jk i just thought you needed some free points<<<<<<<& lt;<<<<<<<< <<333333333333333333333

You are a member of the jury for a murder case. the prosecution has presented dna evidence linking the defendant to the crime scene. the defense claims that dna evidence using str analysis with 13 markers is not sufficient to reliably distinguish between people. what do you think? a. the defense is right. str analysis with 13 markers gives a 1 in 1 million chance of two people having the same pattern, leaving a reasonable doubt. b. str analysis is not sufficient. the defendant's entire genome should be sequenced. the prosecution will have to consult a genomic library to make sure their dna evidence is valid. c. the prosecution is right. str analysis with 13 markers gives a 1 in 10 billion or greater chance that two people will have the same pattern. this person was at the crime scene. d. dna evidence is not generally accepted by legal experts.

Aresearcher conducting behavioral research collects individually identifiable sensitive information about illicit drug use and other illegal behaviors by surveying college students. one of the subjects is in an automobile accident two weeks after participating in the research study. is this an example of an unanticipated problem that requires reporting to the irb? yes, this must be reported because it was not listed as a risk of study participation in the consent form (was unexpected) and the subject experienced harm. yes, this must be reported because it involved a subject in a research study and it’s up to the irb to determine if it was related to participation. no, this does not need to be reported because it was assessed by the researcher as unrelated to the research study. no, this does not need to be reported to the irb since the researcher reported it to the sponsor of the study.

Who is on the senate intelligence committee?