By Lauren Pecorino
There is a tendency to complain about policies when writing blogs, but I think it is time to commend the British campaigns and innovations in treatment. They have proven to be some of the best in the world and have had a major impact in the fight against cancer.
One of the best British campaigns is against cervical cancer. Getting personally posted invitations to attend your next PAP screening, supported by pamphlets of information, is something few women ignore. Those who try to ignore these invitations are rightly and relentlessly bombarded with regular reminders.
And, with the knowledge that a sexually transmitted virus, Human Papilloma Virus (HPV), is responsible for all cases of cervical cancer, the UK implemented a national school-based HPV vaccination programme that has proven to yield high uptake. By 2009, 70 percent of 12-13 year olds in the UK were fully vaccinated. These results are admirable compared to the results of alternative on-demand provisions offered by other countries including the USA. Note that the vaccine is recommended for early teens as it is a preventative vaccine and not a therapeutic vaccine, and must be administered before the initiation of sexual activity for it to be effective. The vaccine prevents about 70% of cervical cancers caused by two specific strains of HPV. PAP screening is still important to catch cases that are not prevented by the vaccine. An added bonus of this campaign is that the same vaccine also protects against some head, neck, and anal cancers caused by HPV infections.
Another great British effort is towards the prevention of lung cancer. The anti-smoking adverts have been haunting, especially the most recent one released by the UK Department of Health that shows a tumor growing on a cigarette. It is brilliant. I wish I had designed it. The advert strikingly conveys the message that if you saw the damage smoking causes, you would not smoke. The percentage of male cigarette smokers have fallen from 55% in 1970 to 21% in 2010 and a decreasing number of deaths due to lung cancer has followed this trend.
Click here to view the embedded video.
The UK is also a model of good practice in that it is the only country in the world which has a network of free ‘stop-smoking’ services, recently supported by specialized training for National Health Service Stop Smoking practitioners.
We can help the national campaign at a personal level by being more opinionated and outspoken when it comes to letting those around us know that smoking is harmful and “uncool”- especially among the young. We must ensure the message is passed down to new generations.
Finally, the UK is at the leading edge in using stem cells to help replace organs damaged by cancer. Tracheal transplants using tracheal scaffolds from cadavers seeded with the patient’s own stem cells have been used to replace damaged tissue for patients with tracheal cancer. Currently scientists at University College London are developing very similar procedures to grow a new nose for a patient who had lost their nose to cancer. These innovative approaches are the result of a continuously open, well-supported but regulated stem cell research policy, not yet seen in the USA.
Well done Great Britain!
Lauren Pecorino received her PhD from the State University of New York at Stony Brook in Cell and Developmental Biology. She crossed the Atlantic to carry out a postdoctoral tenure at the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, London. She is a Principal Lecturer at the University of Greenwich where teaches Cancer Biology and Therapeutics. The teaching of this course motivated her to write The Molecular Biology of Cancer: Mechanisms, Targets, and Therapeutics, now in its second edition. Feedback on the textbook posted on Amazon from a cancer patient drove her to write a book on cancer for a wider audience: Why Millions Survive Cancer: the Successes of Science.
Read a World Cancer Day Q&A with Lauren Pecorino.
Subscribe to the OUPblog via email or RSS.
Subscribe to only health and medicine articles on the OUPblog via email or RSS.
The post World Cancer Day 2013: The Best of British appeared first on OUPblog.
By Frederick Grinnell
On August 23, 2010, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted a preliminary injunction blocking NIH-funded research on human embryonic stem cells (hESC). According to Judge Lamberth’s ruling, NIH-funded research on hESC violates the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, originally passed by Congress in 1996, which prohibits use of federal funds for research in which human embryos are destroyed. The judge rejected the federal government’s claim that hESC research comes in separate pieces, i.e., human embryo destruction in the private domain on one hand vs. investigation of hESC by NIH-funded investigators on the other. Instead, he cited the holistic language of the Dickey-Wicker Amendment and the Random House Dictionary to conclude that the common definition of research includes development, testing and evaluation. According to Judge Lamberth’s ruling, destruction of human embryos and research on stem cells derived from human embryos are part of the same piece.
Destruction of human embryos occurs in the context of diverse research purposes. Some researchers aim to develop hESC-based therapeutic applications. However, others propose to improve the outcome of in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures or to learn about early embryo development and disease progression. Currently, funding for research in which destruction of human embryos occurs is provided by non-Federal sources ranging from IVF clinics to biotechnology companies to state-sponsored biotechnology initiatives. Some of the research involving human embryo destruction has resulted in production of hESC lines. Some of the hESC lines that have been produced have been authorized to be used in NIH‑funded research, at least until the recent court order. Therefore, while one cannot deny that NIH-sponsored hESC research would be impossible without destruction of human embryos, destruction of human embryos is a research activity whose scope is much broader than and independent from the NIH‑funded work. From the point of view of research practice, the relationship between embryo destruction and hESC research is indirect.
In response to the judge’s preliminary injunction, the federal government has filed an appeal. The appeal challenges the judge’s understanding of the Dickey-Wicker Amendment regarding what constitutes the meaning of “research.” The appeal also challenges the judge’s conclusion that his decision would not seriously harm hESC researchers. On the contrary, if left in place, the injunction will have a potentially catastrophic effect because of its total disruption of NIH intramural and extramural hESC research.
One implication of Judge Lamberth’s ruling that has not been discussed but is of potential concern is whether the injunction against NIH-funding of hESC research might also apply to the FDA. The Dickey-Wicker Amendment concerns all of HHS not just the NIH. FDA is another major HHS agency that plays a role in hESC research. FDA develops guidelines and provides oversight for human clinical trials, including those involving hESC. As mentioned in the government’s appeal of the preliminary injunction, the FDA recently approved the enrollment of spinal cord injury patients in the first ever U.S. clinical trial of a hESC-based therapy. User fees from industry cover about half the costs of FDA drug review, but the remainder comes from federal f
posted by Neil
This one is, I think, important:
Hello, Neil. I intern at a lab that deals with stem cell research, and recently was forwarded the following attached message from the head of our lab. The document linked will explain everything, but the gist of it is that there is currently some regulatory legislation in the works to replace the repealed guidelines on embryonic stem cell research from the Bush administration. The National Institutes of Health are currently running an online comment form which allows US citizens to have their opinions on the matter heard, and such opinions are being heavily considered. If you would prefer not to get involved in a controversial issue like this, I would completely understand. But if it is something that you would be willing to get behind, it would be greatly appreciated if someone of your influence could get this message out. Thank you so much for your time.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd5vs2xt_0hkwp6xd8
-Joshua TurnerI think stem cell research is important. (You out there reading this in internet-land do not have to think as I do. You can actively want to ban it if you like.) But having learned that,
*"The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) launched a new
"Oppose Destructive Stem Cell Research" campaign today, equipping citizens
to contact Congress and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to oppose
embryonic stem cell research ." -- WASHINGTON, May 6
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ www.usccb.org/stemcellcampaign
and that
". ..of the 6000 plus comments that NIH
has received concerning the draft guidelines, 99% were from people who
opposed embryonic stem cell research."-Carecure Forum
http://sci.rutgers.edu/forum/showpost.php?p=1039001&postcount=12
and given that I do
not believe that 99% of the people out there believe that stem-cell research should be banned, I thought, well, my opinion is at least as valid as that of any Conference of Bishops. And I bet I can reach at least 6,000 people...
So, look over the document. If you have an opinion on stem cell research, and would like it expressed, go to:
http://nihoerextra.nih.gov/stem_cells/add.htmand let them know what it is.
And please, if you care about this and if you have a blog or LJ or method of reaching other people, pass it along -- link to this blog post, or link to the googledoc above. You've got until May 26th to make your opinions heard.
How do you feel about the huge price being charged for "Absolute Death"? This book is only 360 pages long but retails at $99.99. All of the Absolute Sandman volumes each have a page count over 600 but are priced the exact same as this book. How is that supposed to be rationalized? Don't you think a retail price of between $39.99-$59.99 would be a lot more reasonable for a book of this length? I ask because you blog on Amazon a decent bit, and this is your creation.
I wonder if the product itself will get the same kinds of reviews that "Absolute League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: The Black Dossier (Hardcover)" understandably got on Amazon: one star. Only one person gave it two stars, and 15 people gave it one star, due to this pricing issue.
What are your thoughts?I'm a bit surprised -- I'd been told that it was going to be retailing for about $75, which with an Amazon discount would put it solidly into the area you suggest. but I also know there are a bunch of extra expenses that have turned up on this book, including
having to reletter the whole of Death The High Cost of Living, which weren't originally planned or budgeted for.
The Amazon complaints on Black Dossier (which is over 150 pages shorter than Death will be) aren't about the 'pricing issue', but that it's a complete and utter rip off, as you aren't getting anything extra for your money above what you'd get if you just order the normal hardback of the Black Dossier -- the Absolute edition just has just slightly bigger pages and a slipcase. Absolute Death is filled with stuff that's never been seen, never been reprinted, or never been printed in the form it's going to be seen in, and has definitely never been collected anywhere before. Whetherpeople feel it's it's going to be value for money if you're paying the full $100 (as the Absolute Sandmans probably are) remains to be seen but I do know a ridiculous amount of work is going to making it as wonderful as we can.
Right now it's up on Amazon
for $62.99 (the same price they're doing the Absolute Sandmans at, although they've gone up and down to full price a few times), with a guarantee that if they drop the price between now and publication you'll get it at the lowest price they offer, and you have from here to November. So it's $63 or less.
Dear Storyteller Gaiman,
I'm not sure your personal opinions on tattoos, but if I were compelled to get a piece of Sandman art on my body forever. What would you recommend? Haha I know dumb question right? But I'm sure you wish your story to be represented as awesomely as possible.
Sincerely,
Tanner HuntI think tattoos are personal enough that it should be your choice. Find a Sandman drawing that speaks to you, and that you'd want to live with for the rest of your life. Make it that one.
If you are writing (or doing anything else) for the sheer fun of it, and may sell it and may not, then you are on your own time, and can go throw popcorn at the TV all you want to.
If you have taken an advance or a contract, YOU ARE WORKING FOR SOMEONE ELSE, and you have the same obligation to produce quality work, ON TIME, as a soldier in Iraq does.
If you didn't know that all cats can levitate, and that it's already been studied exhaustively, then you are an idiot, and your cat thinks so too.Mm. You were doing okay until you threw in the bit about Iraq. (I assume the flip side is, "Soldiering. Well, it's just a job. What are they complaining about? Why are they nipping off to hospitals and complaining about the facilities and treatment? Soldiers in Iraq have the same obligation not to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder and not to put themselves in harm's way that a novelist in a rose-trellised cottage Devon does.") (And I keep having fantasies about a trained platoon of Her Majesty's Armoured Novelists being put through their paces by an irascible RSM "... on the double - wait for it wait for it, what do you think you're doing, you horrible little man, contemplating litotes? -on the double, quiiiiiiiiick PLOT!")
Normally, I'm the one marching up and down trying to explain to the world that writing is a job, and it's not romantic and it's not clever and it's not special. For the most part, that's what this blog is about.
But writing fiction isn't the same as say, carpentry, patrolling a border or animal husbandry. You're making stuff up. It's a kind of weird confidence trick you play on yourself, like the Roadrunner running across the air between two peaks, where if you stop and look down you can plummet like Coyote. And getting stuff done on time isn't the same as getting it right.
I'm not sure when
The Graveyard Book was meant to have been delivered, under the original contract. I do know that I had a $50,000 delivery bonus, if I handed it in by the end of December 2007, which I definitely didn't collect even a penny of, what with finishing it in March 2008. I'm pretty sure that I could have bashed something out in 2007 and got it in on time and collected the money; I am also certain that that book wouldn't have won the Newbery, and probably wouldn't have been very good. And I suspect that people who read the book would have complained that I was just churning it out for the money, and they would most definitely have been right.
But, yes. The person or organisation the writer has a contract with definitely has every right to complain, and trust me, they do. The writer is, after all, working for them, if there is a contract.
Often, with a long series, there isn't. I suspect that Stephen King's deal on the Dark Tower was that he did them as and when he was ready. It took him 34 years. Readers died, not knowing how it ended. If Steve had been killed by that minivan in 1999, nobody would have known how it ended. It would have been a tragedy, for many reasons, but contract violation would not be one of them.
Dear Mr. Gaiman,
I can't tell you how much I adored the movie Coraline, and the film's score is no exception.
Bruno Coulais' pieces were haunting and beautiful, and the TMBG's "Other Father Song" was terrific, but sadly, the song which stood out to me the most I can't find!
It's the tune played when Coraline and her mother (real of course) are shopping. It was also featured in one of the TV commercials for the film. (See it here http://twurl.cc/p7j )
In all my searching all I've found is that I think it's called “Nellie Jean”, by Kent Melton (who may also have been a sculptor for the movie as well).
I know it's a long shot, but I was wondering if you had any information to pass along about the song. I downloaded the movie soundtrack from iTunes, and it's not there. I guess at worst I'll keep listening to it on YouTube, though I'd really like to download it!
Thank's, and keep it up!
Jason BI asked Henry Selick, who said,
It is not "Nellie Jean" by Kent Melton – that is the 5 to 7 seconds of ukulele played by the small character in front of the garden store where Dad is dropped off. I think we just called it "shopping music" and I'm surprised it's not on the soundtrack CD. I've asked Bruno Coulais if he'd mind sending me an MP3 to share with Jason.And then, because Henry is a remarkable man, he sent me an MP3 of the track in question, and the mighty webgoblin has put it up at
http://www.neilgaiman.com/mediafiles/exclusive/Audio/in_the_store_2.mp3(The high voice singing is actually Bruno himself.)
...
The house internet died, and Sunday is a day when you learn that 24/7 Tech support means that someone agrees with you that, yes, the Internet certainly does sound broken, and that they'll let people know when they get in to work on Monday. So I am saving this to a flash drive and then walking off into the world to find a wireless connection and, with luck, posting it. But once that is done I may be offline until things get fixed.
