In a case-control study, a researcher found no association between exposure to A and disease B. Later she found out that there was a misclassification when measuring exposure to A, in both cases and controls. What is a potential explanation for the results (no association) of this case-control study? a. Differential misclassification
b. Confounding
c. Selection bias
d. Effect-modification
e. Nondifferential misclassification

e

Explanation:

hey bro i looked it up on google the structure of the eye-spot in euglena viridie, e. ehrenbergii, and phacus pyriyorme is not as franzé haa described it. the so-called “crystal body” and “lens bodies” were not found in any of the individuals of the species examined by me. as earlier observers have stated, the eye-spot consists simply of a mass of pigment granules arranged in a single layer, and probably embedded in a protoplasmic framework, but the latter could not be seen, and its presence was only inferred from the fact that the pigment granules must be held together in some way, thd the eye-spot as a whole is capable of expansion, and that the pigment granules can be separated from each other.

hope this   and an i get brainlsiest

when it is at an intermediate population density