ww2 history

 

 

 

Did everyday Germans largely experience the war in the same way as everyday Americans? Or were their experiences mostly different? Did home front Japan resemble in meaningful ways home front Great Britain? Or were the differences between the home fronts more important than any similarities? Such questions are at the heart of Paper Two. In this paper, you are to compare the home front experiences of the Axis powers with the home front experiences of the Allied powers. Were they similar—and if so, in what important ways? Were they different—and if so, in what important ways? Finally, are the (possible) similarities more important than the (possible) differences? In short, the paper is asking you to answer the following question: can we speak of a common home front experience in the Second World War?

 

Sample Solution

No, everyday Germans and Americans experienced World War 2 (WW2) in very different ways. Although both countries were deeply affected by the war, Germany was the aggressor rather than a target of invasion. This distinction fundamentally shaped how German citizens experienced the conflict.

For instance, compared to American civilians who faced few enemy attacks on their homeland besides Pearl Harbor and Alaska (Dear & Foot 2000), much of Germany’s infrastructure suffered immense devastation as a result of Allied bombings that began in 1942 (Gallagher 2018). As such, many German civilians had to contend with food shortages and harsh living conditions caused by wartime destruction. They also had to grapple with psychological effects such as fear and trauma created by air raids (Kröger et al 2017). In addition, thousands of German men were conscripted into military duty while women joined government-run labor forces or found employment in factories producing ammunition and other war materials (Sanders 2019).

On the other hand, U.S civilians during WW2 enjoyed far greater access to resources than their German counterparts due to America’s participation in global trade networks as well as its support from neutral British colonies like Canada that shipped vital goods across borders for free trade amid the conflict (Harvie 2015). This enabled most Americans to lead relatively stable lives despite shortages in certain consumer goods resulting from rationing efforts imposed by President Franklin Roosevelt’s administration during this time period.

In conclusion, WW2-era Germans often endured more severe consequences associated with the war effort than did Americans due primarily to Germany’s role as an aggressor state throughout much of the conflict. Meanwhile, U.S citizens maintained a higher standard of living due largely because they benefited from trading partnerships shared with allied nations not directly involved in fighting against Axis powers.

The basic aim of the personalized medicine is applying right therapy to the right population of people by defining disease at the moecular level. So, identifying differences among the individuals support the new treatment methods and pharmaceutical companies to develop new cancer drugs. Patients who have similar clinical outcome and histological tumor type can give different response to the same drug(17). Prediction of who will be a nonresponders reduces the harmfull effect of drug on nonresponders like a potential toxic effect of drug and cost effect. Also when drug companies develop new drug, they focus on the patient population that benefit from drug to increase positive responds(17).

U.S. Food and Drug Administration bringed development about targeted therapy. For example, to treat chronic myeloid leukemia and gastrointestinal stromal tumor(18) ,imatinib mesylate is used and to treat breast cancer(19), trastuzumab (Herceptin) is used. Molecular characteristics of these cancer types that are abnormal protein tyrosine kinase activity in chronic myeloid leukemia and gastrointestinal stromal tumor and HER-2 receptor in breastcancer is used as a predictive biomarker. By using these markers only individuals which have these molecular alteration is selected and it means they are favorable for the treatment. Using this way some cancer types’ survival rate is shifted from 0 to 70%(17).

This application is used in non-small cell lung cancer treatment with using of mutations screeing. In this cancer type mutation occurs in kinase domain of EGFR. Gefitinib (Iressa) and erlotinib are tyrosine kinase inhibitors drug are used to treat and patients give a higher response to the treatment(20). Also if patient that is never smoked Asian females have adenocarcinomas, these drugs efficient on them(21). On the other hand, if the mutatuions occur at downstream effector KRAS, patient is resistant to to erlotinib(22). Also mutations that is at KRAS have a resistance to cetuximab (Erbitux) and panitumumab (Vectibix) drugs in colon cancer patients. If the KRAS is wild type, these these drugs is effective on the patients(23). These responses that are specific and different are based on molecular profile. Some molecular test are done before the using of cetuximab or panitu

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.