This week in health and science – 9/14/07
|
As usual ramunas at Cancer Genetics has some informative posts about tests to determine the best breast cancer treatment for a given patient including predicting a patient’s response to hormone-suppressing therapy, the cancer’s sensitivity to chemotherapy and whether a patient is at high or low risk of the cancer recurring after surgery (3 Genomic Tests for Therapy Decisions). In another post a test called the Mammostrat is discussed which can “classify patients into high, moderate, or low-risk categories for disease recurrence”.
Dr. Val did a good job of explaining the news story that came out recently claiming that “Human-Animal Embryo Experiments” were going to be allowed. I thought to myself, ‘I bet what is really going on makes sense and is not a big deal and that the headline was written by someone just trying to get attention’. Apparently I was right – all they are really wanting to do is use “animal egg shells (without the nucleus that contains the majority of their DNA) as mini incubators for human stem cells”. She explains it all here: Britain Allows Human-Animal Embryo Experiments
There was a post this week at Eye on FDA about how food is inspected and about how there are proposals in Congress that would require more frequent inspections. Apparently “federal officials inspect companies growing and processing salad greens an average of just once every 3.9 years”! That’s scary news for someone like me who eats a lot of spinach! Read more: Receipe for Reform – Is Food the Next Frontier?
There is now more research concluding that cell phones do not cause cancer. I never believed they did. I wonder if we will keep hearing more about it or if people will be convinced now?
In heart health news – I’ll admit I’m suprised to hear this: Women Are Less Likely To Make Lifestyle Changes That Favor The Heart. I really would have guessed that women more than men would try to stay healthier. I wonder if its because traditionally it was believed that men were more likely to have heart disease so women take it less seriously?
At Eating Fabulous it was reported that peanut butter is being used to combat malnutrition in Malawi (sub-Saharan Africa). That’s great – but I wonder if many people there are allergic to peanuts? Do they have access to emergency medical treatment if their kid has an allergic reaction to it?
In other heart news “researchers at Children’s Hospital Boston have developed pulmonary-valve replacements for infants and children which could grow as the child grows older“. I had no idea they needed to be replaced as kids grew. And I knew someone who needed a valve replaced in highschool, but may she was big enough at that time.
That’s all for this week – yes I’ve been busy and haven’t posted much recently.
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Stumble: Kirtsy: delicious: reddit: Digg:
________________________________________
If you like my blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (what does this mean?)
or by email!
Thanks! I really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- This week in health and science – 8/18/07
- Menopause – HRT, hot flashes and twins
- Lung health in women and children
3 Responses to 'This week in health and science – 9/14/07'
Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'This week in health and science – 9/14/07'.
Leave a Reply
Comments protected by Lucia's Linky Love.
on September 14th, 2007 at 5:06 pm
Hi,
Thanks for the story about the new pulmonary heart valve replacement for children. Always interested to learn more about the innovations in heart valves. FYI, I had a double valve replacement in 2005.
Cheers,
Adam
The Patient’s Guide To Heart Valve Surgery Book
on September 16th, 2007 at 7:34 am
Thanks for the kudos, Trisha! I enjoy trying to get to the bottom of the media hype… glad that it’s helping others too.
on August 21st, 2009 at 5:37 pm
How would we really know for sure that cell phones DON’T cause cancer?? In reality they’ve only been in widespread use for maybe 10 years at the most. We all know smoking causes cancer, yet you can still smoke for years before you get cancer – if you get it at all. We won’t know conclusively if they have damaging effects until the generation that uses them the most (15-30) ages another decade or so. Then the statistics might show a whole different story. Thanks for the article.