Researchers have a identified the location of a genetic risk fact for a special type of breast cancer. This type of breast cancer, known as estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer, is a form of cancer that does not properly express the estrogen receptor and therefore it does not respond well to drug treatments. This type of cancer is especially prevalent in women of African descent. Studies have shown them to be more susceptive to progesterone receptor-negative and human epidermal growth factor-negative breast cancer, as well as estrogen receptor-negative strain. Researchers have linked this phenomenon to the presence of an allele near the TERT gene on chromosome 5, strongly correlating to an increased risk for estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer. This genetic variant then in turn shows a greater link to the other two receptor-negative cancers. This region of the human genome have been previously researched for links to other types of cancer as well, such as ovarian and lung cancer. While studies are still be conducted as to how this allele actually works, researchers believe that once it is completely understood, it will give insight into other types of cancer as well.
http://www.healthcanal.com/cancers/22740-Genetic-Basis-for-Aggressive-Breast-Cancer-Women-African-Ancestry-Identified.html (Article Link)
[...] I am not at all a fan of the idea that Corporations are people, but when you worry that they can now spend that much money for campaigns that want is this not really say that people are stupid? It would campaign finance issue at all unless the average person could be convinced of anything sufficiently publicized. Two examples: In 2000 Republican primary Bush met with an ad against McCain that he was destined for breast cancer, and he voted against an omnibus bill, with some funds for research on breast cancer. (in) famous "I voted for it before I voted against" ads against Kerry. Anyone who really knows how the legislative process knows that it is a common phenomenon. Lawmakers vote for something in committee and then vote against it, after all the trade margins, changes, and passengers are a different order. Obama has freely consented to millions of "contributions package for employees of law firms that put pressure on Wall Street (which he promised would not be large, clear statements) - these and other gifts he has accepted as part of "contributions workers stacked "method of making a nonsense of his criticism hypocritical Supreme Court decision. Very large companies (through their donations of their employees grouped) and unions have owned since Barack Hussein Obama was a senator. And evidence of billions of dollars the Obama campaign is strong, that if you sling enough against the wall, some will stick. A question about the recent decision of the Scottish business spending on campaigns? I am not at al... [...]
ReplyDeleteThis is a great page with fantastic information. I will definitely recommend my friends to visit your page as well.
ReplyDelete