Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

  1. Both II and III 
  2. Only III 
  3. Both I and III 
  4. Both I and II 
5 views

1 Answers

Option 3 : Both I and III 

  • Klinefelter Syndrome is a condition in which a male possesses an extra X chromosome (XXY) which renders him female characteristics like less body hair, larger breasts, etc. 
  • Turner's Syndrome is a condition in which, one X chromosome is absent in females resulting in lack of secondary sexual character in that female. 
  • In Down's Syndrome, an extra chromosome is added to the 21st autosomal chromosome and it results in a person becoming mentally retarded or having abnormal physical structure. 
  • Therefore, only I and III are associated with the addition of a chromosome in the human body.
5 views

Related Questions

The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: World’s largest beer maker Heineken NV, the majority partner of United Breweries with Vijay Mallya, is understood to have sought legal opinion over its right to appoint a chairman at the Indian company. Heineken and some of its advisers believe that the shareholder agreement between Mallya and the beer giant has become null and void after India’s Enforcement Directorate attached his shares as part of its legal action against the liquor baron. Which among the following arguments support the above statement in the best possible manner Arguments: I. UBL has stopped sharing confidential information with Mallya and has said that he is no longer privy to any strategic developments.  II. The board of UBL, India’s biggest beer company, had asked Mallya to either step down or appoint a nominee after the Securities and Exchange Board of India barred wilful defaulters from holding key board positions last year.  III. The company is functioning well and operations are in good shape but it is not good corporate governance to have an acting chairman for so long.?
1 Answers 7 Views
Two statements are followed by three Conclusions I, II and III. You have to consider the statements to be true, even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts. You are to decide which of the given conclusions can definitely be drawn from the given statements and indicate your answer accordingly. Statements: I. Political parties that opposed simultaneous polls before the Law Commission mostly cited federalism, Constitution and impracticability for their opposition, but Goa Forward Party chose coconuts to drive home its point against the proposal of ‘One Nation, One Election'. II. The regional party that is part of the BJP-led Goa government cited coconut, its party symbol, to argue that regional issues will go unaddressed in the noise of simultaneous polls. Conclusions: I. To buttress its reasoning, Goa Forward Party representative cited the party's history and struggle in protesting against cutting down of coconut trees in Goa before it came to power with ally BJP in March 2017. II. The party had protested against the BJP government's decision to amend rules to simplify the procedure of cutting down coconut trees by removing it from the list of trees. III. The commission held talks with political parties on the proposal of simultaneous elections.?
1 Answers 5 Views
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong' arguments and which is/are ‘weak' arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement:  The central government has told the Supreme Court that anti-adultery laws were required to protect the ‘sanctity of marriage and the institution of family', and any attempt to do away with these laws would hurt ‘Indian ethos'. The government was responding to a court notice on a public interest litigation which wanted the law struck down as it was not gender neutral and the provisions were tilted against men. Which among the following arguments support the above statement regarding the ‘revision of such laws' in the best possible manner Arguments: I. It seemed to suggest that women were chattel owned by men and could be guided and misguided. II. This would erode the sanctity of marriage as an institution and the societal fabric. The issue of making the provision gender neutral was already pending before the government. III. Any step towards decriminalising the offence in the interim would be detrimental to Indian ethos which gives paramount importance to the institution and sanctity of marriage.?
1 Answers 4 Views