I am doing a research paper for school on how technology has effected Breast Cancer and I have been unable to find what I am looking for. There is so much information out there that I was hoping with a little help I could narrow it down some.\nThanks to anyone who will help with this information search.
121586
Great statistics here:\nhttp://www.cancer.org/docroot/STT/stt_0.asp\n\nhttp://www.postgradmed.com/issues/2004/10_04/mirshahidi.htm\n\nAnd this one looks quite promising:\nhttp://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1200808\n\nBest of luck!
166846
Go to www.sciencedirect.com or pubmed.\n\nYou may find some answers.
7050
I remember reading an article on it recently (past few months) - I think it was in Discover magazine.\n\nThat might be a good place to start.
422191
Here's a nice list:\n\nhttp://www.moonlightsys.com/themoon/cancers.html\n\nI hope my daughter is on it someday, she's a proud Cancer, born July 22, 1998!
567112
I applaud you!!!\n\nBeing a 2 year breast cancer survivor, with a sister and aunt who have also had it and other cancers (colon & prostate) in the family.  I really appreciate all that you and the other scientists do to find cures for the "C" word.
537019
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/women/10/10/pill.cancer/index.html
518237
I recently did a very interesting research project on ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION for Biology 30.\nIt is quite a relevant topic and sure to be an interesting one to talk about. It can't help but grab people's attention. Hey it grabbed yours didn't it?
496991
OH MY! I'm sorry, but this news story has everything BACKWARDS!!!\n\nEstrogen is the hormone that stimulates cell growth, NOT progesterone. Progesterone causes cells to mature and die off.\nI think that the writer may have confused progesterone, the bioidentical hormone, with progestin - the synthetic hormone that DOES cause cancers.\n\n- HRT (estrogen supplement) is the cause of many breast cancers.\n- Progesterone is known to PROTECT women from female cancers.\n\nThis article is NUTS!!
380802
Go read this article from the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research \nhttp://www.wi.mit.edu/news/archives/1996/pk_0828.html
339857
i found some information about the history of technology since the early terchnology till now....i really hopes this works for you....good luck\n\n\nps: dont forget to choose me as best answer....\n\nhttp://www.answers.com/History%20of%20Technology
559553
I did the same study myself last semester and didn't find much either.  If you have something specific you are looking for, Wikipedia may have it.  Also, if you don't mind looking at scientific literature try google scholar or your local university library journals.  That is where I had to get most of my stuff.  Sorry...  and Good Luck!
116290
The list of schools that do research in this area is long. What you have to do is visit each schools' website and look into the faculty research sections. Personal projects and majors become so specialized at the graduate level that it takes a lot more to narrow down the right school. Check on gradschools.com for a broad search and then do some research into each school. Remember that microarrays may be a "hot" area right now, but cancer and aids research will be hot until the epidemics are over and we all know that is a very long way off. Biotechnology and bioinformatics have MANY different applications. Good Luck.
16993
Try checking out http://nci.nih.gov/, or perhaps contact the American Cancer Society at www.cancer.org
397377
A very good, complicated and interesting question.  Katy brought up a good point.  You could write entire book on how cell phones has changed daily life around the world.  Just think of how many business decisions are now done in real time rather than getting to a land line (telephone.)  Or how about a reporter in the field giving a story before he or she has set up the equipment to broadcast the story?  Or how about the reporting of the Iraq war where no broadcasting equipment was even available?  With cell phones, many of which now have cameras built into them, people are taking pictures of crimes as they occur.   This is also true for reporting crimes in areas that didn’t normally have phone access.\n\nSince you didn’t speak of which wireless technology you were referring to I can only assume you are talking about all wireless technology so I will discuss some others here.\n\nIn the last few years wireless networking for home computing has really taken off.  It has become much more affordable and easier to configure for the average person.  Now here is where it gets interesting.   Many new laptops have the ability for you to use a wireless networking adapter in them or with them.  Some cities, including mine in Anaheim California, are going to make the whole city wireless!   They are going to install wireless Internet transmitters all over Anaheim so everyone has a wireless connection to the Internet.  Even people visiting from out of town can use the wireless system but they have to pay a small access fee.   Can you imagine driving across the county someday and being able to access the Internet right from your car?\n\n\nLet us not forget that the first wireless technology started with the radio.  Man discovered radio in the late 1800’s.  Radio technology grew in bits and pieces but by the turn of the century wireless communications had been established.  All wireless routers and wireless Internet communication uses radio waves to send the data.\n\n\nLet us not forget RADAR.  RADAR is an acronym for Radio Detection and Ranging\nand helped us win the world war II.  One of the first uses of Microwave technology was used in RADAR in the world war II also.  Most households now use Microwaves to cook food with so radio waves also help us heat things\n\n\nWhat about television transmission?  Isn’t that also wireless?  Although many people now use cable (because they have paid for premium channels) television is a wireless technology.\n\nAnd others:\n\nRadio transponders to find lost aircraft (also a transponder)\nLo Jack stolen automobile retrieval device (also a transponder)\nNavigation\n\nRadio Frequency Identification (RFID) (also a transponder)\nRadio Frequency Identification is a way to remotely receive data from RFID tags or transponders.  They are used on toll roads and even at Mc Donald’s to buy lunch with a swipe of a small device.  They are used soo much that this needs to be researched all by itself.\n\nWhat all wireless technologies have in common is that they are all based on Radio waves.  All of things that I have mentioned are based on Radio technology \n\n\nP.S.  I usually don’t cut and paste and if I do I will say that, that is what I am doing and explain where that information came from.  I like to read information from multiple information sources then put that information together in my own words while keeping the article technically and factually correct.  And as always, I will point to web sites or other information to prove that my information is factual.
84679
Thats all I could find. Hope it helps.\n\n\nhttp://www.cfcc.cc.fl.us/news/archive/stemcells102705.htm
247149
As a mammographer, I am not a fan of breast implants. As we know, early detection of breast cancer DOES save lives. It is very hard to find an early breast cancer on mammography, even with improved techniques. The implant hides the breast tissue on the film. Please research this aspect of it. If you still decide to have implants, have them put in BEHIND the chest wall. That will allow a bit more breast tissue to be imaged during mammography. Good luck to you and please do your homework!\n\nHere are what some "experts" say. You can go to the links for additional info:\n\nBreast implant interference with imaging breast tissue, with between 22% and 83% of mammographically visualizable breast tissue obscured by breast implants. http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/breastimplants/b-adverse-events.html\nIn women without implants, mammography detected 67% of cancers. In women with implants, mammography detected 45% of cancers. \nhttp://www.breastcancer.org/breast_implant_mammogram.html\nScreening mammography missed 55% of breast cancers in women with implants, compared with only 33% among women without implants. \nhttp://www.menagainstbreastcancer.org/online_support/resources/mammography_and_breast_implants.php\n\nFor even more info: \nhttp://www.menagainstbreastcancer.org/online_support/resources/mammography_and_breast_implants.php\nhttp://www.fda.gov/cdrh/mammography/mmwebbro/mambrochure.html\n\nI have also “handled” probably over 2,000 breasts with implants.  The far majority do not feel natural.  This is especially true when the implants are about 5 years or older.
327425
Try these URL's.  Good luck\n\n\nhttp://www.sbceo.k12.ca.us/~ims/techcen/EETT/ImpactofET.pdf\n\nhttp://technologysource.org/article/impact_of_computers_on_schools/\n\nhttp://courses.wcupa.edu/fletcher/english121/projects/10b/jessy.htm\n\nhttp://www.ncrel.org/tech/effects/intro.htm