hypervalent_iodine

! Moderator Note You made no attempt to explain what you wanted to discuss, only that you wished to debate imatfaal (presumably related to moderator action, but you didn't make the specifics of your disagreement clear). This too is closed. If you take issue with moderator action, report it or PM staff.

! Moderator Note Since you can't clearly state your point, this thread has no business being on a discussion forum. Closed.

! Moderator Note Could you perhaps elaborate on what you wish to debate? I'm sure imatfaal would be here to ask, but he's really quite busy laying about.

! Moderator Note sas, If you have no model and no evidence then I am afraid that this thread will be closed. Please go back and read up on the basics and review your thoughts on the matters you are discussing before posting again.

Is this homework? Where exactly are you struggling with these questions?

It would be considerably easier for you to do serial dilutions.

Electronic_engine has been banned as a sock puppet of yahya515.

! Moderator Note Thread closed on account of the OP being a previously banned member.

Usually by doing a literature search on the topic. Google scholar is something you might find useful. You could also check what some of the key enzymes responsible for its biosynthesis are and check to see how many / what organisms are known to possess similar genes. Other people with more experience would be able to direct you better in this than I can. Could you elaborate a little on the context of your question? Why are you trying to figure this out?

Emphasis is mine. This is not true in the slightest. The source of the compound is really quite irrelevant to its function in this context. It is the same molecule and it will act in the same way when it gets to where its going.

They are the same molecule. There is nothing different about them. Pitocin is just the trade name given to it.

! Moderator Note Go see a doctor. This is not the place for medical advice. Fiveworlds, please do not dispense such advice here. You are, as far as I know, not a doctor and even if you were, you have not examined the patient. Edit: to be clear for other readers, the posts that have been made here should not be taken as any sort of medical advice.

The debate was settled in Roe v. Wade. The fact that people still cling to it is likely because it's an easy argument to garner emotional responses from (on both sides) and (as you say) it is a good political selling point for some. Not sure I agree that politicians selling a pro-life agenda then don't go on to do anything about it post-election. It's true for some perhaps, but not true for all when you consider the recent spate of restrictive measures some states have passed or tried to pass.

Preserve them for what purpose exactly? Seems like a waste of money and resources. Also, in the case of rape or incest, why should the father be informed? Or the courts? Courts are expensive and can take time that may force the decision of the mother, thereby restricting her rights. Not to mention the emotional toll of such a thing. I am not sure how it is where you are, but in Australia I think either parent can take parental leave and have access to government assistance I'm addition to whatever is offered by the employer. I am unsure of the specifics, but I definitely agree that paid parental leave should be available to either parent.

I am really not sure how else to explain this to you. You might like to read up a little on basic chemistry and how we write reactions. The way you have written it is incorrect. Whether the water forms a hydronium ion following dissociation of HCl or whatever is irrelevant to the overall reaction. You don't have water on both sides of the equation.

! Moderator Note Closed, pending review.

The NaOH acts as the base. The water doesn't react here and your equation doesn't make chemical sense. If you have water on both sides of your equation, it isn't part of the overall reaction. Perhaps it is involved somewhere in the mechanism, but that is not the same thing.

Mincing words? The sentence directly after the quote says: I think for the most part we all agree that certain threads go on longer than they should do and that earlier intervention would not go amiss.

xxx has been banned as a sock puppet for xyzt.

xyzt has been banned. As much as we appreciated his knowledge in certain areas, his inability to distinguish cranks from people asking genuine questions and general need to become less helpful than abusive has become quite tiresome. I'm sure he'll be glad to be rid of this (in his words) cess pit.

Not really. Surely you have encountered people for whom clear and decisive logic / evidence simply does not hit home? Some people are just plain obstinate and others are too busy jumping down unrelated rabbit holes and / or moving goal posts to notice that their original questions have been answered.

! Moderator Note Well you can take your demands to somewhere that they might be more relevant to the discussion.

! Moderator Note Can we all settle down please? There is really no need for any of it.

! Moderator Note As physica says, we do not typically permit threads seeking specific medical advice. Please see your doctor.

Not if its impeding discussion of the topic, no. We often like to try and let membership sort these things out without intervention, but if all efforts to move forward are failing, you're more than welcome to get staff involved.