Don’t Believe the Hype – 10 Persistent Cancer Myths Debunked

Google ‘cancer’ and you’ll be faced with millions of web pages. And the number of YouTube videos you find if you look up ‘cancer cure’ is similarly vast. The problem is that much of the information out there is at best inaccurate, or at worst dangerously misleading. There are plenty of evidence-based, easy to understand pages about cancer, but there are just as many, if not more, pages spreading myths. And it can be hard to distinguish fact from fiction, as much of the inaccurate information looks and sounds perfectly plausible. In this post, we want to set the record straight on 10 cancer myths we regularly encounter. Myth 1: Cancer is a man-made, modern disease It might be more prominent in the public consciousness now than in times gone by, but cancerisn’t just a ‘modern’, man-made disease of Western society. While it’s certainly true that global lifestyle-related diseases like cancer are on the rise, the biggest risk factor for cancer is age. Myth 2: Superfoods prevent cancer

DO ENORMOUS MAGNETS AFFECT THE HUMAN BODY? WITH the development of powerful magnets for physics research, industrial uses and even transportation, increasing numbers of people are being exposed to magnetic fields thousands of times stronger than those in which humans evolved. In the neighborhood of the giant magnets in some laboratories visitors can feel the pull on nails in their shoes. Japan is developing a magnetically levitated vehicle which will subject both passengers and crew to strong magnetic fields. Magnetism is not felt by the human senses in any obvious way, nor is there any substantial evidence that it is harmful. Probably the best-known sensory effect of magnetism is shown in total darkness, when the head of a person whose eyes are fully adapted to the dark is put between the poles of an alternating current magnet. The effort at Berkeley, as explained yesterday by Dr. Dr. The other sensors of the retina, the rods, cannot discriminate color but are sensitive to dim light. The overall study, directed by Dr.

Controversial T. Rex Soft Tissue Find Finally Explained The controversial discovery of 68-million-year-old soft tissue from the bones of a Tyrannosaurus rex finally has a physical explanation. According to new research, iron in the dinosaur's body preserved the tissue before it could decay. The research, headed by Mary Schweitzer, a molecular paleontologist at North Carolina State University, explains how proteins — and possibly even DNA — can survive millennia. "What we found was unusual, because it was still soft and still transparent and still flexible," Schweitzer told LiveScience. T. rextissue? The find was also controversial, because scientists had thought proteins that make up soft tissue should degrade in less than 1 million years in the best of conditions. Then, in 2007, Schweitzer and her colleagues analyzed the chemistry of the T. rex proteins. "The problem is, for 300 years, we thought, 'Well, the organics are all gone, so why should we look for something that's not going to be there?' Iron lady Searching for soft tissue

A genomic portrait of the emergence, ev - PubMed Mobile Cornelius Nepos: Lives of Eminent Commanders (1886) pp. 305-450 Cornelius Nepos: Lives of Eminent Commanders (1886) pp. 305-450. Translated by the Rev. John Selby Watson, MA Preface 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Fragments I do not doubt that there will be many,1 Atticus, who will think this kind of writing 2 trifling in its nature, and not sufficiently adapted to the characters of eminent men, when they shall find it related who taught Epaminondas music, or see it numbered among his accomplishments, that he danced gracefully, and played skilfully on the flutes 3. If these readers will but understand that the same things are not becoming or unbecoming among all people, but that every thing is judged by the usages of men's forefathers, they will not wonder that we, in setting forth the excellencies of the Greeks, have had regard to their manners. But both the size of my intended volume, and my haste to relate what I have undertaken, prevent me from saying more on this point. I. II. III. IV. V.