of Crucible (g)| Mass Crucible & final product (g)| Mass of final product (g)| 1| 31. 752 g| 31. 982 g| 0. 231 g| 2| 33. 820 g| 34. 072 g| 0. 252 g| 3| 40. 802 g| 40534 g| 0. 268 g| * Above are the measurements of Iron found in unknown sample

Phillipines essays

Phillipines essays The videos trace the development of the United States' colonial policy in the Philippines. It all started with helping a disaster-stricken young republic in creating a democratic society. In order to do that, the Philippines welcomed U.S. intervention. The U.S. was their hope to be freed from the Japanese and to rid their label of being the "sick man of Asia". Of course, U.S. aid came with extensive stipulations requiring amendment of the Philippine Constitution. Americans suddenly now had almost a full set of rights in the Philippines. Many Filipinos soon resented this, as it was a major threat to the sovereignty of the Philippines that they so dreamed of having. . Beginning in 1900, America has had a great influence in the Philippines. U.S. politics dictated the course of events of the islands. Many Filipinos sought after total sovereignty from the U.S. Philippine independence was granted, reserving military and Naval bases for the U.S,. Military and imposing tariffs on Philippine exports. The Philippine commonwealth was independent with supervision by the U.S. With this new republic, the Philippines faced many problems including economic deficiency and much internal strife. Namely, the Huks, a communist led guerilla group, began an extensive rebel movement against the Philippine government requesting that the government put an end to the feudalistic farm system in the rural parts of the Philippine Islands. During a democratic election in 1953, Ramon Magsaysay was elected President. He was known as a populist leader who understood the needs of the peasant farmers. The U.S. gave Magsaysay extensive aid in hopes of ridding the rebel movement. In March of 1957, Magsaysay was killed in an "accidental plane crash". Ferdinand Marcos was elected President in 1961 and was re-elected in 1969, wherein the Philippines was stricken with civil unrest caused in part by Marcos' support of U.S. Vietnam policy. In the early ...

Verbification at Work

Verbification at Work Verbification at Work Verbification at Work By Maeve Maddox Trudy Ripka writes I have come across recipes which are made into healthier versions of the original.   My problem is accepting the word HEALTHIFIED.   There is a particular site which uses this and a lot of the readers dislike the term; I am included.   This could be a case of verbing adjectives. Whatever we call it, something is going on. Apparently just about any word can be turned into an -ify verb and then back-formed into a -tion noun. healthify and healthification: â€Å"Healthified† Fluffy Orange Fruit Dip â€Å"Healthified† Chicken Pot Pie `Healthification and the Promises of Urban Space Fit or Fad: The Healthification Of Starbucks Foodstuffs greenify and greenification: Greenify for Better Business 5 Ways to Greenify Your Home How have you greenified your home? The Greenification of Walmart friendify and friendification: Youll now receive a Friendifcation Notification. . . when a member adds you to their friends list. our current MySpace policy is to friendify anyone with an interesting looking avatar . . . If you get friendified by someone you dont know, its probably because you have a cool avatar. blogify and blogification: Creativity Has Now Been Blogified So we have blog-this and blog-that, basically everything has been blogified . . . blogify: To dramatize or overexaggerate. To describe otherwise bland subjects in a horribly depressing and/or dramatic manner. To make dreary . . . Urban Dictionary I’m wondering when the schools are going to get around to grammifying their students. I’d say that a little grammification is in order. Joking aside, use drives usage. When a word is felt to meet a need by a large number of speakers, it will find a place in the language. The word gentrification, for example, has won acceptance with the meaning The process by which an (urban) area is rendered middle-class. OED The fate of these new -ify verbs is uncertain. Many of the writers who are using them are uncomfortable enough to enclose them in quotation marks. Writers and speakers who don’t want them to catch on can choose not to use them. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Expressions category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:"Based in" and "based out of"When to Form a Plural with an Apostrophe10 Terms for the Common People

Mergers and Aquisitions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 1

Mergers and Aquisitions - Essay Example This is influenced by the fact that in situational contexts where the market economies are in a funk, firms do not engage in much dealing and trade. Consequently, critique provides that the presence and/ or increase of either activities, provides a positive sign of market confidence. Importantly, is the fact both inert human capacity, as well as ‘investor psychology’ are critical towards ensuring brighter futures. This is essentially what leads to the presence of both economic aspects; aimed at alleviating and bettering existing contexts in the international economic arena. In the U.S., just like other international contexts, mergers and/ or acquisitions, from the late 20th century onwards, experienced an upward surge. This is best represented by mega mergers or acquisitions i.e. Spectra Energy Corp (SE) acquisition by Spectra Energy Partners (SEP), which is the paper’s focus; Tokyo Electronic (TOELY) and Applied Materials (AMAT); US Airways (LCC) acquisition by American Airlines (AAMRQ), and Life Technologies (LIFE) acquisition by Thermo Fisher Scientific (TMO) amongst others in the global arena (InvestorPlace, 2013). The year 2013, though having notched amongst the largest of mergers and acquisitions within recorded human history, it was hardly a year of deal activity; though this did smartly pick up. During the first 9 months, the total volume of U.S. mergers and acquisitions did total to US$865.1 billion; attesting to the great influences, impacts and effects of such economic activities within the global economic sector. Accordingly, Dealogic (a global economic consortium) in its – Dealogic M&A Review [First Nine Months 2013 Final Results Report] – portrays that this figure was a 39% increase, over the same period the previous year. Subsequently, a number of deals did make mega splashes, while others were conducted quietly; with all being influential in the eventual recovery in M&A. such high amounts of monies spent on mergers