I am a to be a sophomore at UC Berkeley majoring in Genetics and Plant Biology with pre-med ambitions.
I was hoping that each summer I could do volunteering work at my local hospital and over the school year volunteer at an autism center for kids. However, the people in both places have made it very clear that they will not allow us to touch the patients or gain any clinical experience.
I know that clinical experience is very important but I don't know where I can find any. One of my friends who attends UC Davis now says that he is able to work at the UC Davis medical center's ER room and actually take blood pressures and simple tests on the patients. Since UC Berkeley doesn't have a medical school, I really don't know where to look for to gain clinical experience since hospitals don't offer that.
Furthermore, as for Research works. I wanted to do some plant research with a professoer during my junior year. Since my research is not related to medicine. Is it still useful?
Clinical Work vs. Volunteering vs. Research for Medical School?
Most volunteer experience does not involve direct patient care. There are very few health care positions that don't require certification, so the admission committees aren't looking for hands-on volunteer experience. They do want to see that you've been exposed to the realities of the health care environment and have abandoned the Hollywood romanticized version of health care.
It appears that your interests lie in research medicine. The research oriented medical schools prefer to see research activities versus volunteer work. These admission committees want to see that you've been exposed to research methodologies and protocols, so your plant research would fit that bill nicely.
Good luck!
Monday, April 26, 2010
I need help with a topic for my ethics class research paper. I t has to an ethical issue in the medical feild.
do you have any suggestions?
I need help with a topic for my ethics class research paper. I t has to an ethical issue in the medical feild.
Ethical Behavior: Behavior conforming to generally accepted social norms concerning benificial and harmful action.
Looks at this website I hope it helps: Ethical Issues of Medical Records on the Internet (http://www.luc.edu/ethics/23260etc2/etc2...
Or this one: Ethics Articles of the Month (http://www.hospicecare.com/Ethics/monthl...
Reply:Here's a list of online books that might help you do the research once you choose a topic...
Reply:Face transplants.
Reply:The right to die vs being on a ventilator
or end stage disease and there isn't anything else the hospital can do, so they want to send you home or transfer you to another facitily....Not sure where to tell you to look for information on this one, but I know there has been some court battles with some Houston area hospitals and transferring of patients..Not sure which one though it has been a while.
Also you can use the Florida case to support the first one. The lady that was taking off life support by her husband against the wishes of her family...I believe Gov. Bush at the time tried to stop it. It has been several years ago, so I don't remember all the facts.
Good Luck
Reply:Research: Post-humanism. Then here is your topic: In a world where it will be possible to live until you're 300 should humans be allowed to reproduce? Or: In such a world, who should be allowed to live that long? According to Post-humanism, Medicine may one day - soon - be able to prolong life indefinitely. Should that be allowed?
medicine
I need help with a topic for my ethics class research paper. I t has to an ethical issue in the medical feild.
Ethical Behavior: Behavior conforming to generally accepted social norms concerning benificial and harmful action.
Looks at this website I hope it helps: Ethical Issues of Medical Records on the Internet (http://www.luc.edu/ethics/23260etc2/etc2...
Or this one: Ethics Articles of the Month (http://www.hospicecare.com/Ethics/monthl...
Reply:Here's a list of online books that might help you do the research once you choose a topic...
Reply:Face transplants.
Reply:The right to die vs being on a ventilator
or end stage disease and there isn't anything else the hospital can do, so they want to send you home or transfer you to another facitily....Not sure where to tell you to look for information on this one, but I know there has been some court battles with some Houston area hospitals and transferring of patients..Not sure which one though it has been a while.
Also you can use the Florida case to support the first one. The lady that was taking off life support by her husband against the wishes of her family...I believe Gov. Bush at the time tried to stop it. It has been several years ago, so I don't remember all the facts.
Good Luck
Reply:Research: Post-humanism. Then here is your topic: In a world where it will be possible to live until you're 300 should humans be allowed to reproduce? Or: In such a world, who should be allowed to live that long? According to Post-humanism, Medicine may one day - soon - be able to prolong life indefinitely. Should that be allowed?
medicine
Recent medical research has shown that marijuana may actually PREVENT lung cancer. Do you feel safer, now?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...
Recent medical research has shown that marijuana may actually PREVENT lung cancer. Do you feel safer, now?
Not really
Reply:No, not so much.
Tashkin's group at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA had hypothesized that marijuana would raise the risk of cancer on the basis of earlier small human studies, lab studies of animals, and the fact that marijuana users inhale more deeply and generally hold smoke in their lungs longer than tobacco smokers -- exposing them to the dangerous chemicals for a longer time. In addition, Tashkin said, previous studies found that marijuana tar has 50 percent higher concentrations of chemicals linked to cancer than tobacco cigarette tar.
Did you read this part?????
Smoking any substance can cause chronic irritation with chemicals that can cause mutations leading to cancer....Wake up.
Reply:for people who think the THC can be passed trhough the sperm and make kids retarded Im living proof thats untrue. I have a 136 IQ have a scholorship and my dads smoked weed everyday since way before i was born and I beleive that cuz whats the toxin that hurts your lungs in weed? There is none in ciggarretes theres tar and other toxins. stoners r winning the arguement about legalizing weed these days i think. Too bad we're all too lazy to go vote.
Reply:mary jane.here i come.
Reply:I know someone who never smoke cigarretes but did smoke weed and still got a huge tumor in his lung. so I don't think that is true. According to research I have read, smoking 1 maijuana joint is like smoking a whole pack of cigarettes. The effects of weed can be passed from the sperm to the egg and into the fetus causing health and learning problems.
But I am all for the medical uses. If it truely can help someone in dire pain. Go for it!
Reply:No- smoking is smoking and very irritating to the lungs. They are only meant to filter the air- not excessive pollutants.
Reply:Ha! I still don't like smoking anything, but I can't say I'm THAT surprised. Maybe someday the paranoia will die down and pot will be recognized as the beneficial medicinal (and hedonistic) herb that it is.
Reply:Breathing easier already :)
Reply:Safer than what? I don't smoke pot, so I didn't feel threatened in the first place.
Reply:You'd have to be high to believe that.
Reply:Absolutely not.
Somebody was smoking it in this building the other night. When I opened my door for a friend to leave the fumes hit me so bad that my sinus burned, my throat hurt, I started coughing, and had to cover my nose and mouth, and had to shut my door, but by that time it was too late, my head was now aching. I spent a miserable night with dry hacking cough, watery eyes, and runny nose. It was as if someone was burning garbage in the hallway. Don't try to tell me it was something else, because it happened twice before, and I was told by the caretaker who knew what it was.
Like someone else said, shortly before me, the research is BS!!
Reply:no
Reply:thats BS
Reply:I feel okay, I guess... wait... what was the question again?
Reply:CLINCAL TRIALS ARE BULLLLLLLSHIT.
(;
Reply:Huh that is funny all the research I have read says that it increase the chances, but then again..... I still don't this is a good idea.
Recent medical research has shown that marijuana may actually PREVENT lung cancer. Do you feel safer, now?
Not really
Reply:No, not so much.
Tashkin's group at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA had hypothesized that marijuana would raise the risk of cancer on the basis of earlier small human studies, lab studies of animals, and the fact that marijuana users inhale more deeply and generally hold smoke in their lungs longer than tobacco smokers -- exposing them to the dangerous chemicals for a longer time. In addition, Tashkin said, previous studies found that marijuana tar has 50 percent higher concentrations of chemicals linked to cancer than tobacco cigarette tar.
Did you read this part?????
Smoking any substance can cause chronic irritation with chemicals that can cause mutations leading to cancer....Wake up.
Reply:for people who think the THC can be passed trhough the sperm and make kids retarded Im living proof thats untrue. I have a 136 IQ have a scholorship and my dads smoked weed everyday since way before i was born and I beleive that cuz whats the toxin that hurts your lungs in weed? There is none in ciggarretes theres tar and other toxins. stoners r winning the arguement about legalizing weed these days i think. Too bad we're all too lazy to go vote.
Reply:mary jane.here i come.
Reply:I know someone who never smoke cigarretes but did smoke weed and still got a huge tumor in his lung. so I don't think that is true. According to research I have read, smoking 1 maijuana joint is like smoking a whole pack of cigarettes. The effects of weed can be passed from the sperm to the egg and into the fetus causing health and learning problems.
But I am all for the medical uses. If it truely can help someone in dire pain. Go for it!
Reply:No- smoking is smoking and very irritating to the lungs. They are only meant to filter the air- not excessive pollutants.
Reply:Ha! I still don't like smoking anything, but I can't say I'm THAT surprised. Maybe someday the paranoia will die down and pot will be recognized as the beneficial medicinal (and hedonistic) herb that it is.
Reply:Breathing easier already :)
Reply:Safer than what? I don't smoke pot, so I didn't feel threatened in the first place.
Reply:You'd have to be high to believe that.
Reply:Absolutely not.
Somebody was smoking it in this building the other night. When I opened my door for a friend to leave the fumes hit me so bad that my sinus burned, my throat hurt, I started coughing, and had to cover my nose and mouth, and had to shut my door, but by that time it was too late, my head was now aching. I spent a miserable night with dry hacking cough, watery eyes, and runny nose. It was as if someone was burning garbage in the hallway. Don't try to tell me it was something else, because it happened twice before, and I was told by the caretaker who knew what it was.
Like someone else said, shortly before me, the research is BS!!
Reply:no
Reply:thats BS
Reply:I feel okay, I guess... wait... what was the question again?
Reply:CLINCAL TRIALS ARE BULLLLLLLSHIT.
(;
Reply:Huh that is funny all the research I have read says that it increase the chances, but then again..... I still don't this is a good idea.
Do you know what vetoing stem cell research will mean?
Since other countries are working on this medical technology,
it means the wealthy will be able to fly off to a foreign country
for treatment, while the poor will die off.
Is this just another plan to get rid of the poor, esp, the sick poor?
Yes, I did see a program where a young boy was cured of
leukemia with stem cells. Progress is being made.
I think this will throw the U.S., lightyears behind other countries
with medical research. Very sad.
Do you know what vetoing stem cell research will mean?
I answered with this earlier, but I shall do it again. Tony Snow, Whitehouse Press Secretary, said that GW Bush does not support murder. He then followed it up by saying stem cell research is not illegal, that private companies can continue to do the research, it will just not be funded by the federal government. Here, I shall try to argue like the Rapture Right: Stem cell research is murder. Stem cell research is not illegal. Private companies can murder because it is not illegal.
The real science, however, say this; It all begins with the five to seven days after conception. This is the time period during which embryonic stem cells can be harvested. Most on the right believe that life begins at the moment of conception. So many believe that to kill the cytoblast (the term for the embryo at this particular stage) is amoral and should not be done. i.e. It is murder.
When a couple decides they no longer want any more invitro procedures done, the companies that do the procedures are under the obligation to destroy the remaining supply of cytoblasts, the very same cytoblasts that could otherwise be used for stem cell research.
The Rapture Right's logic on this subject then leads me to believe that it is better to throw life in a garbage can than to use it for research and possible cures to diseases.
The embryos are frozen, they have 150 cells, they aren't even embryos, they are cytoblasts. They already exist and the Rapture Right would rather put them in the trash than in a laboratory.
Reply:its natural selection. its sad that some must die of accidents or diseases but its nature's way of controlling populations. america thinks its evil to use stem cells cause they used to be living things. but can you remember when you weren't even born. they dont have a mind so its not that evil to do so. if only we weren't so sentimental.....
Reply:Nothing. It is the federal subsidy that is in play, something the 42 President said was not right.
Reply:First of all, most of you don't know what you are talking about.
There is NO BAN on stem cell research in America. All this bill would have done is allow federal dollars to be spent in the area.
And we do actually spend federal money on this, but it is limited to a batch of stem cells that was already in existence. In fact Bush actually increased the federal funding on research on those cells to more then Clinton did.
There is plenty of private money being spent on this now, and break throughs will continue to happen. In fact you libs out there should side with Bush on this from your twisted ways of looking at things, it would look like this.
Federal government spends tax dollars, better used for increased entitlement spending, on medical research, will will make BIG medical companies lots of money, on a new technology, that like all new technologies will be expensive and then only help the rich. I know you are to busy being angry at Bush to even think, straight.
Typical of you lib's though, private money, and the people of this country are completely worthless, only by the government getting involved can anything be solved. God its a wonder Henry Ford was able to make cars without a federal grant. How ever did the Wright brothers invent the plane without government money?!?
You are pathetic, just like those losers sitting in New Orleans waiting for the government to help them, rather then helping themselves.
Reply:Your information is a bit cock-eyed. There is stem-cell research in the states it is just privately funded because the current administration does not support it.
The U.S. is already years behind some other countries because of the greed of medical companies and insurance providers!
If you feel strongly about these issues get on your congressmans back and tell him what you want done!!
It's OUR country - WE elect the people that run it - if you don't like how it's being done GET INVOLVED!!!
Reply:so put wealth before the welfare of innocents, where it neither works or profits the community?
Reply:I have yet to see one cure from stem cell research. Lots of promises, but no real solutions. It's just another huge money bag for politicians.
Reply:no
Reply:I think that until stem cell research will have a better percentage of not endangering your unborn child, then yes, it should be vetoed.
Note: I am sorry to whomever said that it was not evil. It is because you are endangering a living human being, it doesn't matter, at the first second that the child is conceived, it is a living human being! It is called murder until they can use it and no endanger the child!
Reply:Keeping me in a wheelchair longer.
Reply:Its not the essence of stem cells that is wrong. It's what will become of them if the wrong people use the technology. Its not a plan to get rid of the poor because the rich are in control here and can get doctors and such brought to them. It will set the U.S. back, but soon we will find something else to better spend our funds on. We just don't know of it yet.
Reply:It will show you, once again, how stupid Bush is!! I think he needs a few!!
Reply:It's very sad when people choose to not be informed of the facts on this issue.
Reply:If cures are developed that USE stem cells from embryos in other countries, then maybe this will happen. A few points to ponder:
I think the veto will block federal funds being used for this type of research, but not necessarily block the research itself. Since it is such a highly-charged moral and ethical issue, it does make a lot of sense that the federal government wouldn't force it's citizens to pay for something that most feel is morally wrong. However, polls show that the majority of Americans (60% +) think that stem cell research should be conducted. If the federal government truly represents the People, then they should follow this instead of following their own personal agendas. They are sent to WA DC to speak on the behalf of their constituents, not to ignore their constituents and press for their personal opinions to become law.
Stem cells can be taken from sources other than embryos. I believe the child to whom you refer was cured of leukemia with stem cells taken from the umbilical cord of his newborn sibling. This opened of a new pandoras box: Is it ethical or "right" to have a child for the purpose of providing cells to save your other child? Silly, really, since both kids would be loved and cared for. Every day families who thought they were done having kids find one reason or another to have another baby. Why not do so to help another of their children?
The embryos in question were created during the process of IVF by families wishing to have children who were unable to do so without a little help. They are the "extras" that ended up not being used because earlier implations of IVF embroys worked for that family. Tens or even hundreds of thousands of these embryos will simply be destroyed with other "medical waste". Thus, some proponents of using them are saying that the argument of "respecting life" makes more sense when you argue FOR using these embryos for research that could possibly save others' lives rather than basically chucking them in the trash.
To say that allowing the use of these embryos would lead to more abortions or breeding embryos for research is a red herring. If that is really what people fear, then legislation can be written that specifies that embyos leftover from IVF can be used for research, but that embryos cannot be grown in test tube breeding grounds for the purpose of research.
I, too, have some moral and ethical reservations about this, but need to study the subject more before coming to a conclusion about my own personal position. I suspect that many people who have taken positions--for or against--on the subject have done so prematurely and that they really need to study the topic for themselves instead of just listening to what others say about it and accepting what may be opinions based on erroneous information as fact.
Reply:Progress is being made in study, not practice. It may turn out that stem cells hold the cures to certain diseases, or they may have been a red herring the whole time. Sadly, both sides of this argument have been grossly exaggerated. Conservatives are crying out that hospitals will begin harvesting baby spines and paying women to abort pregnancies- nonsense. Liberals claim that Stem Cells hold the cure to world hunger, aids, cancer, and the common cold all at once- also nonsense. It would be very nice if we could all look at this rationally, because it isn't really that big of a deal yet, and may never be.
Reply:How many poor will be able to aford it? Come on give me a break. That is such a weak argument. The poor may die of as a result of Bill Gates and his buddy donating all that cash, most of it going towards global population control. Isn't it usually poor women having abortions, and not the rich? Come on, think about it a minute.
Will stem cell research really benefit the poor? I dont think so. I think the rich will always have the money to buy what the poor cannot afford.
Reply:It'll set the US back a hundred yrs. Just like when our schools don't stress math %26amp; sciences in education. And kids graduate from highschool not knowing how to read. And when our educational system stops teaching at 12th grade.
Reply:I have never heard of stem cells taken from babies curing anything. Adult stem cells have proven to be effective, and I think that we should do more research with them instead of murdering babies.
Reply:The poor better get wealthy then.
Reply:OK...even if we did the big stem cell break through here...the poor would still not get it. It would be at best a high risk, experimental medical procedure. And poor folks can't afford that kind of stuff. So a poor person with a funky whatever will still die from it as they have no money and can't pay for the stem cells anyway.
In any case...stem cell may not real end up as the big cure for everything, anyway...
it means the wealthy will be able to fly off to a foreign country
for treatment, while the poor will die off.
Is this just another plan to get rid of the poor, esp, the sick poor?
Yes, I did see a program where a young boy was cured of
leukemia with stem cells. Progress is being made.
I think this will throw the U.S., lightyears behind other countries
with medical research. Very sad.
Do you know what vetoing stem cell research will mean?
I answered with this earlier, but I shall do it again. Tony Snow, Whitehouse Press Secretary, said that GW Bush does not support murder. He then followed it up by saying stem cell research is not illegal, that private companies can continue to do the research, it will just not be funded by the federal government. Here, I shall try to argue like the Rapture Right: Stem cell research is murder. Stem cell research is not illegal. Private companies can murder because it is not illegal.
The real science, however, say this; It all begins with the five to seven days after conception. This is the time period during which embryonic stem cells can be harvested. Most on the right believe that life begins at the moment of conception. So many believe that to kill the cytoblast (the term for the embryo at this particular stage) is amoral and should not be done. i.e. It is murder.
When a couple decides they no longer want any more invitro procedures done, the companies that do the procedures are under the obligation to destroy the remaining supply of cytoblasts, the very same cytoblasts that could otherwise be used for stem cell research.
The Rapture Right's logic on this subject then leads me to believe that it is better to throw life in a garbage can than to use it for research and possible cures to diseases.
The embryos are frozen, they have 150 cells, they aren't even embryos, they are cytoblasts. They already exist and the Rapture Right would rather put them in the trash than in a laboratory.
Reply:its natural selection. its sad that some must die of accidents or diseases but its nature's way of controlling populations. america thinks its evil to use stem cells cause they used to be living things. but can you remember when you weren't even born. they dont have a mind so its not that evil to do so. if only we weren't so sentimental.....
Reply:Nothing. It is the federal subsidy that is in play, something the 42 President said was not right.
Reply:First of all, most of you don't know what you are talking about.
There is NO BAN on stem cell research in America. All this bill would have done is allow federal dollars to be spent in the area.
And we do actually spend federal money on this, but it is limited to a batch of stem cells that was already in existence. In fact Bush actually increased the federal funding on research on those cells to more then Clinton did.
There is plenty of private money being spent on this now, and break throughs will continue to happen. In fact you libs out there should side with Bush on this from your twisted ways of looking at things, it would look like this.
Federal government spends tax dollars, better used for increased entitlement spending, on medical research, will will make BIG medical companies lots of money, on a new technology, that like all new technologies will be expensive and then only help the rich. I know you are to busy being angry at Bush to even think, straight.
Typical of you lib's though, private money, and the people of this country are completely worthless, only by the government getting involved can anything be solved. God its a wonder Henry Ford was able to make cars without a federal grant. How ever did the Wright brothers invent the plane without government money?!?
You are pathetic, just like those losers sitting in New Orleans waiting for the government to help them, rather then helping themselves.
Reply:Your information is a bit cock-eyed. There is stem-cell research in the states it is just privately funded because the current administration does not support it.
The U.S. is already years behind some other countries because of the greed of medical companies and insurance providers!
If you feel strongly about these issues get on your congressmans back and tell him what you want done!!
It's OUR country - WE elect the people that run it - if you don't like how it's being done GET INVOLVED!!!
Reply:so put wealth before the welfare of innocents, where it neither works or profits the community?
Reply:I have yet to see one cure from stem cell research. Lots of promises, but no real solutions. It's just another huge money bag for politicians.
Reply:no
Reply:I think that until stem cell research will have a better percentage of not endangering your unborn child, then yes, it should be vetoed.
Note: I am sorry to whomever said that it was not evil. It is because you are endangering a living human being, it doesn't matter, at the first second that the child is conceived, it is a living human being! It is called murder until they can use it and no endanger the child!
Reply:Keeping me in a wheelchair longer.
Reply:Its not the essence of stem cells that is wrong. It's what will become of them if the wrong people use the technology. Its not a plan to get rid of the poor because the rich are in control here and can get doctors and such brought to them. It will set the U.S. back, but soon we will find something else to better spend our funds on. We just don't know of it yet.
Reply:It will show you, once again, how stupid Bush is!! I think he needs a few!!
Reply:It's very sad when people choose to not be informed of the facts on this issue.
Reply:If cures are developed that USE stem cells from embryos in other countries, then maybe this will happen. A few points to ponder:
I think the veto will block federal funds being used for this type of research, but not necessarily block the research itself. Since it is such a highly-charged moral and ethical issue, it does make a lot of sense that the federal government wouldn't force it's citizens to pay for something that most feel is morally wrong. However, polls show that the majority of Americans (60% +) think that stem cell research should be conducted. If the federal government truly represents the People, then they should follow this instead of following their own personal agendas. They are sent to WA DC to speak on the behalf of their constituents, not to ignore their constituents and press for their personal opinions to become law.
Stem cells can be taken from sources other than embryos. I believe the child to whom you refer was cured of leukemia with stem cells taken from the umbilical cord of his newborn sibling. This opened of a new pandoras box: Is it ethical or "right" to have a child for the purpose of providing cells to save your other child? Silly, really, since both kids would be loved and cared for. Every day families who thought they were done having kids find one reason or another to have another baby. Why not do so to help another of their children?
The embryos in question were created during the process of IVF by families wishing to have children who were unable to do so without a little help. They are the "extras" that ended up not being used because earlier implations of IVF embroys worked for that family. Tens or even hundreds of thousands of these embryos will simply be destroyed with other "medical waste". Thus, some proponents of using them are saying that the argument of "respecting life" makes more sense when you argue FOR using these embryos for research that could possibly save others' lives rather than basically chucking them in the trash.
To say that allowing the use of these embryos would lead to more abortions or breeding embryos for research is a red herring. If that is really what people fear, then legislation can be written that specifies that embyos leftover from IVF can be used for research, but that embryos cannot be grown in test tube breeding grounds for the purpose of research.
I, too, have some moral and ethical reservations about this, but need to study the subject more before coming to a conclusion about my own personal position. I suspect that many people who have taken positions--for or against--on the subject have done so prematurely and that they really need to study the topic for themselves instead of just listening to what others say about it and accepting what may be opinions based on erroneous information as fact.
Reply:Progress is being made in study, not practice. It may turn out that stem cells hold the cures to certain diseases, or they may have been a red herring the whole time. Sadly, both sides of this argument have been grossly exaggerated. Conservatives are crying out that hospitals will begin harvesting baby spines and paying women to abort pregnancies- nonsense. Liberals claim that Stem Cells hold the cure to world hunger, aids, cancer, and the common cold all at once- also nonsense. It would be very nice if we could all look at this rationally, because it isn't really that big of a deal yet, and may never be.
Reply:How many poor will be able to aford it? Come on give me a break. That is such a weak argument. The poor may die of as a result of Bill Gates and his buddy donating all that cash, most of it going towards global population control. Isn't it usually poor women having abortions, and not the rich? Come on, think about it a minute.
Will stem cell research really benefit the poor? I dont think so. I think the rich will always have the money to buy what the poor cannot afford.
Reply:It'll set the US back a hundred yrs. Just like when our schools don't stress math %26amp; sciences in education. And kids graduate from highschool not knowing how to read. And when our educational system stops teaching at 12th grade.
Reply:I have never heard of stem cells taken from babies curing anything. Adult stem cells have proven to be effective, and I think that we should do more research with them instead of murdering babies.
Reply:The poor better get wealthy then.
Reply:OK...even if we did the big stem cell break through here...the poor would still not get it. It would be at best a high risk, experimental medical procedure. And poor folks can't afford that kind of stuff. So a poor person with a funky whatever will still die from it as they have no money and can't pay for the stem cells anyway.
In any case...stem cell may not real end up as the big cure for everything, anyway...
Wouldn't you support federal funding for a medical research on how to cure "gay-ness"?
No.
It's a chosen behavior. They choose to behave in that manner. They have control over what they do or do not do. Excuses change nothing and there is nothing to justify. Why study it?
Better to study how to build a better bomb shelter...we may need it sooner than your "cure".
If you disagree, and Im sure some people do, then explain why people who pride themselves on choice are suddenly helpless when it comes to this particular issue? The average person is capable of a wide array of emotions, each triggered by learned behaviors, so I am not denying they may "feel" something, however the problem is in the act, not the feeling...besides, sex is for procreation, not recreation.
.
Wouldn't you support federal funding for a medical research on how to cure "gay-ness"?
A republican congress would never approve something like that because it runs counter to their argument that homosexuality is a choice. If it "needs to be cured" then it's not a choice, is it?
The democrats don't have a hang up about gay people and neither do I so my answer to your question would be no.
Reply:then we can have higher abortion rates, more abandoned children,
and more people to go into more pointless wars of the future. fantastic.
Reply:Nah, there are more important diseases to fix.
Besides, if they did that, who would be the good hairstylists?
Reply:No, but I would support one that cures hate and ignorance.
Reply:we dont want to be cured!
Reply:Excuse me, but that's an idiotic question. Being gay is not a disease; not even a contagious disease. So, relax.
Reply:YES
I would be in favor of genetic research and testing.
Reply:No, it would be wasted. You can't "cure" homosexuality any more than you can "cure" someone's hair color. I'd spend the money on schools to better educate people so they wouldn't ask questions like this.
Reply:Sure, why not? But there are more pressing issues than that.
Reply:yes i would , it is a disease that they admit they are born with that needs a cure
Reply:No. We need never to get rid of fashion designers
Reply:I wouldn't support federal funding for medical research on how to cure gay-ness just so that these queers can find out that homosexuality isn't a genetic defect. Why spend money to cure a " disease" that isn't a disease but an excuse to some perverts sick habits.
Reply:The same placebo could be administered to cure your bigotry.
Reply:lol
It's a chosen behavior. They choose to behave in that manner. They have control over what they do or do not do. Excuses change nothing and there is nothing to justify. Why study it?
Better to study how to build a better bomb shelter...we may need it sooner than your "cure".
If you disagree, and Im sure some people do, then explain why people who pride themselves on choice are suddenly helpless when it comes to this particular issue? The average person is capable of a wide array of emotions, each triggered by learned behaviors, so I am not denying they may "feel" something, however the problem is in the act, not the feeling...besides, sex is for procreation, not recreation.
.
Wouldn't you support federal funding for a medical research on how to cure "gay-ness"?
A republican congress would never approve something like that because it runs counter to their argument that homosexuality is a choice. If it "needs to be cured" then it's not a choice, is it?
The democrats don't have a hang up about gay people and neither do I so my answer to your question would be no.
Reply:then we can have higher abortion rates, more abandoned children,
and more people to go into more pointless wars of the future. fantastic.
Reply:Nah, there are more important diseases to fix.
Besides, if they did that, who would be the good hairstylists?
Reply:No, but I would support one that cures hate and ignorance.
Reply:we dont want to be cured!
Reply:Excuse me, but that's an idiotic question. Being gay is not a disease; not even a contagious disease. So, relax.
Reply:YES
I would be in favor of genetic research and testing.
Reply:No, it would be wasted. You can't "cure" homosexuality any more than you can "cure" someone's hair color. I'd spend the money on schools to better educate people so they wouldn't ask questions like this.
Reply:Sure, why not? But there are more pressing issues than that.
Reply:yes i would , it is a disease that they admit they are born with that needs a cure
Reply:No. We need never to get rid of fashion designers
Reply:I wouldn't support federal funding for medical research on how to cure gay-ness just so that these queers can find out that homosexuality isn't a genetic defect. Why spend money to cure a " disease" that isn't a disease but an excuse to some perverts sick habits.
Reply:The same placebo could be administered to cure your bigotry.
Reply:lol
How far should we go into stem cell research?
cloning or medical research
How far should we go into stem cell research?
far enough to cure cancer. We should also be able to clone our own organs so that if we ever needed a new heart or lung or whatever, we won't have to wait on a list for a year till someone died in order to get it.
If we were able to grow a heart on a dish, then we wouldn't have to wait for someone to die.. and we wouldn't have to worry about rejection because it's our own organ.
Reply:far enough til it fails. there is a cure for cancer, the reason why we don't know of it is because the government is suppressing our knowledge.
Reply:stop now.... if god wanted us to know everything he would have told us
home teeth cleaning
How far should we go into stem cell research?
far enough to cure cancer. We should also be able to clone our own organs so that if we ever needed a new heart or lung or whatever, we won't have to wait on a list for a year till someone died in order to get it.
If we were able to grow a heart on a dish, then we wouldn't have to wait for someone to die.. and we wouldn't have to worry about rejection because it's our own organ.
Reply:far enough til it fails. there is a cure for cancer, the reason why we don't know of it is because the government is suppressing our knowledge.
Reply:stop now.... if god wanted us to know everything he would have told us
home teeth cleaning
What are recent medical advancements in parasite research?
Research on the Malaria parasite is ongoing, and discoveries are being made every month.
Why should Spain advance medical research?
I imagine people in Spain seek to make advances in medical research for very much the same reasons as people anywhere else...
What is medical research?
Its research into anything medical, this could be for a cure for cancer, the hereditary element of a disease or how to imporve services...anything to do with care, treatment and finding cures;
What is medical research?
The difference between life and death..without it we wouldn't even have antibiotics.
Reply:Some examples would be working to find a cure for cancer, the common cold or what part of the brain controls emotions. The basic concept is that doctors and scientists work together to find the best treatment for patients affected by different illnesses and disorders affecting their physical or mental health.
Reply:getting information for medical purposes
What is medical research?
The difference between life and death..without it we wouldn't even have antibiotics.
Reply:Some examples would be working to find a cure for cancer, the common cold or what part of the brain controls emotions. The basic concept is that doctors and scientists work together to find the best treatment for patients affected by different illnesses and disorders affecting their physical or mental health.
Reply:getting information for medical purposes
Testing on animals for medical research..?
I need some good arguments for and against it.
Testing on animals for medical research..?
Wow, a few arguments for and against?
The arguments are basically the two sides of the same coin. To develop new medicines they have to be tested for both efficacy (how ell they work) and toxicity to assess how good a medicine they will be. This testing is a very complex and involved process, starting with chemistry, moving through test tube (in vitro) testing and then to animal and human testing. At each stage chemicals that are either ineffective or toxic are cast aside. It can take over one million new chemicals to develop one medicince, and although the in vitro testing screens out the majority of these, there is still a need to test in a whole organism, which is where animal testing comes in. Ideally one would test in humans at this stage, but there simply aren't enough volunteers and it would cost far too much money, so animals are used. This does have problems associated with it, as a rat is not the same as a human. However, as the human option is not viable as a high volume screen a compromise has to be made.
The question of ethics also has to be raised. Is it ethical to test a possibly toxic drug on another species that will be used to treat humans? On the flip side, is it ethical to test a possibly toxic chemical on a person without attempting to assess how toxic it could be? Not easy questions to answer.
So, in a nut shell:
For: cost, ease of use, ethics
Against: Not the same as humans, ethics
Reply:they should do medical research on sex offenders and serial killers, not on innocent animals what did they do wrong? put the sick fcuks to good use. thats my thought on animal testing.
Reply:Have you ever had reason to be glad of a prescription drug?
It had, by law, to be trialled on animals before it could even be tested on humans.
Is it possible that you, or someone you care for. might benefit from some drug that is being, or will in the foreseeable future be, developed?
It will have, by law, to be trialled on animals before it can even be tested on humans.
Unless the government is willing to relax the extremely strict laws (tougher than anywhere else in the world) that are in place about the testing of drugs for use in this country, that situation will not change
It might be tempting to suggest that prisoners be used to trial drugs. If their consent is not freely given, it would be illegal, and rightly so. There are too many innocent people in British jails for it to be a serious consideration.
.
And please don't give me that over-familiar garbage about everybody who is found guilty in a court of law being, actually, guilty. If that were the case, there would not be the thousands of successful appeals per year, against conviction, that we see.
Reply:testing is prefered on animals becoz the results are identified easily and rapidly than on humans and also changes can be monitored on the animals better than on humans. Imagine monitoring all the parameters and physical changes on a large human to that of rabbit or a rat.
Reply:You could argue that as animals are a different species there being tested upon holds no relevance,but there again if they are relevant what are we doing subjecting our close cousins to such horrific undertakings in the name of progress.
The one thing that sticks in my mind is that if penicillin had been tested on guinea pigs it would never have been developed because it kills them
Reply:hi
i am against cruelty to animals but if you look at the argument logically, isn't it better to test medication on a animal than on say your child etc, i don't like to think of any poor animal suffering unnecessarily but if it is to save human life then i can see why we do it.
false teeth
Testing on animals for medical research..?
Wow, a few arguments for and against?
The arguments are basically the two sides of the same coin. To develop new medicines they have to be tested for both efficacy (how ell they work) and toxicity to assess how good a medicine they will be. This testing is a very complex and involved process, starting with chemistry, moving through test tube (in vitro) testing and then to animal and human testing. At each stage chemicals that are either ineffective or toxic are cast aside. It can take over one million new chemicals to develop one medicince, and although the in vitro testing screens out the majority of these, there is still a need to test in a whole organism, which is where animal testing comes in. Ideally one would test in humans at this stage, but there simply aren't enough volunteers and it would cost far too much money, so animals are used. This does have problems associated with it, as a rat is not the same as a human. However, as the human option is not viable as a high volume screen a compromise has to be made.
The question of ethics also has to be raised. Is it ethical to test a possibly toxic drug on another species that will be used to treat humans? On the flip side, is it ethical to test a possibly toxic chemical on a person without attempting to assess how toxic it could be? Not easy questions to answer.
So, in a nut shell:
For: cost, ease of use, ethics
Against: Not the same as humans, ethics
Reply:they should do medical research on sex offenders and serial killers, not on innocent animals what did they do wrong? put the sick fcuks to good use. thats my thought on animal testing.
Reply:Have you ever had reason to be glad of a prescription drug?
It had, by law, to be trialled on animals before it could even be tested on humans.
Is it possible that you, or someone you care for. might benefit from some drug that is being, or will in the foreseeable future be, developed?
It will have, by law, to be trialled on animals before it can even be tested on humans.
Unless the government is willing to relax the extremely strict laws (tougher than anywhere else in the world) that are in place about the testing of drugs for use in this country, that situation will not change
It might be tempting to suggest that prisoners be used to trial drugs. If their consent is not freely given, it would be illegal, and rightly so. There are too many innocent people in British jails for it to be a serious consideration.
.
And please don't give me that over-familiar garbage about everybody who is found guilty in a court of law being, actually, guilty. If that were the case, there would not be the thousands of successful appeals per year, against conviction, that we see.
Reply:testing is prefered on animals becoz the results are identified easily and rapidly than on humans and also changes can be monitored on the animals better than on humans. Imagine monitoring all the parameters and physical changes on a large human to that of rabbit or a rat.
Reply:You could argue that as animals are a different species there being tested upon holds no relevance,but there again if they are relevant what are we doing subjecting our close cousins to such horrific undertakings in the name of progress.
The one thing that sticks in my mind is that if penicillin had been tested on guinea pigs it would never have been developed because it kills them
Reply:hi
i am against cruelty to animals but if you look at the argument logically, isn't it better to test medication on a animal than on say your child etc, i don't like to think of any poor animal suffering unnecessarily but if it is to save human life then i can see why we do it.
false teeth
I have a research paper to write on Medical Regeneration. I am having a hard time finding websites that tell?
what is it, the history of it, the future of it, and so on. I keep finding websites for new discoveries, which is fine, but I need more than that. Can you help me. Also, is there another name for it?
I have a research paper to write on Medical Regeneration. I am having a hard time finding websites that tell?
Are you referring to the potential regrowing of limbs and organs or to re-animation of the human body? Please let me know and I will try to assist your search.
I have a research paper to write on Medical Regeneration. I am having a hard time finding websites that tell?
Are you referring to the potential regrowing of limbs and organs or to re-animation of the human body? Please let me know and I will try to assist your search.
I have a research paper to write on Medical Regeneration. I am having a hard time finding websites that tell?
what is it, the history of it, the future of it, and so on. I keep finding websites for new discoveries, which is fine, but I need more than that. Can you help me. Also, is there another name for it?
I have a research paper to write on Medical Regeneration. I am having a hard time finding websites that tell?
Are you referring to the potential regrowing of limbs and organs or to re-animation of the human body? Please let me know and I will try to assist your search.
I have a research paper to write on Medical Regeneration. I am having a hard time finding websites that tell?
Are you referring to the potential regrowing of limbs and organs or to re-animation of the human body? Please let me know and I will try to assist your search.
Research experience for medical school?
I will be a sophomore in college beginning in the fall. I have worked three summers (beginning the summer before my senior year of high school until now, the summer after my freshman year of college) and a full school year (during my senior year of high school) in the same research lab at the NIH. I will also be getting two letter of recommendation ( from my supervisor and from my mentor) for medical school.
I want to go to a primary care oriented medical school and do not plan to do research in medical school. But I have come to this conclusion only after doing research and still want to show that I did research in college. And some medical schools that I want to apply to have high ranking in both research and primary care (so I want to show that I have both). Will medical schools acknowledge the research that I did in high school or will they only care about the one summer that I did after freshman year of college in this lab?
Research experience for medical school?
When you apply to medical school, the letters of recommendation from your supervisor and mentor will be useful. However, you will also need letters from those who taught you in your senior year in college. The former letters will provide sufficient acknowledgment of the work that you did during your senior year in high school. In your application to medical school, you need to (and the faculty members who write letters for you will) focus on your activities during your junior and senior years in college.
I want to go to a primary care oriented medical school and do not plan to do research in medical school. But I have come to this conclusion only after doing research and still want to show that I did research in college. And some medical schools that I want to apply to have high ranking in both research and primary care (so I want to show that I have both). Will medical schools acknowledge the research that I did in high school or will they only care about the one summer that I did after freshman year of college in this lab?
Research experience for medical school?
When you apply to medical school, the letters of recommendation from your supervisor and mentor will be useful. However, you will also need letters from those who taught you in your senior year in college. The former letters will provide sufficient acknowledgment of the work that you did during your senior year in high school. In your application to medical school, you need to (and the faculty members who write letters for you will) focus on your activities during your junior and senior years in college.
As science & medical research has saved more people than God, should you donate to the NSF instead of church?
You bet, and the Howard Hughes medical center and other places that do not rely of federal funds for stem cell research.... you bet.
As science %26amp; medical research has saved more people than God, should you donate to the NSF instead of church?
yes
Reply:I guess it depends on your definition of the term "saved".
Alot of people have been "saved" from death, but ultimately, they will die, anyway. There is nothing at all wrong with saving human life, nor am I implying such. But we must realize that, in the end, it is a losing battle. All are mortal, and all must die, eventually.
On the other hand, to recieve the gift of eternal life...what is that worth?
By all means, donate to research, please. I do. I am all for new life-saving technology.
On the other hand, don't neglect God.
Reply:saved? Spiritually to go to heaven?
"By Jesus all things consist." so give the credit to Jesus
and help the research too in both areas
Reply:Yes....we should.
There are no Christians in hospitals...
Reply:Has science saved peoples souls
Reply:Would like to know where your figures are coming from. It's funny though that faith motivated individuals were often the driving factors behind medicine in the first place. Care for the poor and the sick is more the mission of the various churches than it will ever be of the NSF.
Reply:Well, I don't believe that anyone can save unless God wills for it to happen. It's wit the Will of God that "medicine" and "science" save people, even if the patient being saved doesn't believe in God. That's just my believe, and anyone's welcome to disagree.
As for donation, I don't think we should choose a certain organization to donate to -- unless it's just some personal preference. We should donate to as many as we can as long as we know that the money will be put to some good use. I don't have ANY problems donating my money to medical/science researches than to a Mosque or Church or Temple.
Reply:I donate to SETI, and a few other medical research organizations like the Cancer Society. So I think that you are spot on.
broken teeth
As science %26amp; medical research has saved more people than God, should you donate to the NSF instead of church?
yes
Reply:I guess it depends on your definition of the term "saved".
Alot of people have been "saved" from death, but ultimately, they will die, anyway. There is nothing at all wrong with saving human life, nor am I implying such. But we must realize that, in the end, it is a losing battle. All are mortal, and all must die, eventually.
On the other hand, to recieve the gift of eternal life...what is that worth?
By all means, donate to research, please. I do. I am all for new life-saving technology.
On the other hand, don't neglect God.
Reply:saved? Spiritually to go to heaven?
"By Jesus all things consist." so give the credit to Jesus
and help the research too in both areas
Reply:Yes....we should.
There are no Christians in hospitals...
Reply:Has science saved peoples souls
Reply:Would like to know where your figures are coming from. It's funny though that faith motivated individuals were often the driving factors behind medicine in the first place. Care for the poor and the sick is more the mission of the various churches than it will ever be of the NSF.
Reply:Well, I don't believe that anyone can save unless God wills for it to happen. It's wit the Will of God that "medicine" and "science" save people, even if the patient being saved doesn't believe in God. That's just my believe, and anyone's welcome to disagree.
As for donation, I don't think we should choose a certain organization to donate to -- unless it's just some personal preference. We should donate to as many as we can as long as we know that the money will be put to some good use. I don't have ANY problems donating my money to medical/science researches than to a Mosque or Church or Temple.
Reply:I donate to SETI, and a few other medical research organizations like the Cancer Society. So I think that you are spot on.
broken teeth
I'm trying to find medical experts inepherdine research where do i look?
ive been addicted to ephedrine since ive been 16 and i'm 26 now ..so in the 10 yrs ive my tolerance has went to be extreemly outragous as in taking 300 hundred ephedrine pills a day mentaly i cant stand ephedrine but physically i cant function..and as long as there otc and me and others pheine for them i think it's only going to get worse ....so i'm putting everythin i have into informing myself and others on the effects it has as an 'addicting drug' not aq medical drug cuz with me and so many more ppl ephedrine isnt a medical drug anymore and what happens now that me and thousands maybe more ppl are addicted to it....where do i look for the drug research on it i need all the info i can get THANX
I'm trying to find medical experts inepherdine research where do i look?
i do not know whether to believe you or not. because i would figure you need the help of a centre which deals with drug addiction cases, which you are in the first place.
you don't need all the research info on ephedrine in order to get you out of your addiction problem and at 26 am sure you know that.
furthermore i would like to inform you that you may be looking for a way to make an even worse addiction drug out of ephedrine. when ephedrine is boiled with hydrochloric acid of the right concentration at right pressure you get a cousin of amphetamine. is that what you want?
I'm trying to find medical experts inepherdine research where do i look?
i do not know whether to believe you or not. because i would figure you need the help of a centre which deals with drug addiction cases, which you are in the first place.
you don't need all the research info on ephedrine in order to get you out of your addiction problem and at 26 am sure you know that.
furthermore i would like to inform you that you may be looking for a way to make an even worse addiction drug out of ephedrine. when ephedrine is boiled with hydrochloric acid of the right concentration at right pressure you get a cousin of amphetamine. is that what you want?
Anyone know a good medical information website it do research?
http://www.webmd.com/
Anyone know a good medical information website it do research?
mayo clinic
webmd
Reply:http://medlineplus.gov/
Reply:Web MD, unless it is very specialized.
Reply:ask alice. i believe it is throygh ny presbytarian
Anyone know a good medical information website it do research?
mayo clinic
webmd
Reply:http://medlineplus.gov/
Reply:Web MD, unless it is very specialized.
Reply:ask alice. i believe it is throygh ny presbytarian
Medical Law and Ethics Research Paper?
I have a five page paper that I am required to write for my medical law and ethics class. I was wondering if anyone had some fresh new controversies that I could write about. Abortion and Stem Cell is overdone.. so please dont recomend! Something interesting is a must to keep me motivated! I choose best answer!!! THANKS!
Medical Law and Ethics Research Paper?
Human Experimentation
http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/researc...
looks interesting.. if you choose this topic i would like to read it
Good luck
Reply:Medical marijiuana perhaps?
Reply:Not new, but really good: assisted suicide.
Another one is what to do with prisoners, how prisons make people worse psychologically, sexual offenders
Oh also whether prisoners should be able to be on organ transplant lists or receive care above regular citizens.
Seen Sicko? Insurance and medical care that is denied to certain people is also good.
Reply:the pakistani kidney trade...it's the cheapest place to get kidneys, and there's communities that are so impoverished over half of the people have 1 kidney and are still in debt.
Reply:How about why a person has to pay taxes on income made from selling their own plasma, eggs, sperm, etc. How can the government tax a person's body makeup??
Medical Law and Ethics Research Paper?
Human Experimentation
http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/researc...
looks interesting.. if you choose this topic i would like to read it
Good luck
Reply:Medical marijiuana perhaps?
Reply:Not new, but really good: assisted suicide.
Another one is what to do with prisoners, how prisons make people worse psychologically, sexual offenders
Oh also whether prisoners should be able to be on organ transplant lists or receive care above regular citizens.
Seen Sicko? Insurance and medical care that is denied to certain people is also good.
Reply:the pakistani kidney trade...it's the cheapest place to get kidneys, and there's communities that are so impoverished over half of the people have 1 kidney and are still in debt.
Reply:How about why a person has to pay taxes on income made from selling their own plasma, eggs, sperm, etc. How can the government tax a person's body makeup??
For people who have seen the movie "Requiem for a Dream" I have a medical research question....?
If you've seen this movie, they depict an old woman, "sara", who tries to lose weight using diet pills that stop her from eating and she loses dramatic weight. I can only think of this movie to use for a good example...
I have a persuasive speech coming up for my class and I'm trying to persuade to avoid the use of diet pills and alternative methods
I was wanting to know if there are any drugs out there as dramatic as the one from this show or real-life stories similar.
Where would be some places I can look for research and facts to help back up my topic?
For people who have seen the movie "Requiem for a Dream" I have a medical research question....?
People have different side effects to drugs but all diet pills have side effects. Just google diet pills and a lot of info will up.
canine teeth
I have a persuasive speech coming up for my class and I'm trying to persuade to avoid the use of diet pills and alternative methods
I was wanting to know if there are any drugs out there as dramatic as the one from this show or real-life stories similar.
Where would be some places I can look for research and facts to help back up my topic?
For people who have seen the movie "Requiem for a Dream" I have a medical research question....?
People have different side effects to drugs but all diet pills have side effects. Just google diet pills and a lot of info will up.
canine teeth
Does medical research cause cancer in rats?
No. But it has revealed numerous ways to give them cancer. Now they just need one way to get rid of it.
Does medical research cause cancer in rats?
Kudos on becoming a Top Contributor - and thanks for the win! Report Abuse
Reply:yeah and i think its wrong
Reply:Only when they let them take too many smoke breaks.
Reply:i hope so......
Reply:If the cats eat the rats do they get cancer?
Reply:depends on the research they're doing
Reply:The federal government today released the findings of a four year study that linked living in cages to increased potential of developing cancer in laboratory rats.
The study, which cost an estimated $17 Million, was started in 1983 when all the rats in a laboratory test control group contracted cancer.
Does medical research cause cancer in rats?
Kudos on becoming a Top Contributor - and thanks for the win! Report Abuse
Reply:yeah and i think its wrong
Reply:Only when they let them take too many smoke breaks.
Reply:i hope so......
Reply:If the cats eat the rats do they get cancer?
Reply:depends on the research they're doing
Reply:The federal government today released the findings of a four year study that linked living in cages to increased potential of developing cancer in laboratory rats.
The study, which cost an estimated $17 Million, was started in 1983 when all the rats in a laboratory test control group contracted cancer.
No limits should be placed in medical research??
is it true?? do u agree..?? drop ur views and arguements
No limits should be placed in medical research??
I agree with the first poster and would like to add that we've come a long way.
We are human, and supposedly know what humane is.
Time to show what we have learnt. Strange how we are repelled in most cases against the death penal;ty but will make some animals have a life filled with nothing but sufferring. Seems something is wrong there.
We have to find another way.
Reply:Always should have some limits or we would be like Hitler or the Japanese during WWII
If your baby had a special type of blood that cures cancer, would you want them to drain all of it from his body for reach.
No limits should be placed in medical research??
I agree with the first poster and would like to add that we've come a long way.
We are human, and supposedly know what humane is.
Time to show what we have learnt. Strange how we are repelled in most cases against the death penal;ty but will make some animals have a life filled with nothing but sufferring. Seems something is wrong there.
We have to find another way.
Reply:Always should have some limits or we would be like Hitler or the Japanese during WWII
If your baby had a special type of blood that cures cancer, would you want them to drain all of it from his body for reach.
Can someone direct me to LEGIT information regarding an NCAA medical redshirt?
I was looking around on the NCAA website and they make it very difficult to find any legit information on a medical redshirt. Can someone familiar with the NCAA rules direct me to some links I can research medical redshirts on? Thank you very much
Can someone direct me to LEGIT information regarding an NCAA medical redshirt?
Talk to the athletic director of a nearby university, or any one you might be interested in. You should be able to find out contact numbers from the university's website. I'll start you off with Missouri state University.
Can someone direct me to LEGIT information regarding an NCAA medical redshirt?
Talk to the athletic director of a nearby university, or any one you might be interested in. You should be able to find out contact numbers from the university's website. I'll start you off with Missouri state University.
What scientific or medical advance in discoveries and research would you like to see in 50 years?
This answer has kind of a personal note to it.
First, my father passed away from Cancer, so I would like to see a cure found for this...........Who wouldn't!!!!!!!
Secondly........My sons Best Friend just passed away from a life-long struggle with MD......A lot of people do not know what this disease does and how it effects families. It is truly a cruel and terrible disease. I would hope that a cure is found so that no one else ever has to suffer like this kid did. By the way, he was 14 when he passed. RIP
What scientific or medical advance in discoveries and research would you like to see in 50 years?
I would like to see the Singularity by that time. (see link)
Reply:Well, the thing I would most like to live to see...it's neither a discovery nor a medical advance...is the magnetic poles flip.
Every so many eons or so, fossil evidence shows that the magnetic poles flip.
Recent evidence shows that the magnetic north pole is migrating and some have theorized that this is leading up to a flip of the earth's magnetic field.
I'd love to see what effect this would have on EVERYTHING!
Reply:Hell I will be dead by then
Reply:A cure for cancer %26amp; aids, and the answer to stop global warming.
Reply:I'd be satisfied with seeing *anything*, since I'll be 100 years old.
human teeth
First, my father passed away from Cancer, so I would like to see a cure found for this...........Who wouldn't!!!!!!!
Secondly........My sons Best Friend just passed away from a life-long struggle with MD......A lot of people do not know what this disease does and how it effects families. It is truly a cruel and terrible disease. I would hope that a cure is found so that no one else ever has to suffer like this kid did. By the way, he was 14 when he passed. RIP
What scientific or medical advance in discoveries and research would you like to see in 50 years?
I would like to see the Singularity by that time. (see link)
Reply:Well, the thing I would most like to live to see...it's neither a discovery nor a medical advance...is the magnetic poles flip.
Every so many eons or so, fossil evidence shows that the magnetic poles flip.
Recent evidence shows that the magnetic north pole is migrating and some have theorized that this is leading up to a flip of the earth's magnetic field.
I'd love to see what effect this would have on EVERYTHING!
Reply:Hell I will be dead by then
Reply:A cure for cancer %26amp; aids, and the answer to stop global warming.
Reply:I'd be satisfied with seeing *anything*, since I'll be 100 years old.
human teeth
I wanna know if there is any use of x-rays in current science except da medical research?
please answer
I wanna know if there is any use of x-rays in current science except da medical research?
X-ray crystallography in which the pattern produced by the diffraction of X-rays through the closely spaced lattice of atoms in a crystal is recorded and then analyzed to reveal the nature of that lattice.
X-ray astronomy, which is an observational branch of astronomy, which deals with the study of X-ray emission from celestial objects.
X-ray microscopic analysis, which uses electromagnetic radiation in the soft X-ray band to produce images of very small objects.
X-ray fluorescence, a technique in which x-rays are generated within a specimen and detected. The outgoing energy of the x-ray can be used to identify the composition of the sample.
Paintings are often X-rayed to reveal the underdrawing and pentimenti or alterations in the course of painting, or by later restorers. Many pigments such as lead white show well in X-ray photographs.
Reply:The welds on huge stainless steel pipes of nuclear plant vessels and vessel welds must be near perfect and are all x-rayed. The radio-graphs (x-ray photos) can be evaluated for flaws that must be corrected. In fact welders must practice each special weld which is x-rayed to qualify the welder and the weld process. X-rays may also be used to inspect packages at airports for contraband. X-rays arriving from outer space (perhaps from the center of our galaxy) are used to better describe what can not be seen with a telescope. X-rays are also used to identify crystal structures (minerals) because the interaction with ordered atoms or molecules can produce characteristic patterns on film, etc.
Reply:Found a new website that has information about medical research studies.
http://www.medical-research-study-direct...
http://www.medical-research-study-direct...
http://www.web-site-award-winning.com/ad...
Reply:Sure. Pipelines and airplane wings are x-rayed routinely.
I wanna know if there is any use of x-rays in current science except da medical research?
X-ray crystallography in which the pattern produced by the diffraction of X-rays through the closely spaced lattice of atoms in a crystal is recorded and then analyzed to reveal the nature of that lattice.
X-ray astronomy, which is an observational branch of astronomy, which deals with the study of X-ray emission from celestial objects.
X-ray microscopic analysis, which uses electromagnetic radiation in the soft X-ray band to produce images of very small objects.
X-ray fluorescence, a technique in which x-rays are generated within a specimen and detected. The outgoing energy of the x-ray can be used to identify the composition of the sample.
Paintings are often X-rayed to reveal the underdrawing and pentimenti or alterations in the course of painting, or by later restorers. Many pigments such as lead white show well in X-ray photographs.
Reply:The welds on huge stainless steel pipes of nuclear plant vessels and vessel welds must be near perfect and are all x-rayed. The radio-graphs (x-ray photos) can be evaluated for flaws that must be corrected. In fact welders must practice each special weld which is x-rayed to qualify the welder and the weld process. X-rays may also be used to inspect packages at airports for contraband. X-rays arriving from outer space (perhaps from the center of our galaxy) are used to better describe what can not be seen with a telescope. X-rays are also used to identify crystal structures (minerals) because the interaction with ordered atoms or molecules can produce characteristic patterns on film, etc.
Reply:Found a new website that has information about medical research studies.
http://www.medical-research-study-direct...
http://www.medical-research-study-direct...
http://www.web-site-award-winning.com/ad...
Reply:Sure. Pipelines and airplane wings are x-rayed routinely.
Should animals be used for medical research?
NO! thats crazy talk.
Should animals be used for medical research?
no, I think they should be tested on criminals
Reply:NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
YOU ARE CRAZY MAN!
ANIMAL CRUELTY!!!
Reply:No.
Reply:No! It's ridiculous to put animals in harms way.
Reply:Recently scientist succeeded in their experiment that inject adult human cells in a sheep embryo. And the sheep has 15% human cell and their organ can be use for implants. Do you think this is great for those who waited for 10 years for a heart?
Reply:WOW! you really want to stir things up today!!!!!! this will be fun
Reply:yes
``````
and y not?
will it be okay for any of u guys to be dead for the research?
there has to be some living thing, other wise how on earth will u know that.
Reply:nope :)
Reply:All the people who say no should also agree to be excluded from using the antibiotics, chemotherapeutic agents etc that come from this research. I'm not saying they're not entitiled to their opinions, but they should be aware of the implications.
Reply:no thats cruel
Reply:NO, NO, NO
Reply:No !!!
Should humans be used to test animal food and/or medications?
Reply:yesthey should
Reply:Never in any ways. Animals should be free and loved. Just pretend if we were the animal and we are the victims to the research, wouldn't we feel much suffering. I vote "NO" forusing animals for research.
Reply:NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!! animals are not here for us to eat, wear or experiment on!!!!!!!!! besides, animals react differently to us, it's completely pointless, and cruel! You wanna make a drug, fine, but test it out on a willing volunteer, not a harmless, benine, defensless animal!!!!!!!!!
Reply:No they shouldn't unless they have problems with their health such as overweight or pregnancy. etc....
Reply:there's enough criminals to work on : )
Reply:hmm, that's a tough one....it's hard to say....where will they draw the line
Reply:Yes, unless you'd rather be used for the research instead.
Come on people, they can't use other human beings because that is against the law and considered more ethically unjust.Would you rather hurt animals or alot more people? Truth is, if the animals weren't tested on, than we'd get a whole bunch of possibly deadly medications, etc. if you guys use medecine or go to the hospital for a surgery or something, you are such a hypocrite.
Reply:NO WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Should animals be used for medical research?
no, I think they should be tested on criminals
Reply:NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!
YOU ARE CRAZY MAN!
ANIMAL CRUELTY!!!
Reply:No.
Reply:No! It's ridiculous to put animals in harms way.
Reply:Recently scientist succeeded in their experiment that inject adult human cells in a sheep embryo. And the sheep has 15% human cell and their organ can be use for implants. Do you think this is great for those who waited for 10 years for a heart?
Reply:WOW! you really want to stir things up today!!!!!! this will be fun
Reply:yes
``````
and y not?
will it be okay for any of u guys to be dead for the research?
there has to be some living thing, other wise how on earth will u know that.
Reply:nope :)
Reply:All the people who say no should also agree to be excluded from using the antibiotics, chemotherapeutic agents etc that come from this research. I'm not saying they're not entitiled to their opinions, but they should be aware of the implications.
Reply:no thats cruel
Reply:NO, NO, NO
Reply:No !!!
Should humans be used to test animal food and/or medications?
Reply:yesthey should
Reply:Never in any ways. Animals should be free and loved. Just pretend if we were the animal and we are the victims to the research, wouldn't we feel much suffering. I vote "NO" forusing animals for research.
Reply:NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!! animals are not here for us to eat, wear or experiment on!!!!!!!!! besides, animals react differently to us, it's completely pointless, and cruel! You wanna make a drug, fine, but test it out on a willing volunteer, not a harmless, benine, defensless animal!!!!!!!!!
Reply:No they shouldn't unless they have problems with their health such as overweight or pregnancy. etc....
Reply:there's enough criminals to work on : )
Reply:hmm, that's a tough one....it's hard to say....where will they draw the line
Reply:Yes, unless you'd rather be used for the research instead.
Come on people, they can't use other human beings because that is against the law and considered more ethically unjust.Would you rather hurt animals or alot more people? Truth is, if the animals weren't tested on, than we'd get a whole bunch of possibly deadly medications, etc. if you guys use medecine or go to the hospital for a surgery or something, you are such a hypocrite.
Reply:NO WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I want to research the most advanced and complex medical topics of today. Where is the best place to do it?
I'm referring to specific institutions, universities, organizations, etc.
I want to research the most advanced and complex medical topics of today. Where is the best place to do it?
where there is money there is good research.
Howard huges medical centers all around the US.
Baylor College (Texas)
MIT, Harvard -needless to mention the ivy league.
Mayo Clinic, but its dead boring there.
Cold Spring Harbour -one of the best.
Sanger institute (Cambridge Univ)
Imperial College (london, not the best, but retty good))
There are a few places in germany, including Heidelberg, but u need to research this..
Doing cutting edge science doesnt just depend on the institutde, but rather who you work with. If you find a lab head to work with, read his/her papers. Were they published in good journals? Do they have science, nature, PNAS, EMBO papers??
go to www.pubmed.com to search for their articles..
Reply:I am assuming u are a dr or scientist of some kind here.
mayo clinic is always doing good resarch. thats all i can think of
Reply:Oxford Biochemistry Department.
Reply:hi
I think the best website is Pubmed:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
I want to research the most advanced and complex medical topics of today. Where is the best place to do it?
where there is money there is good research.
Howard huges medical centers all around the US.
Baylor College (Texas)
MIT, Harvard -needless to mention the ivy league.
Mayo Clinic, but its dead boring there.
Cold Spring Harbour -one of the best.
Sanger institute (Cambridge Univ)
Imperial College (london, not the best, but retty good))
There are a few places in germany, including Heidelberg, but u need to research this..
Doing cutting edge science doesnt just depend on the institutde, but rather who you work with. If you find a lab head to work with, read his/her papers. Were they published in good journals? Do they have science, nature, PNAS, EMBO papers??
go to www.pubmed.com to search for their articles..
Reply:I am assuming u are a dr or scientist of some kind here.
mayo clinic is always doing good resarch. thats all i can think of
Reply:Oxford Biochemistry Department.
Reply:hi
I think the best website is Pubmed:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Do you believe animals should be used for medical research?
No. Most of the great medical break throughs are not due to torturing animals.
Do you believe animals should be used for medical research?
Yes! If we need to eradicate diseases on our planet for humans how else are we going to do that!
Reply:only if they are used inhumanely
Reply:no
Reply:Unfortunately yes, to a degree. Humans can't be used, obviously. There have been great medical break throughs, that if it weren't for the animals they tested on, we'd still be without.
Reply:nope, that a cruelty to animals.
Reply:It is either we eat them and use them or let them run amock. I don't think a traffic jam caused by a cow in NYC would be very funny
Reply:I have mixed emotions on this issue. I think it's cruel to use them but some of the good things that have come from it might outweigh the bad. Hard question...probably no right answer.
Reply:I do think it is sad BUT if it helps research ... then its helping save lives it has 2 b done.
Reply:NO I THINK THATS SAD
Reply:On Rodents...Yes. We cant use ppl, and we need to keep doing research, so...*
my cat
Do you believe animals should be used for medical research?
Yes! If we need to eradicate diseases on our planet for humans how else are we going to do that!
Reply:only if they are used inhumanely
Reply:no
Reply:Unfortunately yes, to a degree. Humans can't be used, obviously. There have been great medical break throughs, that if it weren't for the animals they tested on, we'd still be without.
Reply:nope, that a cruelty to animals.
Reply:It is either we eat them and use them or let them run amock. I don't think a traffic jam caused by a cow in NYC would be very funny
Reply:I have mixed emotions on this issue. I think it's cruel to use them but some of the good things that have come from it might outweigh the bad. Hard question...probably no right answer.
Reply:I do think it is sad BUT if it helps research ... then its helping save lives it has 2 b done.
Reply:NO I THINK THATS SAD
Reply:On Rodents...Yes. We cant use ppl, and we need to keep doing research, so...*
my cat
How does summer research programs and internships influence admittance into medical school, if any?
I did a med-dent start program (clinical experience) over spring break and i'm doing a summer research program where I will be devoting 30 hours per week to research and 10 hours per week of clinical. Will this give me a good look on med. school applications? THANKS!!
(i'm a sophmore in undergrad)
How does summer research programs and internships influence admittance into medical school, if any?
It depends. If you are interested in doing medical research and you apply to a medical school that is research oriented, this activity will be viewed very positively. However, if you are not interested in doing research and simply want to provide patient care and you apply to a medical school that is primary care oriented, the admission committee is going to prefer seeing activities that are more clinically oriented.
To elaborate, research oriented schools prefer applicants with advanced degrees in sciences (which is natural, as most research MD's obtained a PhD first). In contrast, primary care oriented schools led the way in admitting applicants with diverse undergrad degrees to enhance and humanize medicine.
All too frequently, students fail to do proper research on the schools they apply to. An exceptionally qualified applicant will frequently not be accepted into medical school simply because the orientation of the school did not match the applicant's interests.
Reply:probably, because most schools like to see that applicants are really dedicated to their chosen area of study. doing "school work" (like research) outside of school is one way to show that. also, having research experience is always a bonus because then they will know you're already competent in that respect. good luck!
(i'm a sophmore in undergrad)
How does summer research programs and internships influence admittance into medical school, if any?
It depends. If you are interested in doing medical research and you apply to a medical school that is research oriented, this activity will be viewed very positively. However, if you are not interested in doing research and simply want to provide patient care and you apply to a medical school that is primary care oriented, the admission committee is going to prefer seeing activities that are more clinically oriented.
To elaborate, research oriented schools prefer applicants with advanced degrees in sciences (which is natural, as most research MD's obtained a PhD first). In contrast, primary care oriented schools led the way in admitting applicants with diverse undergrad degrees to enhance and humanize medicine.
All too frequently, students fail to do proper research on the schools they apply to. An exceptionally qualified applicant will frequently not be accepted into medical school simply because the orientation of the school did not match the applicant's interests.
Reply:probably, because most schools like to see that applicants are really dedicated to their chosen area of study. doing "school work" (like research) outside of school is one way to show that. also, having research experience is always a bonus because then they will know you're already competent in that respect. good luck!
What scientific or medical advance in discoveries and research would you like to see in 50 years?
Courses taught to every child in grade school so that every human being knows how to use the power of mind to heal him/herself.
What scientific or medical advance in discoveries and research would you like to see in 50 years?
breaking the viral barrier as antibiotics did in the 1930's to kill bacteria. maybe a designer viral hunter killer for cancer , flu, herpes, etc. these mutate fast, like swine flu. next lower cost electron microscopes so a dr in the boonies could have one that ran on solar power. low cost analysis for spectral work in the field. more research on how critters don't get cavities and humans do? is it really tied to diet? i don't know...pass the alpo!
Reply:I hope to see a cure found for diabetes (sooner, if possible) because my granddaughter has had it since she was 4 and many of my family members have been afflicted with it.
Reply:New broad-sprectrum and targeted classes of antibiotics, bugs kill more people yearly than all the big name diseases combined, meaning cancer and heart disease etc. Only a handful of pharmaceutical companies are even trying anymore, and the number of multidrug-resistant strains is on the rise. Even though I have high blood pressure, a history of cancer and diabetes in my family, and friends with HIV this one tops my list. These other diseases go 2-5 in the order listed.
Reply:I really want to see a cure for cancer of any kind, as four of my family members have cancer and numerous friends as well. It is truly horrifying to think how many people are diagnosed each year.
Reply:2nd vote for stem cell pathways mapped out and cloning of primates developed. We could make huge improvements in the quality of human life.
Reply:A combo of stem cell/cloning that makes new organs.A 150 year lifespan.
Reply:I think in 50 years civilization will of fallen. There will be a few people with anazing techknowledgy. But I think society will be corrupt and the farms will become deserts, there will to more volacanos. Earthquakes. The earth and mankind will be on the down side of things
What scientific or medical advance in discoveries and research would you like to see in 50 years?
breaking the viral barrier as antibiotics did in the 1930's to kill bacteria. maybe a designer viral hunter killer for cancer , flu, herpes, etc. these mutate fast, like swine flu. next lower cost electron microscopes so a dr in the boonies could have one that ran on solar power. low cost analysis for spectral work in the field. more research on how critters don't get cavities and humans do? is it really tied to diet? i don't know...pass the alpo!
Reply:I hope to see a cure found for diabetes (sooner, if possible) because my granddaughter has had it since she was 4 and many of my family members have been afflicted with it.
Reply:New broad-sprectrum and targeted classes of antibiotics, bugs kill more people yearly than all the big name diseases combined, meaning cancer and heart disease etc. Only a handful of pharmaceutical companies are even trying anymore, and the number of multidrug-resistant strains is on the rise. Even though I have high blood pressure, a history of cancer and diabetes in my family, and friends with HIV this one tops my list. These other diseases go 2-5 in the order listed.
Reply:I really want to see a cure for cancer of any kind, as four of my family members have cancer and numerous friends as well. It is truly horrifying to think how many people are diagnosed each year.
Reply:2nd vote for stem cell pathways mapped out and cloning of primates developed. We could make huge improvements in the quality of human life.
Reply:A combo of stem cell/cloning that makes new organs.A 150 year lifespan.
Reply:I think in 50 years civilization will of fallen. There will be a few people with anazing techknowledgy. But I think society will be corrupt and the farms will become deserts, there will to more volacanos. Earthquakes. The earth and mankind will be on the down side of things
Medical research shows we retain fish brains & reptile brains within our mammal brain does it prove evolution?
Not on it's own. The fact that so many structures have been retained and modified is a good hint. Observing the commonalities of their embryonic development goes a step farther. Observing the commonalities over a vast range of vertebrates worldwide, and observing the pattern of variations shows a branched pattern of development, the phylogenetic tree, which indicates descent from a common ancestor.
Medical research shows we retain fish brains %26amp; reptile brains within our mammal brain does it prove evolution?
You got "medical research" confused with "Art Bell" again. Click your medulla oblongata forward! I wonder where the "fish switch" is? For the absolute best proof of evolution, watch the "Planet of the Apes". To-date nothing beats it for proving evolution, not kidding, it is the very best evidence evolution has.
Reply:Not necessarily, it is merely a truth about the structure of our brains *per se|*
In the human brain is a hierarchical structure|
In something like the core, is the *reptilian brain|* That governs basic urges such as sex, territorial, aggression, fear and that sort of thing|
Built upon that is the *mammalian brain|* This governs things such as emotional affection| That is why a cat or a dog can love you with affection, but a reptile cannot| A mammal can love in that way, but the only thing that a reptile has in an *appetite|*
Built upon that is the brain that governs our *higher reasoning processes* - that concerning rational thought and deliberate choice| It is precisely that which makes us distinctly human from the lower animals|
---
Reply:No, that's just another mans opinion.
Reply:Sure is. Not difficult to imagine.
Medical research shows we retain fish brains %26amp; reptile brains within our mammal brain does it prove evolution?
You got "medical research" confused with "Art Bell" again. Click your medulla oblongata forward! I wonder where the "fish switch" is? For the absolute best proof of evolution, watch the "Planet of the Apes". To-date nothing beats it for proving evolution, not kidding, it is the very best evidence evolution has.
Reply:Not necessarily, it is merely a truth about the structure of our brains *per se|*
In the human brain is a hierarchical structure|
In something like the core, is the *reptilian brain|* That governs basic urges such as sex, territorial, aggression, fear and that sort of thing|
Built upon that is the *mammalian brain|* This governs things such as emotional affection| That is why a cat or a dog can love you with affection, but a reptile cannot| A mammal can love in that way, but the only thing that a reptile has in an *appetite|*
Built upon that is the brain that governs our *higher reasoning processes* - that concerning rational thought and deliberate choice| It is precisely that which makes us distinctly human from the lower animals|
---
Reply:No, that's just another mans opinion.
Reply:Sure is. Not difficult to imagine.
I love research,my desire to know is high, How can I get scholarship to study as a medical anthropologist?
Once you get to about third year in the anthropology and psychology majors, you get to assist professors in their research which is really exciting. You have to be like their pidgeon and help organize data and analyze data and go out on to campus to collect data or help with the study subjects. Beyond that, to become a medical anthropologist you have to major in anthropology and get your B.S. and Masters, then prolly your Ph.D.
Your school should have flowcharts on what classes are required to major in anthropology. I know how you feel, because I have to know EVERYTHING!
I love research,my desire to know is high, How can I get scholarship to study as a medical anthropologist?
You have to get a degree in Anthropology and a Masters in that field... then you go for the PhD fellowship "scholarship" directly related to the field. For the Bachelor and Masters you will have to search other standard scholarship opportunities. Talk to guidance counselors in your school!
dog teeth
Your school should have flowcharts on what classes are required to major in anthropology. I know how you feel, because I have to know EVERYTHING!
I love research,my desire to know is high, How can I get scholarship to study as a medical anthropologist?
You have to get a degree in Anthropology and a Masters in that field... then you go for the PhD fellowship "scholarship" directly related to the field. For the Bachelor and Masters you will have to search other standard scholarship opportunities. Talk to guidance counselors in your school!
dog teeth
What is a reason to keep stim cell research from saving lives?
I cannot fathom why people would intentionally inhibit the medical research that can literally save millions of lives and cure ANYTHING. With enough research it can cure anything so why are we stopping it? I understand why our president VETO'd it. He votes for the bible instead of the will of the American people. I'm curious what others think? I'm not attacking the other side im asking you to share your opinions with me so please be polite.
What is a reason to keep stim cell research from saving lives?
the controversy is that, although it will save millions, it kills fetus's and embryo's. Now, for the anti-abortionists, they think that the doctors are murdering them. Some people believe, however, that life doesnt start until the fetus is actually born, so they dont mind they are using fetus's and embryo's for stem cells and then throwing them away. i personally think that if they only use embryos (1-3 months old in the woman's body), that would be okay because it doesnt have a fully developed spinal cord and brain, therefore not fully alive. Not a fetus, because after the embryo stage, it is almost fully developed with the main points. thats my opinion however, because no one is going to stop this research anyway. so might as well put a limitation to it.
Reply:There is nothing to attack so don't worry. You are just another person who has not bothered to research something before you get your panties in a knot.
We have Non Embryonic stems cell research and Embryonic stem cell research. The Non embryonic comes from adult stem cells and from also from the umbilical cord of fully developed new born babies. This is funded by the Government.
The embryonic comes from abortions, and so the government does not fund this program. But scientist can use them if they wish.
Now here is the important part. There has no evidence brought fourth anywhere to suggest that the Embryonic stems cells will result in additional benefits. Nothing, Nada.....not a dag gum thing. So there is no need to fund it. We are getting our research, and the pro-lifers are happy. It's a win win situation.
Reply:It is not steam cell research that people are opposed to. I wish that people would get their facts straight before posting a question. What many people are opposed to is using embryos as a source of steam cells.
Many Christians consider embryos to be little people. What is the point in sacrificing little babies to save an old person? The older person had his chance at life already. Why deny the embryo the same chance at life?
If one could easily make stem cells without sacrificing the embryo, then the issue would no longer be controversial.
.................................
Q. Why is it wrong to destroy embryos for their stem cells?
A. Biologically, an embryo represents one of the earliest stages of human life. Human development progresses in a continuum, from the single cell to the embryonic stage, then a fetus, newborn, toddler, adolescent and adult. Embryos, whether created through in vitro fertilization, cloning or sexual intercourse, are fully human and deserve protection. The weakest and most vulnerable member of the human family — the embryo — should not be the subject of scientific experimentation. It is never morally or ethically justified to destroy one human in order to possibly save another. Advances in adult stem cell research provide both tangible hope for patients and an ethical avenue for developing the therapies they need.
Reply:I feel kinda of like you do. If it would help so many people why not do it. However I have never researched the whole thing so I hate to make any judgements.
Reply:Bush vetoed government funding for stem cell research, not the research itself. Stem cell research is one of those slippery slopes like cloning, where do you stop? Now it is innocent enough, but in the hands of the wrong people, well, it would be bad. If we keep stiff regulations and provide severe penalties for violations, I have no problem with it.
Reply:Bush is just playing safe, hedging his bets. Allowing living people to suffer is bad but, if it is possible that foetuses are actual life forms then he'd be guilty of allowing mass murder and he definitely would go to hell.
Reply:they come from dead babys(that's the ONLY reason)
What is a reason to keep stim cell research from saving lives?
the controversy is that, although it will save millions, it kills fetus's and embryo's. Now, for the anti-abortionists, they think that the doctors are murdering them. Some people believe, however, that life doesnt start until the fetus is actually born, so they dont mind they are using fetus's and embryo's for stem cells and then throwing them away. i personally think that if they only use embryos (1-3 months old in the woman's body), that would be okay because it doesnt have a fully developed spinal cord and brain, therefore not fully alive. Not a fetus, because after the embryo stage, it is almost fully developed with the main points. thats my opinion however, because no one is going to stop this research anyway. so might as well put a limitation to it.
Reply:There is nothing to attack so don't worry. You are just another person who has not bothered to research something before you get your panties in a knot.
We have Non Embryonic stems cell research and Embryonic stem cell research. The Non embryonic comes from adult stem cells and from also from the umbilical cord of fully developed new born babies. This is funded by the Government.
The embryonic comes from abortions, and so the government does not fund this program. But scientist can use them if they wish.
Now here is the important part. There has no evidence brought fourth anywhere to suggest that the Embryonic stems cells will result in additional benefits. Nothing, Nada.....not a dag gum thing. So there is no need to fund it. We are getting our research, and the pro-lifers are happy. It's a win win situation.
Reply:It is not steam cell research that people are opposed to. I wish that people would get their facts straight before posting a question. What many people are opposed to is using embryos as a source of steam cells.
Many Christians consider embryos to be little people. What is the point in sacrificing little babies to save an old person? The older person had his chance at life already. Why deny the embryo the same chance at life?
If one could easily make stem cells without sacrificing the embryo, then the issue would no longer be controversial.
.................................
Q. Why is it wrong to destroy embryos for their stem cells?
A. Biologically, an embryo represents one of the earliest stages of human life. Human development progresses in a continuum, from the single cell to the embryonic stage, then a fetus, newborn, toddler, adolescent and adult. Embryos, whether created through in vitro fertilization, cloning or sexual intercourse, are fully human and deserve protection. The weakest and most vulnerable member of the human family — the embryo — should not be the subject of scientific experimentation. It is never morally or ethically justified to destroy one human in order to possibly save another. Advances in adult stem cell research provide both tangible hope for patients and an ethical avenue for developing the therapies they need.
Reply:I feel kinda of like you do. If it would help so many people why not do it. However I have never researched the whole thing so I hate to make any judgements.
Reply:Bush vetoed government funding for stem cell research, not the research itself. Stem cell research is one of those slippery slopes like cloning, where do you stop? Now it is innocent enough, but in the hands of the wrong people, well, it would be bad. If we keep stiff regulations and provide severe penalties for violations, I have no problem with it.
Reply:Bush is just playing safe, hedging his bets. Allowing living people to suffer is bad but, if it is possible that foetuses are actual life forms then he'd be guilty of allowing mass murder and he definitely would go to hell.
Reply:they come from dead babys(that's the ONLY reason)
I want to be a medical researcher but I don't know where to start?
I love learning about the human body, i think its so fascinating...i really want to work in medical research, specifically genetic links to disease/cancer research...do you think it would be better to study biomedical science or study medicine, then do a research PhD?
thank u for ur help :)
I want to be a medical researcher but I don't know where to start?
I am a PhD researcher working in a medical department. I have been working on cancer research for over 10 years now and I think that a degree in Cellular Biology, Molecular Biology, Immunology or Genetics, followed by a PhD in a cancer research-related field would give you the best background. I have several colleagues that come from a medic background and it seems to me that they lack in designing proper experimental setups as well as missing out in basic cellular biology knowledge. Cancer research is a great field and full of openings in Science and Medicine. The best direction to take is that of "translational" research, which is very fashionable today, and very useful, too, as it will give the Medics tools to use to cure diseases.
Our lab has been interested in colon cancer prevention for several years and I find this field very exciting!
Good luck - feel free to contact me directly if you want more directions / advice
Reply:If you're about to enroll in college take any medical related courses, Physical Therapy, Nursing, Dentistry, or pre-medical courses, like Biology, Botany, Zoology and Psychiatry.
While taking-up any of those course you will discover your area of interest in the field of science concerned about the study of the human body.
After graduation you can choose to work in a company related to your course, especially those ones dealing in medical research. Or you may want to pursue a Masteral course where you will be required to do a lot of research. After the graduating from the masteral then that's the time you can enroll a in a PhD course.
Reply:Go with either microbiology or biotechnology (or both). PhD is probably necessary for higher level research (not grunt work), and so is experience. Go ask if you can volunteer at a lab or something, get as much exposure to the techniques that are used as possible.
Reply:First Get Biology or Chemistry Degree bachelors
then Biomedical Sciense masters
Then you will have to Attend medical School in a MD/Phd
About 12-15 years before you can work for Roche or Novartis or other Biotech and lead research on a project
thank u for ur help :)
I want to be a medical researcher but I don't know where to start?
I am a PhD researcher working in a medical department. I have been working on cancer research for over 10 years now and I think that a degree in Cellular Biology, Molecular Biology, Immunology or Genetics, followed by a PhD in a cancer research-related field would give you the best background. I have several colleagues that come from a medic background and it seems to me that they lack in designing proper experimental setups as well as missing out in basic cellular biology knowledge. Cancer research is a great field and full of openings in Science and Medicine. The best direction to take is that of "translational" research, which is very fashionable today, and very useful, too, as it will give the Medics tools to use to cure diseases.
Our lab has been interested in colon cancer prevention for several years and I find this field very exciting!
Good luck - feel free to contact me directly if you want more directions / advice
Reply:If you're about to enroll in college take any medical related courses, Physical Therapy, Nursing, Dentistry, or pre-medical courses, like Biology, Botany, Zoology and Psychiatry.
While taking-up any of those course you will discover your area of interest in the field of science concerned about the study of the human body.
After graduation you can choose to work in a company related to your course, especially those ones dealing in medical research. Or you may want to pursue a Masteral course where you will be required to do a lot of research. After the graduating from the masteral then that's the time you can enroll a in a PhD course.
Reply:Go with either microbiology or biotechnology (or both). PhD is probably necessary for higher level research (not grunt work), and so is experience. Go ask if you can volunteer at a lab or something, get as much exposure to the techniques that are used as possible.
Reply:First Get Biology or Chemistry Degree bachelors
then Biomedical Sciense masters
Then you will have to Attend medical School in a MD/Phd
About 12-15 years before you can work for Roche or Novartis or other Biotech and lead research on a project
Would u favor a hybrid ( genetically altered) embryo for medical research or has science gone too far?
On Tuesday, MPs have a further free vote on the emotive issue of cutting the abortion time limit.
Mr Cameron, along with Mr Brown, has backed the use of hybrid embryos as a means to develop treatments for cancer and conditions such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease. They also both support the creation of "saviour siblings".
However, the majority of the Tory shadow cabinet, including shadow foreign secretary William Hague and shadow home secretary David Davis, backed the unsuccessful attempt to ban hybrids.
Ex-minister Edward Leigh, who led the fight against the creation of hybrid "admixed" embryos, said they were "ethically wrong and almost certainly medically useless".
He said there was "no evidence yet to substantiate" claims the work could lead to treatment for degenerative diseases like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's.
The bill would allow regulated research using hybrid or "admix" embryos, where the nuclei of human cells are inserted into animal eggs. The resulting embryos would be kept for up to 14 days to harvest stem cells.
Health Minister Dawn Primarolo says any research done using human embryos "must satisfy the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority that it was necessary or desirable".
No human "admix" embryo would be implanted into a woman or animal, she says.
'Too human'?
But Mr Leigh said: "We do not believe that regulation is enough. We believe this is a step too far and therefore should be banned.
"In embryos, we do have the genetic make up of a complete human being and we could not and should not be spliced together with the animal kingdom."
Would u favor a hybrid ( genetically altered) embryo for medical research or has science gone too far?
I believe stem cell research is the way forward so perhaps the question should be about how they gain them.
What the uk government is proposing is to use animal eggs and then any human cells can be used to make the stem cells. Other ways would be to use human eggs (very small supply unless they use the eggs from aborted fetus), embryotic fluid, or umbilical cord fluid. Probably a few other ways too but I am just a lay person and not a scientist.
The question then becomes what is the lesser evil of all the means and suddenly using animal eggs doesn't seem so bad.
Course if you are really against it then why not sign up to donate your own body parts (cord blood, amniotic fluid, or eggs) and then we could get on a lot quicker with the research.
Reply:Science is the final frontier of the decaying world, and embryo's and this research already have proof it can work and I think it will one day.
Reply:Science never goes too far. Its science that will save us all in the future. Some day you or your loved ones may need those stem cells.
Mr Cameron, along with Mr Brown, has backed the use of hybrid embryos as a means to develop treatments for cancer and conditions such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease. They also both support the creation of "saviour siblings".
However, the majority of the Tory shadow cabinet, including shadow foreign secretary William Hague and shadow home secretary David Davis, backed the unsuccessful attempt to ban hybrids.
Ex-minister Edward Leigh, who led the fight against the creation of hybrid "admixed" embryos, said they were "ethically wrong and almost certainly medically useless".
He said there was "no evidence yet to substantiate" claims the work could lead to treatment for degenerative diseases like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's.
The bill would allow regulated research using hybrid or "admix" embryos, where the nuclei of human cells are inserted into animal eggs. The resulting embryos would be kept for up to 14 days to harvest stem cells.
Health Minister Dawn Primarolo says any research done using human embryos "must satisfy the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority that it was necessary or desirable".
No human "admix" embryo would be implanted into a woman or animal, she says.
'Too human'?
But Mr Leigh said: "We do not believe that regulation is enough. We believe this is a step too far and therefore should be banned.
"In embryos, we do have the genetic make up of a complete human being and we could not and should not be spliced together with the animal kingdom."
Would u favor a hybrid ( genetically altered) embryo for medical research or has science gone too far?
I believe stem cell research is the way forward so perhaps the question should be about how they gain them.
What the uk government is proposing is to use animal eggs and then any human cells can be used to make the stem cells. Other ways would be to use human eggs (very small supply unless they use the eggs from aborted fetus), embryotic fluid, or umbilical cord fluid. Probably a few other ways too but I am just a lay person and not a scientist.
The question then becomes what is the lesser evil of all the means and suddenly using animal eggs doesn't seem so bad.
Course if you are really against it then why not sign up to donate your own body parts (cord blood, amniotic fluid, or eggs) and then we could get on a lot quicker with the research.
Reply:Science is the final frontier of the decaying world, and embryo's and this research already have proof it can work and I think it will one day.
Reply:Science never goes too far. Its science that will save us all in the future. Some day you or your loved ones may need those stem cells.
I can't find a site for Adelson Medical Research Foundation.?
He was on Charlie Rose and mentioned the foundation
I can't find a site for Adelson Medical Research Foundation.?
The site is www.apnrr.org.... which stands for the "Adelson Program in Neural Repair and Rehabilitation"
dr teeth
I can't find a site for Adelson Medical Research Foundation.?
The site is www.apnrr.org.... which stands for the "Adelson Program in Neural Repair and Rehabilitation"
dr teeth
Does anyone know of good Peer Reviewed Research Articles about Slippery Elm?
I am looking for Peer Reviewed medical research articles regarding the use of slippery elm herb in the treatment of gastrointestinal irritation. Does anyone know of some good websites or articles?
Does anyone know of good Peer Reviewed Research Articles about Slippery Elm?
Try www.heartburn-help.com's messageboard.
Does anyone know of good Peer Reviewed Research Articles about Slippery Elm?
Try www.heartburn-help.com's messageboard.
When do Animal rights infringe on human rights?Hunting? Medical research? Eating?
Be honest thats all I ask.
When do Animal rights infringe on human rights?Hunting? Medical research? Eating?
Animal rights infringe on human rights when so called "animal rights" activists attack research facilities and try to stop medical research using animals. They infringe when they put the life of a rat above the life of a dying child.
Animals continue to play an essential role in the development of new drugs and medical treatments. Animal testing saves lives!
Before those few anti-human, pro-animal activists start shouting and screaming about the "myth" that animal testing is worthwhile and beneficial, and start saying animal research is cruel/ worthless etc, please take time to read the information on the sites below that give you the true facts about the use of animals in medical research.
Smallpox has now been eradicated from earth using a vaccine developed in cows. Polio has been eradicated from North America using a vaccine developed in mice and monkeys. Research continues into new treatments for Malaria (pigeon), TB (cow, sheep), leprosy (armadillo), HIV/AIDS (rats and monkeys), cancer (mice and rats). If the animal rights lobby had their way, all medical research would stop and millions of people would die needlessly horrible deaths of these conditions.
Reply:For Science and the advancement of medicine, you need animal tests. But sometimes scientists can carry out unnecessarily cruel experiments. Also pet owners can abuse their pets.
Reply:I think your question is backwards.
Animals do NOT "infringe" on human's rights in any way whatsoever.
HUMANS, however, certainly do go way, way, WAY out of their way to infringe on the rights of animals.
Hunting? Outdated, unnecessary, barbaric, testosterone-laden excuse to imbibe alcohol.
Medical research? Rats aren't people. Monkeys aren't people. NONE of the animals slaughtered for "research" have the same genetic make-up as humans, so extrapolated data is not reliable data. Besides, I personally do not believe humans are SUPPOSED to cure every disease under the sun. We're not SUPPOSED to live and live and live. Make way for the next generation, don't be greedy. Pay volunteers for research.
Eating? Tons and tons of data showing health risks involved with consumption of animal flesh.
****************************
EDIT: What I'm saying is that your QUESTION is backwards. It SHOULD have read, "how do HUMANS infringe on ANIMAL rights"
Reply:animals dont have rights sadly
Reply:They don't. I am a firm believer in animal rights, and none of those rights interfere with me at all. Infact, they help to keep society healthy and even free of deadly diseases.
Reply:Well, firstly I think animals have rights, only because we allow it. I believe in conservation but not at the risk of human development and progress. Baby seals are cute and worth saving, but I'd be the first to club one over the head if it was guaranteed to produce some sort of vaccine for Cancer, or any other illness affecting humanity as a whole. There are extremes on both sides of the debate as in any other, logic and common sense need to be better practiced to find good solutions.
Reply:animal rights activist are nothing but whackos who cant get a real job. they are attention deprived and to get the attention they crave they will put animal life over human... oh yeah,,, i love meat
Reply:animals deserve a life but life is just confusing sometimes and even though its hard we have to learn to live w/ it
Reply:Animals don't have RIGHTS, because they are not created in the image of God, but they should be treated humanely (not saying that they cannot be hunted, eaten, and killed, or pest-types eliminated) under our duty of stewardship of the earth, given by the Almighty himself, in Holy Writ (a.k.a. the Bible).
Genesis 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. [one of MANY references to this subject]
Reply:Because some misguided people believe that people are merely another sort of animal. They fail to recognize that we are, as a species, set apart, special and superior. Of course, I don't advocate animal abuse, but I believe that, when it comes down to animal rights vs. human rights, the human should be on top every time.
Reply:No matter if you think they have rights or not, it's a little ****** up when cosemetic companies spary hair dye into a rabbit's eye to see what would happen to a human. It's even more ****** up when the eye bleeds out, and they are blind.
As far as these religious freaks? How can you be so god loving if you believe in the torture of animals?
KFC beats their chickens against walls, and cuts all their beaks off with machines. Animals are skinned alive for their fur, so ****** up.
Reply:Animals don't have rights.
Don't listen to religious nuts quoting select words to support their pointless opinoin.
The only people who give animals the time of day are bleeding heart sappy idiots who would rather swerve to avoid a cat than keep straight to avoid killing the woman and her two children in the caravan next to them.
Reply:It depends on the CRUELNESS and SUFFERING. I can handle med research, hunting (as long as it is eaten), and eating meat, but only if the animal is raised and/or killed in a humane way.
EDIT: Blueridge- there are families out there that hunt to feed their children because they can't afford to buy meat from a grocier. Its cheaper to buy a box of ammo and a hunting license. One average size deer can feed a family of 4 for several weeks.
Reply:Animals would have more rights if they didn't taste so good...
It's their own fault really.
When do Animal rights infringe on human rights?Hunting? Medical research? Eating?
Animal rights infringe on human rights when so called "animal rights" activists attack research facilities and try to stop medical research using animals. They infringe when they put the life of a rat above the life of a dying child.
Animals continue to play an essential role in the development of new drugs and medical treatments. Animal testing saves lives!
Before those few anti-human, pro-animal activists start shouting and screaming about the "myth" that animal testing is worthwhile and beneficial, and start saying animal research is cruel/ worthless etc, please take time to read the information on the sites below that give you the true facts about the use of animals in medical research.
Smallpox has now been eradicated from earth using a vaccine developed in cows. Polio has been eradicated from North America using a vaccine developed in mice and monkeys. Research continues into new treatments for Malaria (pigeon), TB (cow, sheep), leprosy (armadillo), HIV/AIDS (rats and monkeys), cancer (mice and rats). If the animal rights lobby had their way, all medical research would stop and millions of people would die needlessly horrible deaths of these conditions.
Reply:For Science and the advancement of medicine, you need animal tests. But sometimes scientists can carry out unnecessarily cruel experiments. Also pet owners can abuse their pets.
Reply:I think your question is backwards.
Animals do NOT "infringe" on human's rights in any way whatsoever.
HUMANS, however, certainly do go way, way, WAY out of their way to infringe on the rights of animals.
Hunting? Outdated, unnecessary, barbaric, testosterone-laden excuse to imbibe alcohol.
Medical research? Rats aren't people. Monkeys aren't people. NONE of the animals slaughtered for "research" have the same genetic make-up as humans, so extrapolated data is not reliable data. Besides, I personally do not believe humans are SUPPOSED to cure every disease under the sun. We're not SUPPOSED to live and live and live. Make way for the next generation, don't be greedy. Pay volunteers for research.
Eating? Tons and tons of data showing health risks involved with consumption of animal flesh.
****************************
EDIT: What I'm saying is that your QUESTION is backwards. It SHOULD have read, "how do HUMANS infringe on ANIMAL rights"
Reply:animals dont have rights sadly
Reply:They don't. I am a firm believer in animal rights, and none of those rights interfere with me at all. Infact, they help to keep society healthy and even free of deadly diseases.
Reply:Well, firstly I think animals have rights, only because we allow it. I believe in conservation but not at the risk of human development and progress. Baby seals are cute and worth saving, but I'd be the first to club one over the head if it was guaranteed to produce some sort of vaccine for Cancer, or any other illness affecting humanity as a whole. There are extremes on both sides of the debate as in any other, logic and common sense need to be better practiced to find good solutions.
Reply:animal rights activist are nothing but whackos who cant get a real job. they are attention deprived and to get the attention they crave they will put animal life over human... oh yeah,,, i love meat
Reply:animals deserve a life but life is just confusing sometimes and even though its hard we have to learn to live w/ it
Reply:Animals don't have RIGHTS, because they are not created in the image of God, but they should be treated humanely (not saying that they cannot be hunted, eaten, and killed, or pest-types eliminated) under our duty of stewardship of the earth, given by the Almighty himself, in Holy Writ (a.k.a. the Bible).
Genesis 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. [one of MANY references to this subject]
Reply:Because some misguided people believe that people are merely another sort of animal. They fail to recognize that we are, as a species, set apart, special and superior. Of course, I don't advocate animal abuse, but I believe that, when it comes down to animal rights vs. human rights, the human should be on top every time.
Reply:No matter if you think they have rights or not, it's a little ****** up when cosemetic companies spary hair dye into a rabbit's eye to see what would happen to a human. It's even more ****** up when the eye bleeds out, and they are blind.
As far as these religious freaks? How can you be so god loving if you believe in the torture of animals?
KFC beats their chickens against walls, and cuts all their beaks off with machines. Animals are skinned alive for their fur, so ****** up.
Reply:Animals don't have rights.
Don't listen to religious nuts quoting select words to support their pointless opinoin.
The only people who give animals the time of day are bleeding heart sappy idiots who would rather swerve to avoid a cat than keep straight to avoid killing the woman and her two children in the caravan next to them.
Reply:It depends on the CRUELNESS and SUFFERING. I can handle med research, hunting (as long as it is eaten), and eating meat, but only if the animal is raised and/or killed in a humane way.
EDIT: Blueridge- there are families out there that hunt to feed their children because they can't afford to buy meat from a grocier. Its cheaper to buy a box of ammo and a hunting license. One average size deer can feed a family of 4 for several weeks.
Reply:Animals would have more rights if they didn't taste so good...
It's their own fault really.
Any tips for understanding of medical research for medical students?
I am trying to understand the importance of medical reseach for medical students. Any one to let me know about this?
Any tips for understanding of medical research for medical students?
Scientific advances continue to increase and the amount of information available to the media and the public is staggering. No doubt - all this medical information, for which we have easy access, can be confusing. Not only do medical news stories often use jargon that only trained professionals can understand, entire concepts are not always explained in a clear and concise way so that the average reader can understand them. The information and Internet links provided in this section can help you gain a better understanding of medical information so that you can use the knowledge to become a more informed patient and to communicate more effectively with your doctor and other health professionals.
Consumer's Guide to Taking Charge of Medical Information
This guide, developed by the Harvard School of Public Health, helps consumers can understand terms and concepts often used in medical news stories. Written in a humorous style, it also helps the reader understand the concept of “risk” and offers tips to determine if the source of the information is reliable.
Deciphering Medspeak
This guide will help you learn the specialized language of health professionals and to understand the medical shorthand doctors use when writing out a prescription. The guide is published by the Medical Library Association.
HealthNewsReviews
This site was designed to help journalists develop more critical appraisal skills when writing a story on health or medicine. It also offers guidance to consumers to help them evaluate the medical and research news reported in the various media. News from about fifty different media is monitored and each story is given a score based on certain criteria. The site was developed by the University of Minnesota School of Journalism %26amp; Mass Communication and the Foundation for Informed Medical Decision Making. Read the “About” section and also the section on “How We Rate Stories”.
Interpreting News on Diet and Nutrition
Confused by all the conflicting stories about what’s good to eat and what’s not? This site by the Harvard School of Public Health will help you understand why there is often conflicting information reported in studies on diet and nutrition. It also describes in easy to understand language the different types of studies and offers advice on deciphering media stories on diet and nutrition.
Understanding Risk: What Do Those Headlines Really Mean
News stories are often sensationalized to attract readers and viewers. How often have you heard or seen a news headline only to find out after reading the story that the headline was misleading? This fact sheet from the National Institute on Aging will help improve your understanding of these stories and to better judge the results that are really important and ones that are interesting but not a reason to change how you take care of yourself.
Reply:In one word. . .breakthrough. .
Reply:U have to take medical research to learn about the human body alive as well as deceased. If u didn't have the medical research how are u going to be able to diagnose someone with a really serious disorder. It's just like psychiatric hours, u have to do so many hours in mental hospital to learn in case u have to work there in the future. Good Luck!!! I am a nurse also and u most have medical research.
Reply:Very broad question. It depends on every study. Just make every effort in the name of science to remove your bias.
Any tips for understanding of medical research for medical students?
Scientific advances continue to increase and the amount of information available to the media and the public is staggering. No doubt - all this medical information, for which we have easy access, can be confusing. Not only do medical news stories often use jargon that only trained professionals can understand, entire concepts are not always explained in a clear and concise way so that the average reader can understand them. The information and Internet links provided in this section can help you gain a better understanding of medical information so that you can use the knowledge to become a more informed patient and to communicate more effectively with your doctor and other health professionals.
Consumer's Guide to Taking Charge of Medical Information
This guide, developed by the Harvard School of Public Health, helps consumers can understand terms and concepts often used in medical news stories. Written in a humorous style, it also helps the reader understand the concept of “risk” and offers tips to determine if the source of the information is reliable.
Deciphering Medspeak
This guide will help you learn the specialized language of health professionals and to understand the medical shorthand doctors use when writing out a prescription. The guide is published by the Medical Library Association.
HealthNewsReviews
This site was designed to help journalists develop more critical appraisal skills when writing a story on health or medicine. It also offers guidance to consumers to help them evaluate the medical and research news reported in the various media. News from about fifty different media is monitored and each story is given a score based on certain criteria. The site was developed by the University of Minnesota School of Journalism %26amp; Mass Communication and the Foundation for Informed Medical Decision Making. Read the “About” section and also the section on “How We Rate Stories”.
Interpreting News on Diet and Nutrition
Confused by all the conflicting stories about what’s good to eat and what’s not? This site by the Harvard School of Public Health will help you understand why there is often conflicting information reported in studies on diet and nutrition. It also describes in easy to understand language the different types of studies and offers advice on deciphering media stories on diet and nutrition.
Understanding Risk: What Do Those Headlines Really Mean
News stories are often sensationalized to attract readers and viewers. How often have you heard or seen a news headline only to find out after reading the story that the headline was misleading? This fact sheet from the National Institute on Aging will help improve your understanding of these stories and to better judge the results that are really important and ones that are interesting but not a reason to change how you take care of yourself.
Reply:In one word. . .breakthrough. .
Reply:U have to take medical research to learn about the human body alive as well as deceased. If u didn't have the medical research how are u going to be able to diagnose someone with a really serious disorder. It's just like psychiatric hours, u have to do so many hours in mental hospital to learn in case u have to work there in the future. Good Luck!!! I am a nurse also and u most have medical research.
Reply:Very broad question. It depends on every study. Just make every effort in the name of science to remove your bias.
Were can i find a site that's free to do medical research?
need for pepole that get cyst on there organs
Were can i find a site that's free to do medical research?
Pub-Med is good. That is where I start when researching something.
braces for teeth
Were can i find a site that's free to do medical research?
Pub-Med is good. That is where I start when researching something.
braces for teeth
I am doing a medical project on chapped lips and need some help finding some good references to cite research?
I'm having a hard time finding sites related to chapped lips I need to know like news, definitions if you could find some sites for me in addition to the ones I have I would be appreciative. No work just a linky thanks
I am doing a medical project on chapped lips and need some help finding some good references to cite research?
http://www.health-disease.org/skin-disor...
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-causes-chap...
http://www.uspharmacist.com/index.asp?sh...
Reply:http://www.visualdxhealth.com/adult/chei...
I am doing a medical project on chapped lips and need some help finding some good references to cite research?
http://www.health-disease.org/skin-disor...
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-causes-chap...
http://www.uspharmacist.com/index.asp?sh...
Reply:http://www.visualdxhealth.com/adult/chei...
What are some good choices for college if i want to get involved in research science?
i want to be a research scientist...maybe with stem cells, human/animal behaviors, or medical research.
What are some good choices for college if i want to get involved in research science?
NCSU / UMCP / PURDUE / PENN STATE.
These are very good when it comes to Research Science, but you can get the complete detailed list from the below source.
Reply:You can cell biology, micrbiology, molecular biology, and if you wanted to study things like stem cells then you may be interested in regenerative medicine.
teeth grinding guard
What are some good choices for college if i want to get involved in research science?
NCSU / UMCP / PURDUE / PENN STATE.
These are very good when it comes to Research Science, but you can get the complete detailed list from the below source.
Reply:You can cell biology, micrbiology, molecular biology, and if you wanted to study things like stem cells then you may be interested in regenerative medicine.
teeth grinding guard
I want to be a medical researcher but I don't know where to start?
I love learning about the human body, i think its so fascinating...i really want to work in medical research, specifically genetic links to disease/cancer research...do you think it would be better to study biomedical science or study medicine, then do a research PhD?
thank u for ur help :)
I want to be a medical researcher but I don't know where to start?
Me too! I live in Australia and i think i'm going to do a bioscience degree at uni, then go on to study medicine, and maybe work as a lab researcher. Or, alternatively, I'd like to work as part of a team, perhaps diagnosing people, running tests, etc.
Reply:For what you want, it sounds like biochemistry is the place to start. That will give you the foundation--then in graduate sschool you'll be able to move into whatevery specialized area is appropriate to your interests as they develop. Good luck :)
Reply:Dear Researcher Good Day to you Godbless
You will love it even more when you know that you had a hand in creating this body, it is wonderful and is beyond anything describable through words which unfortunately is our only armoury!
Genertics is a very definitive field and will fit you handsomely from what i can read between the lines. If you have the necessary qualifications and subjects for medicine do the necessary qualifying tests and get into Biotechnology for a start. This is offered as a three year study program and makes you ready to make choices in the field of research. You should make the computer search engine and the think tank through the web your creative self and let it roam and search the variants for you to make the necessary choices.
Make at least five choices and rate them on how you and the choice of the subject to be researched would gel or fit in. If it is tailor made exact and you are absolutel rearing to go then that is your subject...rate this 9. When all five are rated narrow it down to two scanning the finer print and the minute details which find a mention therein.
This done you should look for universities and colleges. The criteria should be within 5km of your home and everything at a distance which does not discomfit but fits in with your ability to work congenially and profitably.
Go for it
Take care and may the Lord be with you in this exercise
thank u for ur help :)
I want to be a medical researcher but I don't know where to start?
Me too! I live in Australia and i think i'm going to do a bioscience degree at uni, then go on to study medicine, and maybe work as a lab researcher. Or, alternatively, I'd like to work as part of a team, perhaps diagnosing people, running tests, etc.
Reply:For what you want, it sounds like biochemistry is the place to start. That will give you the foundation--then in graduate sschool you'll be able to move into whatevery specialized area is appropriate to your interests as they develop. Good luck :)
Reply:Dear Researcher Good Day to you Godbless
You will love it even more when you know that you had a hand in creating this body, it is wonderful and is beyond anything describable through words which unfortunately is our only armoury!
Genertics is a very definitive field and will fit you handsomely from what i can read between the lines. If you have the necessary qualifications and subjects for medicine do the necessary qualifying tests and get into Biotechnology for a start. This is offered as a three year study program and makes you ready to make choices in the field of research. You should make the computer search engine and the think tank through the web your creative self and let it roam and search the variants for you to make the necessary choices.
Make at least five choices and rate them on how you and the choice of the subject to be researched would gel or fit in. If it is tailor made exact and you are absolutel rearing to go then that is your subject...rate this 9. When all five are rated narrow it down to two scanning the finer print and the minute details which find a mention therein.
This done you should look for universities and colleges. The criteria should be within 5km of your home and everything at a distance which does not discomfit but fits in with your ability to work congenially and profitably.
Go for it
Take care and may the Lord be with you in this exercise
Is this cutting edge science or the scariest thing you have heard from medical research science since cloning?
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,3...
Is this cutting edge science or the scariest thing you have heard from medical research science since cloning?
Cutting edge science to me. Just because some total jerk will abuse or use for evil intent any research that that gets published doesn't mean research shouldnn't be done.
Reply:A monkey with two butts is infinity useful...
Reply:If the end resutls are without danger and it helps lives I'm all for it.
Reply:Absolutely. This pushing the envelope will result in one day some poor creature being created that is thinking/feeling as a human but is trapped as part animal. Its too revolting for words.
Stop tinkering with nature, we all have to die of something some day and we have to accept some illnesses are part of life.
Before judging, I have had both my parents die at an early age, one after many year of debilitating and painful illness
Reply:I think its good, it'll help treat or find ways to treat diseases which are currently a big problem in the world today. All the people that are against it wont refuse the treatment found by the research if they are ill.
I know a lot of people feel strongly on the subject but embryos are not 'alive' (technically they are but meh) they cant feel anything they are just cells.
I can see it helping a lot of people and therefore its a good thing, people think things like this means well be growing limbs and things, it doesn't. It just means some DNA will be combined to make stem cells which are one of the most versatile things used in science/medicine today.
And I'm sure your God wouldn't be so unhappy about you 'playing' at his job, you're saving lives which he doesn't seem to be that fussed about. And don't give me that rubbish about everyones life being planned before they are born, wheres the fairness in a baby dying at 3 months old of a disease which research like this could help to prevent/treat/cure.
And stop talking about one day that itll create a hybrid animal with the brain of a human and body of an animal even if that was possible (which it isn't) do you have any idea how long, and how much money it take? Over 100 years and billions of pounds? yesyes.
Reply:People just fear what they don't understand. Most biologists would just chuckle if you told them this was scary.
Reply:Its all a bit scary to me!
Reply:Some people probably suggested similar things when aspirin was discovered.
Reply:Another H.G. Wells tale (The Island of Dr. Moreau) comes to life yet again!
Reply:OMG, that's just so weird.
Reply:They might clone politicians, god forbid,the world would deteriorate twice as fast
Reply:cloning could be a good thing, not whole people but if organs can be cloned then people would not die waiting for doners, plus the body would not reject an organ with the persons DNA.
Reply:Of course its good for stem cell research that will help to find the causes and hopefully cures for many diseases.
They aren't actually going to grow the embryos in to half man/half cow creatures like people think!!!
Is this cutting edge science or the scariest thing you have heard from medical research science since cloning?
Cutting edge science to me. Just because some total jerk will abuse or use for evil intent any research that that gets published doesn't mean research shouldnn't be done.
Reply:A monkey with two butts is infinity useful...
Reply:If the end resutls are without danger and it helps lives I'm all for it.
Reply:Absolutely. This pushing the envelope will result in one day some poor creature being created that is thinking/feeling as a human but is trapped as part animal. Its too revolting for words.
Stop tinkering with nature, we all have to die of something some day and we have to accept some illnesses are part of life.
Before judging, I have had both my parents die at an early age, one after many year of debilitating and painful illness
Reply:I think its good, it'll help treat or find ways to treat diseases which are currently a big problem in the world today. All the people that are against it wont refuse the treatment found by the research if they are ill.
I know a lot of people feel strongly on the subject but embryos are not 'alive' (technically they are but meh) they cant feel anything they are just cells.
I can see it helping a lot of people and therefore its a good thing, people think things like this means well be growing limbs and things, it doesn't. It just means some DNA will be combined to make stem cells which are one of the most versatile things used in science/medicine today.
And I'm sure your God wouldn't be so unhappy about you 'playing' at his job, you're saving lives which he doesn't seem to be that fussed about. And don't give me that rubbish about everyones life being planned before they are born, wheres the fairness in a baby dying at 3 months old of a disease which research like this could help to prevent/treat/cure.
And stop talking about one day that itll create a hybrid animal with the brain of a human and body of an animal even if that was possible (which it isn't) do you have any idea how long, and how much money it take? Over 100 years and billions of pounds? yesyes.
Reply:People just fear what they don't understand. Most biologists would just chuckle if you told them this was scary.
Reply:Its all a bit scary to me!
Reply:Some people probably suggested similar things when aspirin was discovered.
Reply:Another H.G. Wells tale (The Island of Dr. Moreau) comes to life yet again!
Reply:OMG, that's just so weird.
Reply:They might clone politicians, god forbid,the world would deteriorate twice as fast
Reply:cloning could be a good thing, not whole people but if organs can be cloned then people would not die waiting for doners, plus the body would not reject an organ with the persons DNA.
Reply:Of course its good for stem cell research that will help to find the causes and hopefully cures for many diseases.
They aren't actually going to grow the embryos in to half man/half cow creatures like people think!!!
Doing a talk on worry at church. Want medical research. Do you know of any websites to search?
My husband is doing the talk it doesn't need to be long. He wants Medical evidence to show the problems that worry has today on people and then he is going use the bible to show how God can take away all your worries so that you can live healthier lives and depend on God for your health as well as your salvation.
Doing a talk on worry at church. Want medical research. Do you know of any websites to search?
1. You may have better luck searching with the word 'stress' instead of 'worry'.
2. Please make sure he uses real scientific studies on stress, God and health benefits (I have no idea whether these studies exists). Otherwise, it's quite likely he'll be using his faith to lie, and there are enough people lying (even innocently) about their faith..
Reply:Go to the Bible for answers and/or ask a main line denomination minister. No one is promised to be without trials in life. No one is promised all will be well, fortune and fame in THIS life Believing in God, trusting God, confessing sins, giving God praise, try to abandon sinful ways, accepting Jesus as the only way to salvation, is the way to ETERNAL life ie..Heaven. There will be trials, temptations, all sorts of bad things=evil in this life. Why is there war? Why do good people ,especally kids, get killed in wrecks, school shootings, etc. Why do good people get ripped off and robed? Why so much hate and anger? The answer to these questions is because of sin, we live iin a sinful world and try as we may, we all still sin. We know right from wrong but do we always do whar's right? No. Jesus, Gods Son, had trials in life. Trials to the point of being despised, rejected, and ultimately killed. He did nothing wrong, but still was killed. Others were mortered, killed, put into prison, etc. but they didn't deserve it. The best is yet to come and that means heaven. We may have bad things on earth but in heaven, there is no such thing as bad. We are in our present life for a given number of years. Some die at birth and some live to be over 100 but all die in and from this earthly life of misfortune and sin. Unlike this life, heaven in all its beauty, splendor, perfection, painlessness, relaxation, peace, love, happiness and more, will last FOREVER. I heard a neet way of explaining how long forever is and how long we will be in this remarkable heaven. Lets say a bird comes to earth ONCE EVERY MILLION YEARS. This bird takes ONE GRAIN OF SAND away- back with him. A million years later he does the same thing..one tiny grain of sand. How long would it take that bird to get ALL the grains of sand? One grain at a time, a million years apart !!! Then consider all he has taken is the sand. How long would it take him to get to the rocks, stone, every inch of earth and the mountains?? This is just the first page of how long the bliss of heaven will last. BUT first we need to get there. How? See the Bible, what Jesus did..........
Reply:hahahahaha!
well good luck! the idea that a magical diety can take all of your worries away is absurd. almost as absurd as assuming that taking avacatio nwill solve all of your problems at work.
the ONLY way to give yourself less worries is to be on top of everything. to have a controlled life and to be in control of all the situations in your life.
god is ABSOLUTELY a placebo! sheesh. look at this question! can god take your worries away? no. any half brained logical person can see that. want medical evidence of the contrary? then youll be digging til your imaginary god comes back in his holy station wagon to pick you all up!
Doing a talk on worry at church. Want medical research. Do you know of any websites to search?
1. You may have better luck searching with the word 'stress' instead of 'worry'.
2. Please make sure he uses real scientific studies on stress, God and health benefits (I have no idea whether these studies exists). Otherwise, it's quite likely he'll be using his faith to lie, and there are enough people lying (even innocently) about their faith..
Reply:Go to the Bible for answers and/or ask a main line denomination minister. No one is promised to be without trials in life. No one is promised all will be well, fortune and fame in THIS life Believing in God, trusting God, confessing sins, giving God praise, try to abandon sinful ways, accepting Jesus as the only way to salvation, is the way to ETERNAL life ie..Heaven. There will be trials, temptations, all sorts of bad things=evil in this life. Why is there war? Why do good people ,especally kids, get killed in wrecks, school shootings, etc. Why do good people get ripped off and robed? Why so much hate and anger? The answer to these questions is because of sin, we live iin a sinful world and try as we may, we all still sin. We know right from wrong but do we always do whar's right? No. Jesus, Gods Son, had trials in life. Trials to the point of being despised, rejected, and ultimately killed. He did nothing wrong, but still was killed. Others were mortered, killed, put into prison, etc. but they didn't deserve it. The best is yet to come and that means heaven. We may have bad things on earth but in heaven, there is no such thing as bad. We are in our present life for a given number of years. Some die at birth and some live to be over 100 but all die in and from this earthly life of misfortune and sin. Unlike this life, heaven in all its beauty, splendor, perfection, painlessness, relaxation, peace, love, happiness and more, will last FOREVER. I heard a neet way of explaining how long forever is and how long we will be in this remarkable heaven. Lets say a bird comes to earth ONCE EVERY MILLION YEARS. This bird takes ONE GRAIN OF SAND away- back with him. A million years later he does the same thing..one tiny grain of sand. How long would it take that bird to get ALL the grains of sand? One grain at a time, a million years apart !!! Then consider all he has taken is the sand. How long would it take him to get to the rocks, stone, every inch of earth and the mountains?? This is just the first page of how long the bliss of heaven will last. BUT first we need to get there. How? See the Bible, what Jesus did..........
Reply:hahahahaha!
well good luck! the idea that a magical diety can take all of your worries away is absurd. almost as absurd as assuming that taking avacatio nwill solve all of your problems at work.
the ONLY way to give yourself less worries is to be on top of everything. to have a controlled life and to be in control of all the situations in your life.
god is ABSOLUTELY a placebo! sheesh. look at this question! can god take your worries away? no. any half brained logical person can see that. want medical evidence of the contrary? then youll be digging til your imaginary god comes back in his holy station wagon to pick you all up!
Ethical use of animals in biomedical research?
I am diong a presentation in my Medical Ethics class about animals used in biomedical research. Any suggesitons on additional topics? What I have so far:
I. Intro (ways porople use animals - medical %26amp; non medical)
II. Pro's of using animals in medical research
III. Opinion of Animal Rights Activists
IV. Public Opinion
V. Types of animals used
VI. Medical Advancements made possible by animal research
VII. Ethical guidelines of animal use
VIII. Animal Welfare Act
I also need a bit of help with the comclusion. My positon is that the sue of animals in biomedical research is a very valuable tool, but that ethical guidelines should be adhered to and every precaution should be taken to reduce invasiveness and pain, and to ensure that there are no other alternative models.
Ethical use of animals in biomedical research?
Something very timely for your presentation might be to include a section on the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) that's currently making its way through Congress.
The AETA is designed in part to protect researchers from attacks on their work and their personal lives. You can find more info on the bill at http://www.nabr.org. It's a relatively straightfoward piece of legislation that could have a big impact.
Reply:When I was teaching, I had a worksheet I used that asked from very simple to very thoughtful questions with a 1 to 3 scale.(never, sometimes, always) It started with would you step on an ant? Would you kill a mosquito that was about to bite you? How should a doctor practice a new operation, etc.
hotels
I. Intro (ways porople use animals - medical %26amp; non medical)
II. Pro's of using animals in medical research
III. Opinion of Animal Rights Activists
IV. Public Opinion
V. Types of animals used
VI. Medical Advancements made possible by animal research
VII. Ethical guidelines of animal use
VIII. Animal Welfare Act
I also need a bit of help with the comclusion. My positon is that the sue of animals in biomedical research is a very valuable tool, but that ethical guidelines should be adhered to and every precaution should be taken to reduce invasiveness and pain, and to ensure that there are no other alternative models.
Ethical use of animals in biomedical research?
Something very timely for your presentation might be to include a section on the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) that's currently making its way through Congress.
The AETA is designed in part to protect researchers from attacks on their work and their personal lives. You can find more info on the bill at http://www.nabr.org. It's a relatively straightfoward piece of legislation that could have a big impact.
Reply:When I was teaching, I had a worksheet I used that asked from very simple to very thoughtful questions with a 1 to 3 scale.(never, sometimes, always) It started with would you step on an ant? Would you kill a mosquito that was about to bite you? How should a doctor practice a new operation, etc.
hotels
American medical research :))?
American Medical Association researchers have made a remarkable discovery.
It seems that some patients needing blood transfusions may
benefit from receiving chicken blood rather than human blood.
It tends to make the men cocky and the women lay better.
Just thought you'd like to know?
American medical research :))?
lmao.. that's a terrific medical breakthrough..
hahahahahahahahahaha
very funny one... thanx for sharing
Reply:Thanks for the info and the points.
Reply:haha...nice joke to tell my girl....thanks
Reply:I like it !! 9/10
Reply:haha
Reply:cute
It seems that some patients needing blood transfusions may
benefit from receiving chicken blood rather than human blood.
It tends to make the men cocky and the women lay better.
Just thought you'd like to know?
American medical research :))?
lmao.. that's a terrific medical breakthrough..
hahahahahahahahahaha
very funny one... thanx for sharing
Reply:Thanks for the info and the points.
Reply:haha...nice joke to tell my girl....thanks
Reply:I like it !! 9/10
Reply:haha
Reply:cute
Ever participated in one of those medical research studies where you help test new meds or treatments?
Ya I was in one for Fibromyalgia and it was the best decision i ever made
Ever participated in one of those medical research studies where you help test new meds or treatments?
No, I've watched too many episodes of "The Drew Carey Show" to do that....
Ever participated in one of those medical research studies where you help test new meds or treatments?
No, I've watched too many episodes of "The Drew Carey Show" to do that....
I need a good medical research topic....?
it has to be on a disease or a condition in the medical field and i cant figure out a topic...can anyone help me?? plez?? ty in advance..
I need a good medical research topic....?
How about mental illness,drugs, smoking, low blood sugar, low blood pressure. nerves. There are many topics you can choose from/.
I need a good medical research topic....?
How about mental illness,drugs, smoking, low blood sugar, low blood pressure. nerves. There are many topics you can choose from/.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Can I sell you to canadia for medical research?
don't worry, it's only a 5 year plan, and you don't remember any of the horrible things they do to you...but then again, you wont remember your name either, but c'mon, think of all the stuff you could buy with your share, five dollars and half a twix
Can I sell you to canadia for medical research?
as the reigning prince of canadia, i find your offer tempting. throw in a couple of jellied penguins and you have a deal.
Reply:1st of all : wowzo, "canadia"?
2nd: 5 years is 5 years too long
3rd: I'd want to remember that massacre so wheres the fun in that?
4th or shall I say 4rd?: I don't even remember my dog's name so that part wont matter.
5th: I don't like twix.
so the obvious answer to this is a big fat NNNNYES!!!
Reply:No
Reply:Sure! And you can have the candy.
Reply:No but sell yourself
tooth bleaching
Can I sell you to canadia for medical research?
as the reigning prince of canadia, i find your offer tempting. throw in a couple of jellied penguins and you have a deal.
Reply:1st of all : wowzo, "canadia"?
2nd: 5 years is 5 years too long
3rd: I'd want to remember that massacre so wheres the fun in that?
4th or shall I say 4rd?: I don't even remember my dog's name so that part wont matter.
5th: I don't like twix.
so the obvious answer to this is a big fat NNNNYES!!!
Reply:No
Reply:Sure! And you can have the candy.
Reply:No but sell yourself
tooth bleaching
Why government doesn't want to spend money for Alternative medical research, and both-Conventional and?
Complementary and Alternative Medicine will then work together
http://www.mbschachter.com/Approaches%20...
Why government doesn't want to spend money for Alternative medical research, and both-Conventional and?
The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine receives regular taxpayer funding including 121 million dollars just for 2007.
http://nccam.nih.gov/about/appropriation...
If the NCCAM was able to prove that any of their therapy options other than the complementary treatments like acupuncture and massage had any consistent benefit then I am sure their funding would be increased. The trials with laetrile and other supposed miracle cancer cures have all produced tremendously underwhelming levels of proof of efficacy.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancerinfo/treatme...
Reply:The posters "Panda" and "quijibored" are correct. The government does spend money on alternative medical research.
Be also aware, the days of trial and error testing for drugs are gone. Most research is based on the current understanding of how cancer works. Design and development of drugs is applying the theories. Example, identifying a defective gene, identifying the protein produced by the defective gene, discovering and synthesizing an inhibitor to bind to the oncoprotein that is not toxic to humans. This is very expensive.
What would research of alternative treatments like? Trial and error with no rationale of why they may work.
Reply:in my opinion it is because alternative medicine might work and they would lose out on a lot of money. after all, it is all a money game to them.
Reply:Maybe it's because of campaign contributions from the drug companies..
Reply:Governmental funding only amounts to a small amount of the research dollars, with most coming from the drug companies and other sources. The government does tend to be careful where it spends its money, because they're looking for the most bang for the taxpayer's buck. Most "alternative" medicine is known to be quackery, so it's easy to avoid. Some may show promise here and there, but the point is that investments must be made wisely, and siting people that have a bunch of straw-man arguments and half-truths doesn't endear them to any people with purse-strings. New approaches are tried, generally without public knowledge, all the time, and nobody's closed to the idea of different approaches, but there has to be something upon which to base the investment.
Reply:Well, you are misinformed as the US government happens to have a national branch dedicated to alternative and complementary medicine and research.
National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine
http://nccam.nih.gov/
They provide Clinical Trial information, updates on the latest research, latest news, training facilities, legitimate contacts for CAM practitioners, and how to be an informed consumer.
Government funding amounts from 1992 to 2007:
http://nccam.nih.gov/about/appropriation...
Reply:looks like you are going to have to create another profile "B" because you are almost out of points. or either that answer a few LOL
http://www.mbschachter.com/Approaches%20...
Why government doesn't want to spend money for Alternative medical research, and both-Conventional and?
The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine receives regular taxpayer funding including 121 million dollars just for 2007.
http://nccam.nih.gov/about/appropriation...
If the NCCAM was able to prove that any of their therapy options other than the complementary treatments like acupuncture and massage had any consistent benefit then I am sure their funding would be increased. The trials with laetrile and other supposed miracle cancer cures have all produced tremendously underwhelming levels of proof of efficacy.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancerinfo/treatme...
Reply:The posters "Panda" and "quijibored" are correct. The government does spend money on alternative medical research.
Be also aware, the days of trial and error testing for drugs are gone. Most research is based on the current understanding of how cancer works. Design and development of drugs is applying the theories. Example, identifying a defective gene, identifying the protein produced by the defective gene, discovering and synthesizing an inhibitor to bind to the oncoprotein that is not toxic to humans. This is very expensive.
What would research of alternative treatments like? Trial and error with no rationale of why they may work.
Reply:in my opinion it is because alternative medicine might work and they would lose out on a lot of money. after all, it is all a money game to them.
Reply:Maybe it's because of campaign contributions from the drug companies..
Reply:Governmental funding only amounts to a small amount of the research dollars, with most coming from the drug companies and other sources. The government does tend to be careful where it spends its money, because they're looking for the most bang for the taxpayer's buck. Most "alternative" medicine is known to be quackery, so it's easy to avoid. Some may show promise here and there, but the point is that investments must be made wisely, and siting people that have a bunch of straw-man arguments and half-truths doesn't endear them to any people with purse-strings. New approaches are tried, generally without public knowledge, all the time, and nobody's closed to the idea of different approaches, but there has to be something upon which to base the investment.
Reply:Well, you are misinformed as the US government happens to have a national branch dedicated to alternative and complementary medicine and research.
National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine
http://nccam.nih.gov/
They provide Clinical Trial information, updates on the latest research, latest news, training facilities, legitimate contacts for CAM practitioners, and how to be an informed consumer.
Government funding amounts from 1992 to 2007:
http://nccam.nih.gov/about/appropriation...
Reply:looks like you are going to have to create another profile "B" because you are almost out of points. or either that answer a few LOL
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)