Compare and contrast how foreign antigens are recognised by the innate Essay

Compare and contrast how foreign antigens are recognised by the innate and the adaptive immunity - Essay Example The innate immunity system is composed of four main components each of which contains a large number of different types of cells. These four main components are: Phagocytes, Interferon, Compliment system and Natural Killer cells. The innate immunity is non-specific and targets every foreign antigen that it is exposed to. Also the response to these foreign antigens is very rapid. Mast cells of the innate immunity system release histamine which causes inflammation and dilation of the capillaries to allow the needed action. Adaptive immunity also aims to protect the body against infectious particles however the mode of action and the components involved are quite different from that of innate immunity. The adaptive immunity is very specific recognizing and acting against a specific antigen. The response against the antigen is quite slow when compared with the innate immunity and there is a time delay between the onset of antigens and the action taken by the adaptive immunity. The action however is targeted and once it is taken, it leads to rapid removal of antigens from the body. In both the innate and the adaptive immunity, the response to the foreign antigens takes place in two phases: the activation phase and the effector phase. The activation phase is very similar in both of these systems. During the activation phase, antigens are presented by the Major histocompatibility complexes to the T-cells. In the innate immunity the antigen is presented to the cytotoxic T cell which after recognizing the signal proliferates and produces perforin in order to lyse the infected cell. On the other hand, in the adaptive immunity, the antigens are presented to T-helper cells. The helper cells release cytokines which allow it to proliferate into clones. These clones then act on individual B-cells which cause them to proliferate and differentiate into either plasma cells or memory cells. Like the innate immunity, the adaptive

Equity & Trust Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Equity & Trust - Essay Example It has to be understood that the term 'Law' implies an act enacted and passed in Parliament (statutory law) and the common law (principles established by judges in previous trials, procedures and conclusions) in the process of deciding on litigations. The most important dissimilarity between law and equity is the difference in remedies that both offer. While laws equip the court with the necessary set of instructions that enable the court to draw monetary compensations for the damages cased to the plaintiff, the equity enables the court to order injunctions or decrees that direct someone to act or not to act in some particular manner. Often, it is this form of order that is more practical to the plaintiff and provides more convenient remedies to the sort of problems raised by the plaintiff in the court of law. A plaintiff who has lost his baggage in a particular place may seek to get it back from the place and not the monetary value of the contents of the baggage. What marks the distinction between an equity and a law is the non-availability of a jury in the former. Equitable remedies can be decided upon exclusively by a judge, as it is a matter of law and not subject to intervention. Hence the intervention of a jury as a trier of facts is impossible to come by. Legal and equitable remedies are thus distinct in their nature and scope and this factor is well deliberated upon in modern legal systems of progressive states such as the United States of America. The right of trial by jury in a civil dispute in the United State is governed by the Seventh Amendment of the American Constitution. Hence the question of a trial by jury depends on the nature of relief the plaintiff has sought in his prayer before the court. If he is seeking a monetary benefit in lieu of the wrongs done to him, the matter can be decided upon by a jury since the matter is considered legal. But is cases where the prayer is for specific performance or non-performance, and areas where the intended award is an injunction, declaratory judgment, modification of contract etc., then the matter is treated to be solved by equity. Hence in such areas, the jury is not allowed. The foremost distinction between a law and equity is the source of the governing rules from which the decisions are arrived at. In law, the decisions are derived from a set of governing rules that are well laid out in long hand and approved by the government. Where as in the case of equity, it only has general guidelines known as the maxims on equity. It is due to this factor that the equity is deeply rooted on fairness and flexibility. An important criticism that equity has is that since there are no prior written guidelines, the lord chancellor can give a ruling according to his conscience. This open endedness led to the wrapping up of the provision and its being included in to a consolidated system of precedents much like its cousin - the Common Law by the 17th century. History of Equities and Trust The distinction betwe