Experiment 1
The first experiment testing to see if LPS was a good way of producing Inflammotin was done on rats. The control group was not given any amount LPS and showed on average 10.516 pg/ml of Inflammotin, with a variance of 2.2255 in both directions. The test group was given 10mg of LPS and showed on average 11.112 pg/ml of Inflammotin with a variance of 7.402 in both directions. Both groups had a total of 5 subjects each. Looking just at the averages between the groups it would seem that there is a slight difference that may be significant, but that cannot be said for certain until statistical test are run which will be discussed in a later section.

Experiment 2

The Second experiment testing to see if LPS was a good way of producing Inflammotin was done on human subjects namley the elderly of an average age of 67.675 years. The control group was not given any amount LPS and showed on average 3.834 pg/ml of Inflammotin, with a variance of 1.523010177 in both directions. The first test group was given 5mg of LPS and showed on average 8.932 pg/ml of Inflammotin with a variance of 1.593931547 in both directions. The second test group was given 10mg of LPS and showed on average 61.622 pg/ml of Inflammotin with a variance of 30.11069386 in both directions. The third test group was given 15mg of LPS and showed on average 657.941 pg/ml of Inflammotin with a variance of 212.9429762 in both directions. Each and every group had 10 subjects. Upon quick glance there definitely seems to be some significant differences between the averages that will be analyzed later.

Results

Experiment 1 (Rats)

Experiment 2 (Humans)

Analysis

Experiment 1

Because there were only two factors involved in the study with the rats, a t-test was used to confirm data.

Because the t-test value is higher than the P-value(0.05), there is no significance with the rat study.

Experiment 2

According to the one way Anova Test, the P-value is 0.124. In this situation, the initial P-value was less than the correlated P-value of 0.05. Therefore, we ran the Post-Hoc test to determine any further values.

Because all the values were under P value of 0.00833, we can confirm that there is significance.

(Using inferential statistics, please determine statistically significant differences in the data.)

Summary/Discussion

(Please discuss the results and statistical analysis from both experiments. State your conclusion.) Discussion: The drug (LPS) had a significant effect on the subjects of the human experiment as the doses past the 5mg mark and the effect seemed to be exponential ingrowth because the production of Inflammotin would increase ten fold each time the dosage increased by five mg. But the dosage size also had a direct correlation to the amount of standard deviation for each test, as the doses increased the standard deviation would also increase ten fold. This showed that although the experiment proved the relationship between LPS and Inflammotin, LPS did not create the same effect in each subject but rather varied significantly. As far as the rat experiment, the average Inflammotin levels did not seem to increase as the doses did but at the same time the standard deviation was much larger in the 10mg experiment compared to the 0mg. This shows that when rats are given LPS, it will both increase or decrease the Inlammotin levels compared to their body's natural production levels. Conclusion: This experiment has shown that standard deviation is a factor in all science experiments and is a valuable piece of data. SD has the ability to give light to data found in certain experiments and shows that all of the data is accounted for. It was also shown that different tests will have different effects in certain kinds of subjects compared to others. In this test the Inflammotin in the rats increased minutely from 0mg to 10mg, whereas, in the human experiment it increased by over 50 pg/mL thus proving that there was a significantly different result from the two tests.