Read the paragraph from The Hot Zone. She took up a scalpel and slit the monkey's abdomen, making a slow and gentle cut, keeping the blade well away from her gloved fingers. The spleen was puffed up and tough, leathery, like a globe of smoked salami. She did not see any bloody lesions inside this monkey. She had expected that the monkey's interior would be a lake of blood, but no, this monkey looked all right, it had not bled into itself. If the animal had died of Ebola, this was not a clear case. She opened up the intestine. There was no blood inside it. The gut looked okay. Then she examined the stomach. There she found a ring of bleeding spots at the junction between the stomach and the small intestine. This could be a sign of Ebola, but it was not a clear sign. It could also be a sign of simian fever, not Ebola. Therefore, she could not confirm the presence of Ebola virus in this animal based on a visual inspection of the internal organs during necropsy. Which statement best summarizes the central idea of this paragraph? 1. It is difficult to identify Ebola in dead specimens. 2. Performing a necropsy is a tedious procedure. 3. Signs of simian fever and Ebola can be similar. 4. Ebola has unusual effects on infected monkeys. 5. Mark this and return

In the text, it was shown that bloody lesions were indicative that an animal likely died from ebola.  The statement that best summarizes the central idea of this paragraph is;

When the doctor saw bloody lesions in the animal, he found it difficult to conclude that the animal died of ebola or simian fever. This is because these two diseases share the same effects.

Therefore we can reach the conclusion on option 3.

Learn more here:

link

The statement that best summarizes the central idea of this paragraph is 3. signs of simian fever and Ebola can be similar.

Explanation:

We can reach a conclusion through elimination. The first option is incorrect because the test does not claim the confirmation did not happen because the animal was dead. If the animal had had a bloody interior, Ebola would have been confirmed. So, dead specimens are not the reason why it is difficult to identify Ebola.

Number 2 is subjective, giving us an opinion that at no moment was suggested or stated in the paragraph. We cannot say the central idea of this text is that necropsies are boring.

Number 3 is the correct option. The reason why the woman was unable to confirm if the monkey had died of Ebola was because the signs she found could also be due to simian fever. Since they are similar, she could not confirm the disease visually.

Number 4 is incorrect. Ebola does not have unusual effects. Its effects are known and specific. Again, the reason behind the difficulty was the similarity of signs between the two diseases.

the service industry in the united states grew in the late 1800s. what was one effect of that growth?

the number of people with jobs in factories as unskilled workers decreased.

the number of people with jobs in factories as unskilled workers increased.

the middle class grew as people took jobs as clerks, lawyers, and teachers.

the middle class shrank as people left jobs as clerks, lawyers, and teachers.

question: which statement best describes a similarity in purpose between the frames and excerpt?

answer: both inform the reader that faryad and liaqat were not given the chance to tell their version of events at the police station

explanation: so as you see they were told to leave before they could tell there story

question answered by

(jacemorris)