For treating Parkinson's disease with adult stem cells have to replace the cells that have died with other identical dopaminergic neurons (Euro Stem Cell). Even though scientists have not yet did any clinical trail because they need to understand the genetic make for the disease more to go further. Same with other diseases scientists think they can cure or treat them but they need to do more research on the disease to make sure nothing can go wrong. In near future cure for adult stem cells is more possible then the cure from ES cells. Because adult stem cells do not have that much restriction and government is not against it.
I agree with the reductions in costs, even in a medical error. I liked the way they conducted the research and how they handled their findings, yet when they found that EMRs did not really prevent medical errors and to not increase patient safety, I had to disagree. If an EMR is correctly formatted and records are kept precisely and consistently, then the safety of a patient would have to increase. EMRs keep track of medication allergies, mental disorders, chronic illnesses, current and pat medications and procedures, all this would be a tool to correctly prescribe, treat and care for a patient, reducing medical errors just by having knowledge of their
The survey purpose must be explained in detail to the subjects, especially if it is a lab experiment. The nature of the study cannot be misrepresented. Intrusive personal information should not be solicited. Specific reasons should been given if it is necessary and it should be categorized as highly sensitive. The data collection method should not violate the self-respect or self-esteem of the participants.
All humanistic studies are conducted unscientifically. This is a strength of this is that they are less artificial in the way they conduct their studies, this in turn makes the tests more ecologically valid. However a weakness of this is that they have no objective results and they are unable to control variables. This makes causality harder to establish and means psychologists are unable to predict what is going to happen. The humanistic approach represents the ‘healthy half of psychology’ and suggests that we are all with good intentions.
Or in other words, it is an activity that can “prove” through a test of experiments something to be true or not. Scientist use the scientific method, or forms of this method, to prove a theory to be right or wrong. If a theory proves to be wrong or cannot provide proof, then it not considered to be science. The purpose of science is to produce useful models of reality. Pseudoscience is a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.
law describes, theory explains * What is the difference between a scientific theory and a scientific hypothesis? theory is well tested, hypothesis is an educated guess * How are scientific theories, laws, and hypotheses similar? they all start with a hypothesis, kind of a step by step analysis * Why is evidence important in science? to support or refute a hypothesis * What happens if scientists discover new evidence that contradicts an accepted scientific hypothesis, theory, or law? it leads to modification of scientific
There have been efforts made by philosophers to reconcile the thoughts on determinism and voluntarism. Psychology being a science of human behavior does not have scientific laws to prove the presence of fate/destiny or choice. But that does not mean that the controversy ends, but it widens, since, some of the behavior is unpredictable and some behavior is voluntary. Therefore, a mid-way approach to the free will and determinism can prove to end the debate and solve the issue. For example, the illness, stress, and happiness are not choices, but they just really ‘happen’, whereas, the free will lets us achieve our goals and targets for a better life as a
Conclusion - Age has an effect on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. *Evaluation Methodological strengths -This was a lab experiment and this means there was a high control of variables. This is a good thing as it means it is reliable and if replicated, similar results will be obtained. Methodological weaknesses -This study lacks external validity as it is artificial and will not arouse the participants in the same way that they would have been if they were faced with the same situation in real life. Therefore the finding cannot be used as and indication of what may happen in reality.
Based on actual fact and findings one can discover the actual results needed. There is not a need to implement unnecessary costs and expenditures to establish an actual cause and effect scenario. The data has been collected and can be used to initiate different methodologies. Contrary to the use of experimental research design, the use of nonexperimental design may result in outdated and unusable results. For example, the previous cure for certain mental conditions involved electroshock therapy, whereas the use of hormonal therapy and psychological counsel may serve as a better method.
Lyotard looks at the pragmatics of narrative and scientific knowledge. He explains that knowledge and science are not synonymous. Science is a subset of knowledge that requires its statements to be based on repeatedly observable phenomena and it must be possible for them to be judged valid or not by the appointed experts. He goes on to argue that knowledge generally (unlike scientific knowledge) contains not just denotative statements of truth but also statements on ethical, aesthetical and of technical wisdom and someone with such knowledge, capable of making ‘good’ utterances, is deemed competent in their respective field. Lyotard argues that these criteria for ‘good’ utterances are culturally specific and this leads him to narrative knowledge, the ‘quintessential form of customary knowledge.’ He says that popular stories within society serve as myths to establish institutions or as legends or fables representing positive or negative models of integration into those institutions.