ericjones12398 writes: "A tumor suppressor gene acts as a molecular guardian against cancer by protecting the cell from various forms of damage. "p53" is a tumor-supressing protein that functions as an anti-cancer gene in several ways. Early this week researchers reported the identification of a transcription factor that regulates p53, an important step towards better cancer treatments."
ericjones12398 writes: "FCC chairman Julius Genachowski has released a formal petition to his fellow commissioners calling for an inter-agency review of mobile phone emission frequency standards, set in 1996. At the heart of the proposal, which will need majority approval before public comment and any studies commence, are growing concerns about health risks of radiation emitted from mobile devices and whether the 15-year-old standards don’t take into account the proliferation of both mobile device ownership and usage. While scientists representing the Environmental Working Group applauded the agency’s reevaluation of safety standards, the above proposals have drawn enormous protests from the $170 billion wireless industry."
ericjones12398 writes: "The strategy Google uses to decide which pages are relevant to a search is being used to determine which proteins in cancer are relevant for the progression of the disease. Researchers from Dresden University of Technology used a modified version of Google's PageRank algorithm to rank 20,000 proteins by their genetic relevance to the progression of pancreatic cancer. They found seven proteins help assess how aggressive a patient's tumor is. The Google strategy takes into account the content of pages and how they are connected by links. With this as a model, the authors made use of the fact that proteins in a cell are connected through a network of physical and regulatory interactions. "Once we added the network information in our analysis, our biomarkers became more reproducible," said Christof Winter, the paper's first author. This allowed them to find overlap with an earlier study and a connection was made with the proteins that can assess cancer aggressiveness."
ericjones12398 writes: "The most recent research coming out of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reported that one in six cancers worldwide are caused by infections. This single finding created a big buzz in news headlines earlier this week; there were millions of reports containing headlines about cancers caused by infections. I wanted to know more about the context of the research, and how the findings might be applied to solve the global cancer epidemic. To begin, I’ll summarize the research findings to bring you up to speed (in case you missed out earlier this week). The IARC, which is affiliated with the World Health Organization (WHO), conducted a study to see how many cancers are caused by infections, identify the specific bacteria and cancer types involved, and present the research in light of a global scale. And yes, the IARC determined that one in six cancers is indeed caused by an infection, and the most affected countries are less-developed areas where modern medicine is in short supply. In countries like the US and Australia, where cancer prevention and management tools are readily available, the rate of infection-caused cancer was the lowest in the world; poorer countries in Africa had the highest rate. No surprise there. The predominant cancer types were also the obvious ones — Hepatitis B and C and human papilloma virus (HPV) — which are known to be caused by infection. The research easily supports the need for better cancer management and prevention tools in less developed countries where the incidence of infection-caused cancer is highest. The WHO is tasked with monitoring and assessing health trends within the United Nations (UN) system. Since 1948, this organization has been involved with shaping health research agendas, providing leadership on global health matters, articulating evidence-based policy options, and more. Since the IARC is a pocket within WHO, the context of the latest research falls neatly within their mission. But, the IARC is “not involved with implementing cancer control measures or research and treatment of cancer patients.” Clearly, the IARC and WHO are more involved with policy matters, and that’s for a good reason."
ericjones12398 writes: "Over the past century, the personal response to breast cancer has dramatically changed. While breast cancer is still greatly feared (and rightly so), the increased visibility of breast cancer survivors has reduced the stigma that was once associated with the disease. High profile women, such as Guiliana Rancic, openly discussing life after their diagnosis with breast cancer provide a face for this cancer and motivate other women to look after their own health through preventive screening. Screening aims to diagnose breast cancer before symptoms occur, while the cancer is in its early stage and, thus, easier to treat. Mammography and breast self-exam (BSE) have been the standard screening methods for decades. Unfortunately, controversy remains around the effectiveness of these methods. BSE has been encouraged for women starting in their early 20s, but research suggests that breast cancer death rates are not lowered in women who regularly perform BSE. Mammography has been shown to save lives, but has come under recent fire for its limitations in diagnosis. Specifically, this test tends to over-diagnose individuals, which leads to invasive, unnecessary testing and anxiety. Of course, when it comes to cancer, many feel its better to be safe than sorry."
ericjones12398 writes: "Since President Richard Nixon declared a 'War on Cancer' with the signing of the National Cancer Act of 1971, the US has spent more than $100 billion on cancer research. While there have been some recent hopeful statistics about improvements in cancer mortality rates in the US and in Europe, the results have not been dramatic. In the same period that saw heart disease death rates drop by a third, cancer death rates have stayed relatively the same since 1950, proving just how challenging it is to fight a disease that boils down to the body itself running a muck."
ericjones12398 writes: "The first volume of the Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE), funded by Novartis and authored by scientists at the Broad Institute, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Genomics Institute of the Novartis Foundation, and Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, is now available online