Body Organization Worksheet Form

A2a.  As we all know from all the lifeguards who save almost-drowned people, the immediate damage directly to the lungs by water is minimal (after all, you lived 9 months with your lungs full of fluid), salt water can cause irritation and inflammation, but that will eventually subside.  Once the water is expelled from the lungs (most probably by the resuscitation efforts) the coughing reflex will kick in, causing the diaphragm to expand and pull air into lungs that are otherwise full of nothing (similar to how you feel when you get "the air knocked out of you"). Coughing, painful deep breaths in and out, eventually returning to somewhat normal, then finally normal.  Lung tissue can definitely survive exposure to fresh and salt water, for short periods of time, obviously. For longer periods, they start to not do their job of getting oxygen into the blood, and cerebral anoxia is usually what kills drowning victims. Preventing drowning is all about getting O2 back to the brain before permanent damage. This happens much quicker than most other physiological responses to water in the lungs.Amazingly, when water first hits the lungs, the larynx goes into spasm, and during the first "phases" of a person drowning, most of the water goes into the stomach.  Medical examiners know of what they call "dry drownings", where the anoxia that killed the victim did not come from water preventing oxygen intake in the lungs, but rather the laryngospasm prevents air (and or water) from getting down the throat in the first place, and stays in spasm until death. "Wet drownings" occur when the spasm relaxes after the victim approaches or goes into unconsciousness, and water can then enter the lungs.Finally, one of the bigger problems when drowning is not damage to lung tissue at all (which is usually mild), but rather concerns blood chemistry. Fresh water in the lungs will be pulled into pulmonary circulation by osmosis. Diluting the blood this way leads to hemolysis (bursting of red blood cells). Plasma K+ (potassium) levels go sky high and Na+ (sodium) levels drop, which alters the electrical activity of the heart usually causing ventricular fibrillation. This effect is capable of causing cardiac arrest in 2 to 3 minutes. Acute renal failure can also result from hemolytic hemoglobin accumulating in the kidneys, and if the water is cold enough the cold shock effect can cause cardiac arrest almost immediately as well.Sea water, on the other hand, is hypertonic to blood (more salty). It does the opposite of fresh water. Osmosis will instead pull water from the bloodstream into the lungs, thickening the blood. Thicker blood requires more work from the heart leading to cardiac arrest in 8 to 10 minutes. Sea water is usually much colder than fresh water, so the danger of cold shock is also there.So if my answer is Too Long;Didn't Read, then the short answer is if water enters the lungs and then is pumped out in time for the victim to survive, it is VERY possible that no long term damage to the lungs would occur, and if given proper medical support, the victim could survive any issues with the possible blood dyscrasias that might result.  The biggest issue would be how long the victim's brain was deprived of oxygen.So, medical disclaimer, I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV.  If Dr. House or Dr. Oz comes on and says I am full of it, believe him.

Departments of education and school districts always have to make decisions about what to include in their curriculum.  There are a lot of life skills that people need that aren't taught in school.  The question is should those skills be taught in schools?I teach high school, so I'll talk about that.  The typical high school curriculum is supposed to give students a broad-based education that prepares them to be citizens in a democracy and to be able to think critically.  For a democracy to work, we need educated, discerning citizens with the ability to make good decisions based on evidence and objective thought.  In theory, people who are well informed about history, culture, science, mathematics, etc., and are capable of critical, unbiased thinking, will have the tools to participate in a democracy and make good decisions for themselves and for society at large.  In addition to that, they should be learning how to be learners, how to do effective, basic research, and collaborate with other people.  If that happens, figuring out how to do procedural tasks in real life should not provide much of a challenge.  We can't possibly teach every necessary life skill people need, but we can help students become better at knowing how to acquire the skills they need.  Should we teach them how to change a tire when they can easily consult a book or search the internet to find step by step instructions for that?  Should we teach them how to balance a check book or teach them how to think mathematically and make sense of problems so that the simple task of balancing a check book (which requires simple arithmetic and the ability to enter numbers and words in columns and rows in obvious ways) is easy for them to figure out.  If we teach them to be good at critical thinking and have some problem solving skills they will be able to apply those overarching skills to all sorts of every day tasks that shouldn't be difficult for someone with decent cognitive ability  to figure out.  It's analogous to asking why a culinary school didn't teach its students the steps and ingredients to a specific recipe.  The school taught them about more general food preparation and food science skills so that they can figure out how to make a lot of specific recipes without much trouble.  They're also able to create their own recipes.So, do we want citizens with very specific skill sets that they need to get through day to day life or do we want citizens with critical thinking, problem solving, and other overarching cognitive skills that will allow them to easily acquire ANY simple, procedural skill they may come to need at any point in their lives?

When you say that “body parts" have evolved from some form to another, your question is very nebulous. Are you asking what they originally evolved from, or what small changes to pre-existing parts have occurred?Assuming that you mean the later, the largest macroscopic changes have been to the human penis and testes.For instance, different apes have different mating strategies. Chimps have a lot of sex promiscuously. As a result, the chimp who produces the most sperm will get the most females pregnant, and have the most offspring. Chimps have BIG testes.Gorillas have small harems. There's no sperm competition. Gorillas have small testes.Humans are between the two, indicating that we are moderately promiscuous.

It's as simple as filling any school admission form but you need to be quite careful while filling for courses ,don't mind you are from which stream in class 12 choose all the courses you feel like choosing,there is no limitations in choosing course and yes you must fill all the courses related to your stream ,additionally there is no choice for filling of college names in the application form .

Somewhere on that form should be a blank for routing number and account number. Those are available from your check and/or your bank statements. If you can't find them, call the bank and ask or go by their office for help with the form.  As long as those numbers are entered correctly, any error you make in spelling, location or naming should not influence the eventual deposit into your proper account.