>question has more than one possible answer

>question isn't specific enough
>question is up for interpretation
>answer has 50 different factors, but the amount each factor contributes is omitted

>>9166997

>OP is confronted with reality

>>9166997
>>9167039
>American high school education
I feel sorry for burgers

>>9167039
>Inhibited carbonic anhydrase would cause blood CO2 levels to increase, does this explain the decrease in both CO2 and HCO3?
>yes (respiratory compensation will correct for declining ph by breathing off CO2, bringing it into balance with the limited HCO3)
Wrong? I fucking hate multiple choice [spoiler]I got an email typed out, but my head is cooling, I don't think I'll bother. It was all I got wrong. Do professors get salty about why is it wrong emails?[/spoiler]

>may or may not
Rŕrrrrrreeeeee
Literally just "may" or "may not". Never both you insufferable diletant.

>>9167133
while you are cooling off, post the whole question here

File: 1504050920995.png (10KB, 645x773px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 645x773px

>>9166997
>Question makes no sense

they arent looking for you to write "x is the answer", but to demonstrate your understanding of the subject
even brainlets can understand this

>>9167383
It was a two part question. Given a readout of slight acidosis, low PaCO2, low PaHCO3, and high PaO2. We were told it was from inhibited carbonic anhydrase. First part of question stated this would cause equilibrium to shift toward (increased [which was correct]) CO2. Second part of the question asked does this explain the readings, (yes [because of respiratory compensation of pH, CO2 would be hyperventilated]) Wrong? I still don't really see why, other than it didn't literally spell out every factor involved. Can't you even calculate ECF ph with only a CO2 to HCO3 ratio? I don't see how you could separate this equilibrium from what's going on

>>9168110
>PaHCO3
My own stupidity is triggering myself