With reference to monoclonal antibodies, often mentioned in news, consider the following statements : I. They are man-made proteins. II. They stimulate immunological function due to their ability to bind to specific antigens. III. They are used in treating viral infections like that of Nipah virus. Which of the statements given above are correct?

States that a gene (DNA) provides information for making a specific protein — establishes proteins are cellular products encoded by genes.

A student could combine this with the fact that antibodies are proteins and then ask whether monoclonal antibodies originate from natural cellular protein synthesis or from laboratory-directed gene/cell methods.

Reinforces that DNA in cells is the information source for making proteins and that changes in information alter the proteins produced.

One could extend this to consider whether monoclonal antibody production involves directing cells (or their DNA) to produce specific antibody proteins artificially.

Explains that medical products (vaccines) can be made in different ways, including newer approaches that instruct our own body cells — illustrates that biomedical agents can be produced or engineered.

Use this as an example that some therapeutic proteins can be produced or engineered by medical/biotech methods, prompting investigation of how monoclonal antibodies are manufactured.

Defines 'man-made' (cultural) environment as creations of humans, giving a clear conceptual distinction between natural biological products and human-made products.

A student can apply this distinction to ask whether monoclonal antibodies are natural products isolated from organisms or human-created/engineered products (thus 'man-made').

States that vaccines train the immune system using parts of a germ so the immune system can 'recognise' and attack harmful pathogens — implying immune recognition of specific molecular features.

A student could infer that molecules (like monoclonal antibodies) that bind specific features might similarly enable recognition or targeting, and then check whether such binding triggers immune effects.

Describes making a harmless part of a germ so the immune system 'learns to fight' (acquired immunity), illustrating that exposure to specific antigenic parts elicits an immune response.

Use the idea that binding to a specific part (antigen) can lead to an immune reaction to reason that an antibody that binds a defined antigen could influence immune function.

Defines immunity and vaccines as training the immune system to recognise and attack harmful germs, linking recognition of specific pathogen components with immune activation.

From this, a student might hypothesize that externally provided molecules (antibodies) that target specific pathogen components could modulate recognition or defence.

Explains that cells detect chemical compounds using 'special molecules on their surfaces' to recognise information — a general rule about molecular binding mediating recognition.

A student could analogize that antibodies binding antigens are another example of molecular recognition via specific binding to surface molecules, and then investigate downstream immune consequences.

Notes that UV exposure can 'decrease the immune response to ... antigens,' showing that immune responses are specifically described as responses to antigens.

This supports treating 'antigen' as the target of immune responses; a student could therefore consider whether something that binds an antigen would alter that antigen-specific response.

Defines viruses as microscopic agents that infect living cells and cause disease, establishing the target (viruses) for specific antiviral interventions.

A student could combine this with the general fact that targeted biological therapies (like antibodies) act against specific pathogens to judge that an antibody could be designed against a virus.

Explicitly states that antibiotics work only against bacteria and do not work against viruses, implying viral diseases require different kinds of treatments.

A student could extend this by considering alternative therapeutic classes (antivirals, biologics such as monoclonal antibodies) as plausible treatments for viral infections like Nipah.

Notes a documented Nipah virus outbreak and fatalities, highlighting Nipah as a clinically important viral disease that may require specific therapeutic approaches.

Knowing Nipah is a serious viral infection, a student might look for targeted therapies (including monoclonal antibodies) developed for high‑mortality viruses.

Mentions that new drug therapies dramatically lowered death rates from HIV-AIDS, showing that novel therapeutics can substantially change outcomes in viral diseases.

A student could infer that similarly novel biologic therapies (e.g., monoclonal antibodies) might be developed or used against other viruses such as Nipah and should be investigated.