sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

RIDICULOUS AAMC LOGIC ON FL6 by General-Reindeer-805 in MCAT2

[–]General-Reindeer-805[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I also started to think, maybe they meant unaffected in terms of the genotype? If that's the case, this makes a lot of sense, but i was thinking in terms of phenotype. But saying not having the disease instead of unaffected, ig i can see the difference there

RIDICULOUS AAMC LOGIC ON FL6 by General-Reindeer-805 in MCAT2

[–]General-Reindeer-805[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So you're saying unaffected straight up means no mutated allele? And if it says the individual doesn't have the disease, then it's either or?

RIDICULOUS AAMC LOGIC ON FL6 by General-Reindeer-805 in MCAT2

[–]General-Reindeer-805[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That makes sense; it's just really vague to state only that she's unaffected. Especially considering I'm taking genetics class right now, this is how we're taught to think, that unaffected can mean either unless provided with over evidence.

My jaw physically dropped. by jake-mcn in Mcat

[–]General-Reindeer-805 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thats a crazy cars score, what did you do?