Satmi

IBCONQUERER, on May 19, 2012 - 12:58, said:

But wasn't the difference between the drugs what we were supposed to analyse in that question as well?

Sara.Taha, on May 19, 2012 - 11:08, said:

Oh right, so I just misread it then. Or It could be that I remember the letters wrong.
I just recall reading the question and options over and over (very weird that I missed something so obvious), being very confused and thinking that either of two choices should be correct. I think in the end I picked the one where it was said to inhibit flowering in short-day plants... I'm now really hoping it actually said during long nights.

EDIT:

IBCONQUERER, on May 19, 2012 - 12:51, said:

That I'm actually not so sure about, now that I think about it. I considered it as well (that monocyte production would mean more macrophages), but then there was something (probably the results of the placebo group) that clearly did not make sense in that interpretation to me. It was more like I was I wondering why monocyte production could be thought to stay constant.
But I mean there shouldn't be anything in antipyretic drugs that promotes immune response?

P1 was easy I think, although I already know that I made the wrong choice in several of them – which is never a good sign. The question about phytochrome, to me, seemed to have two correct answers. c) I think claimed that p_fr promotes flowering in long-day plants and d) that p_fr inhibits flowering in short-day plants. Both are correct, no? Or did I just misread either the question or the choices?

P2's first question was indeed weird – in the sense that they would choose data like that for analysis. I don't think I ended up having any problems with it, but there was this constant doubt that am I now really doing this correctly since they normally have much more... normal data.
And overall a really weird paper as well, for the reasons already mentioned. I suppose it was fine (although I'm wondering if I said enough for the 8-mark questions in Section B) – we had people leaving really early, but I on the other had found out that checking your answers might be worthwhile. In the X Y Z plant leaf diagram I had written palisade mesophyll and xylem the other way around...

vids.10, on May 19, 2012 - 09:58, said:

Because anti-inflammatory drugs reduce the natural immune response, just like in all the other parts of that question. I do feel though that the purpose of the placebo group was pretty unconventional – clearly there should have also been a group who took no drugs for the placebo to actually account for something. Maybe it was just excluded from the data.

HoolaBaloola, on May 17, 2012 - 16:26, said:

Satmi, on May 17, 2012 - 13:45, said:

As I said, I used the wrong unit in the calculation.

i7amani, on May 17, 2012 - 08:21, said:

I did. It's just that I never studied it before the previous night, and I did not have time to look at general relativity at all. I was able to do surprisingly many of the calculations though, so it went pretty much according to the plan.
Astrophysics was quite easy, but I'm seriously worried about my handwriting. And I think I used the wrong unit in the apparent magnitude calculation, so I got something around -35 as the result. That would be one bright star...