4.2.5 (1 Viewer)

[kimmeh]

discuss evidence for the mutagenic nature of radiation

eep... what could possibly be a point against for this ?

 

[Zarathustra]

Don't you just discuss the effect of radiation on dna - that radiation changes the genetic information. The evidence is if you bombard an organism with radiation they will mutate - e.g. Chernobyl (this was discussed on STAT tonight - the channel 31 show with medical graduates- does anybody watch that except me???) with all of the mutant fish or Hiroshima/Nagasaki with the high rates of mutant babies - or three mile island (I think).

 

[xiao1985]

also, first generation radio therapist all developed cancer...

 

[cko]

Originally posted by kimmeh
discuss evidence for the mutagenic nature of radiation

eep... what could possibly be a point against for this ?

it confuses me too coz doens't 'discuss' mean to provide arguement FOR and AGAINST. what would be an arguement AGAINST the evidence for the mutagenic nature of radiation??? i mean, i don't think one even exists.... this dot point should be more like... describe or identify the evidence for the mutegenic nature of radiation

 

[xiao1985]

uhm, key work: discuss...

ok, the evidence may be a fluke =(???
i dunno, yea, if u are really desperate, prolly say something like, altho there are little scope for doubt, they still might be coincidence...

*xiao starts to curse hsc syllabus writers

 

[Halo]

"Discuss", from the BoS Glossary of key words, is defined as "Identify issues and provide points for and/or against". Notice the "and/or": there is no requirement to provide both cases (although you should when both cases are substantial).

Assuming most textbooks do not cover the against case for that dot point, you probably should just disregard it. If you are really keen to provide one, maybe you could talk about the early "evidence" (eg. the first generation radio therapists) not being conclusive enough as there may be other factors involved...