Pharmacogenetics in Cancer Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Pharmacogenetics in Cancer - Essay Example Various problems have been realized during the cancer therapy using the conventional chemotherapy. This is because to attain reasonable efficacy, a considerable degree of toxicity is needed and hence severe side-effects. Most oncologists are faced with the major challenge of the variability of the treatment responses as well as narrow therapeutic index for the anticancer drugs. Therefore, there is no doubt that the developments in molecular biology and molecular genetics, and of the associated methods have had considerable effects on the comprehension of drug action. Therefore, drawing on a variety of sources the paper will discuss pharmacogenetics in cancer. Cancer is a very unusual disease because it emanates from the accumulation of several gene mutations within the cell, thus disrupting normal cellular function as well as normal checks. Therefore, cancer cells have definite genetic profiles. As result, pharmacogenetics is helpful as a cancer therapeutic since is focuses on the genetic profiles and a person’s interaction with the drug. Pharmacogenetics can be described as the interaction between the drug and individual traits, and is very helpful in cancer therapeutics. Therefore, it is based on the clinical efficacy observations as well as tolerability profile of a drug in a person (Licinio and Wong 129). The most common challenge in cancer treatment is the related to the anticancer drugs. The pharmacogenetics can assist in the discovery, development, and individualization of the anticancer drugs.

Economics Paper Essay Example for Free

Economics Paper Essay 1: Define the term ‘equilibrium price’: The price at which quantity demanded by consumers and the quantity of goods and services supplied by firms is the same. 3: With the help of an appropriate diagram and the information in extract B, explain why the world price of sugar changed in 2009: The price of sugar rose to $0.40 per kilo in 2009 this is shown in the extract as it states that in 2009 prices in New York and London rose by 52% to its highest in almost three years. The diagram below shows how the inward shift of supply caused by poor crop harvests and India’s %40 fall in output of sugar affected the price of sugar due to its scarcity, leading to the %52 rise in price of sugar. Another factor that could have had an effect on the price of sugar would have been in 2008 there were poor crop harvests that year – this led to a low level of supply in 2008 which raised the price of sugar due to its scarcity. This poor harvest would have had something to do with the land quality –this may have affected the harvest in 2009. Supply constraints also had an effect, as due heavy rainfall the Columbian crop was damaged – the rain also washed away some of the roads used to transport the products from the field to the market. So whatever crop the farmers managed to save from the rain was then prevented from reaching market, this would have contributed to the price rise in a way similar to the diagram above. India is a main producer of sugar, so much so that its sugar output is a critical factor in determining the world price of sugar. India’s output was forecast to fall by %40 so only 15million tonnes of sugar would have been produced in the growing season – this is well below India’s sugar consumption of 23million tonnes a year. This would mean that India wouldn’t be inclined to export much of its sugar as there’s already a deficit of supply in its own country. Although, with this large fall in supply there’ll most likely be a rise in sugar price in India – the people may not be willing or able to pay the new price so whatever amount of sugar is leftover could be exported, at a price which would lead to the %52 rise in London and New York sugar prices.

Female Oppression History And Its Role Today Philosophy Essay

Female Oppression History And Its Role Today Philosophy Essay Humanistic/sameness feminism is that everyone is equal; everyone is a self no matter their gender. The main focus is on the common humanity between woman and men (Notes from 10-6). In Mills argument he states that we would be equal, however women suppress themselves into the stereotype theyre in. Years ago they did not speak up; they were expected to be the arm candy and only do what was told of them. No one had the courage to step outside the box and speak up for themselves. Women made themselves into artificial beings. They allowed the men to mold them and bake them into any form they wished. They initiated the stereotype for non-educated, child bearer, step ford wife. Mills argument was telling woman that we needed to break free from all of this instead of sitting back and watching it kill the beauty from within. Sameness feminism in his eyes was to break the stereotype against women, against discriminated groups, so that we could all be treated equally. Schechter also explains humanist feminism in her argument. She explains the problem with battered women cases and how theyre not handled properly. They need to be dealt with just as much importance as a case involving a male would, or the way any other case of that nature would be treated. If battered cases were categorized with cases of abused children or gang violence, they would receive the same strict consequences and the probability of them happening would decrease. In her article, Schechter discusses how she feels the problems should be worked out between the families. This I completely disagree with because I feel that no one, whether the victim male or female, would want to be counseled with the person who threatened their life. The victim is not going to want to work on the problems because the same situation could potentially play out again. All in all I feel that society is too concerned with keeping the families together instead of focusing on the safety of each individua l within the case. Humanist feminism in this case is not so much about making everyone equal (because women were still a suppressed gender), but making the cases against them and every discriminated race/gender qualify for equal attention. Simone de Beauvoir also discusses the idea of a humanist feminism approach. The article discusses how women are inferior to men. They lack the qualities and characteristics that would make a powerful leader. She talks about that no matter what the definition of the other is; society would always categorize a group as being that because there are two; men and women. When de Beauvoir discusses the bipolarity between the sexes, stating that men are the positive and neutral pole and women are the negative pole, it best explains the humanist feminism approach. Women are striving to become not of man, but of their equal; equal as in work distribution, income, social status, etc. They need to stop portraying us as a negative, and start treating us as a neutral gender, just like man. Question #2 Gynocentric feminism is women centered feminism. It emphasizes the point of view from a woman. It is the different fundamental attributes of men and women (Notes from 10-6). Gilligan explains this idea with two main points; justice perspective and care perspective. The justice perspective is what is right or wrong by law or how a person views justice within their own society. It is how you think the problem through based on the laws and what you know is right/wrong, rather than relying solely on your gut feeling. Care perspective is based on how you feel the situation should be handled based on your experiences. It is like the Golden Rule, Treat others the way you would want to be treated. I mix these two perspectives daily based on the situation and who is involved. With family you would lean more towards gut feeling because you have a bond with them and a love that you need to maintain. With strangers or situations you stumble across, you would use the justice perspective. This way you can handle the situation based on facts and law and both people get an equal chance. Young discusses the Five Faces of Oppression. No matter what type of group is being discriminated against or bullied because of race/gender, it all leads back to oppression in society. Woman often face these more than other categories just based on our history. We have been suppressed in every form possible and these are issues that we still have to deal with on a day-to-day basis. We deal with exploitation within the workplace; suffer from rape and battery, sovereignty, othering. Young doesnt just focus on women; he focuses on all discriminated categories and states that they will experience a different combination of the five faces at some point (from Young handout). Lorde exemplifies gynocentric feminism in the sense that women are disempowered based on the fact that their sexual and erotic behaviors are denied. Erotic in the form of being a strong suppressed feeling women have towards something the desire. It is entirely a womans feeling. In our lives we were conditioned to feel erotic only in the bedroom with our male companion. It was unheard of for woman to feel erotic with themselves or even with other women. Being only a feeling and idea from women, it can threaten patriarchy because men have no control over it. We have finally broken out of the mold and have found other means of pleasure than solely from a man. Question #3 Dominance feminism is basically stating that men are dominant and women are suppressed. It explains that the dominant figure is one who has the upper hand in politics, businesses, and religion. Marilyn Frye discusses the idea of being a Willful Virgin or a Lesbian. Her idea is that youre either a virgin, a married woman who is not having sex; one who is free and socially and sexually on her own (Pg. 330). Then youre categorized as being a tease or a bitch, or even a lesbian. On the other hand if youre openly having sex and youre a straight woman, youre a whore and easy. Youre either the stereotypical housewife or you must be a lesbian. Why cant it be that you just want to express who you really are and not fall into the same category as a majority of the women? Frye is trying to explain dominance feminism in the way that women dont even have control over their sexual desires. They are constrained and conformed to keep their bodies hidden for only their man to see. Bartky also exemplifies dominance feminism by discussing many ways in which men hold the upper hand and women are suppressed. The idea of the Panopticon is a structure that allows you a view from all angles. It gives the watchmen the overall feeling of the highest power. Thats how men want to be perceived over woman. Woman diet and focus their day around perfecting the latest fad or trend. They are expected to be soft and delicate, and keep to themselves. Our bodies are expected to be a timeless piece; never aging, never showing sign of wear. We are so used to this way of life that even when no one is there to tell us how to act or what to do, we have disciplined ourselves so much that these behaviors are natural. Kimmel discusses the idea of masculinity. We believe that every man has manhood. We shrug off their actions because we expect it from them. If men are to branch out from the stereotype then we categorize them as gay. Men judge men just as the world judges women. It is just as much of a competition for them as any other being. They see who can get the nicest car, best job, biggest muscles, and the best looking girl. They use us to their advantage because it means that they must be doing something right. Men hold the power to overthrow another mans power. They fear that another can strip away their exterior and find that they dont possess the qualities that an ultra-man should. They themselves are the dominant gender, yet they suppress within their society. It is not a matter of whether or not what theyre doing (suppressing women or themselves) is right, its more about keeping their mouths shut to avoid being frowned upon. So all in all, men have the choice to either remain dominant ov er women as well as their own gender, or fear that they will be excluded and shut out from their manhood. Question #6 I believe that womens personal lives matter in the case of sameness feminism. The whole idea behind creating men and women equal depends solely on their lives on a personal level. I believe that whether or not women will continue to dig themselves farther into the pit of suppression will determine which way feminists will lean. The idea of battered women is also a big personal issue. You have a choice whether or not to act upon it or hide because you feel you wont be taken seriously. Of course women do this to themselves, but its only because of the way weve been conditioned all of these years. Gynocentric feminism rests solely on a womens personal level; mainly because it translates into women centered feminism. It emphasizes a womans point of view and focuses on what would benefit her. The care perspective goes hand in hand with this. That is how we react to situation based on our internal feelings and past experiences weve had. We then dissect the situation and handle it in a way that we would expect it to be if it were us on the receiving end. How we deal with exploitation and the suppressing of our erotic feelings can determine the class of woman that you become. We are conditioned to be of a certain nature, however it is our duty to break the mold and create a new meaning for the word woman. Dominance feminism is the main issue in regards to othering of the female gender. It is exactly what it states; men are dominant and women are suppressed. Whether women stick to that suppression is the real situation. We have become so disciplined within ourselves that we act without being told. We have conformed ourselves to be the picturesque wife; flawless skin, perfect body, and well-mannered. Not all women want to be perceived in that light, but without it wed be ridiculed. Men hold such power over us. They control our actions, words, movements, sexuality. If we break the mold we are then placed into a new category; lesbian, whore, or even psycho. These are all things that we have to take into consideration on a daily basis. We walk on eggshells trying not to bring attention to ourselves in a negative sense. Whether it is in the workplace or out having drinks with our friends, we try to keep a cool and collective faà §ade so that we can prove to men that they dont have the control. We hold jobs in high positions, we run for president; we have our work published in books when it was unheard of. We have begun to crack the glass, now we just need to do something to make it shatter.

Ancient Egyptian :: essays research papers

The ancient statues and pottery of the Golden Stone Age of Greece were much advanced in spectacular ways. The true facts of Zeus’s main reason for his statue. The great styles of the Kouros and the Kore. The story of The Blinding of Polphemus, along with the story of Cyclops. The Dori and Ionic column stone temples that were built in Greece that had an distinctive look. The true colors of the vase, Aryballos. The vase that carried liquids from one place to another. The Lyric Poetry that was originally a song to be sung to the accompaniment of the lyre. Zeus was considered, according to Homer, the father of the gods and of mortals. He did not create either gods or mortals; he was their father in the sense of being the protector and ruler both of the Olympian family and of the human race. He was lord of the sky, the rain god, and the cloud gatherer, who wielded the terrible thunderbolt. His breastplate was the aegis, his bird the eagle, his tree the oak. Zeus presided over the gods on Mount Olympus in Thessaly. His principal shrines were at Dodona, in Epirus, the land of the oak trees and the most ancient shrine, famous for its oracle, and at Olympia, where the Olympian Games were celebrated in his honor every fourth year. The Nemean games, held at Nemea, northwest of Argos, were also dedicated to Zeus. Zeus was the youngest son of the Titans Cronus and Rhea and the brother of the deities Poseidon, Hades, Hestia, Demeter, and Hera. According to one of the ancient myths of the birth of Zeus, Cronus, fearing that he might be dethroned by one of his children, swallowed them as they were born. Upon the birth of Zeus, Rhea wrapped a stone in swaddling clothes for Cronus to swallow and concealed the infant god in Crete, where he was fed on the milk of the goat Amalthaea and reared by nymphs. When Zeus grew to maturity, he forced Cronus to disgorge the other children, who were eager to take vengeance on their father. Zeus henceforth ruled over the sky, and his brothers Poseidon and Hades were given power over the sea and the underworld, respectively. The earth was to be ruled in common by all three. Beginning with the writings of the Greek poet Homer, Zeus is pictured in two very different ways.

Cannibalism Among Dinosaurs :: Anthropology Essays Paleontology Papers

Cannibalism Among Dinosaurs Typically, when an individual browses through various newspapers or watches the evening news they are most likely to see or hear some new and groundbreaking news concerning a scientific breakthrough. As I was looking through various scientific journals I came across an article that caught my eye for numerous reasons, but one in particular. The heading of the article read, â€Å"Cannibal dinosaurs revealed by tooth marks.† These prehistoric creatures that have been viewed by the public for centuries as being wild and ferocious beasts, are presently being seen more then just that. Recent evidence originating in Madagascar is leading researches in the direction that dinosaurs consumption of food did not strictly adhere to the food chain but instead fed amongst their own kind. This recent discovery has left scientists with many questions to be answered. The discovery is quite important because any research up until now has failed to uncover any evidence that would reveal that dinosaurs fed among their own kind. Ray Rogers whom has been leading the ten-year excavation states in the article that there are at least 14 current day animals that still practice cannibalism such as lions, komodo dragons, crocodiles, hyenas, black bears and grasshopper mice, but in contrast, any evidence of cannibalism among dinosaurs is sparse. This article was also particularly interesting to me because this is a recent find and there is little to no literature published concerning the idea that dinosaurs may have been cannibals. This is a new fossil find in which makes any and all research being administered equally as important. The time period of these fossils date back nearly 65 to 75 million years ago to the late –Cretaceous period when dinosaurs neared the end of their existence on earth. The fossils that have been discovered that tend to persuade researchers to believe dinosaurs were cannibals have been located in Northwest Madagascar’s bone beds. Rogers states, â€Å" Fossilized soil samples from the same region are red and oxidized, hinting that the area was arid, with food in short supply. The animals may have traveled to the river to find sustenance and died there.

Church Reform :: European Europe History

Church Reform The Reformation of European religion in the 16th century cannot be generally attributed to the secular spirit of the Italian Renaissance. Although the peasants saw bishops and abbots as part of a wealthy and oppressive ruling class and rebelled against the Roman Catholic Church for reasons primarily pertaining to the lavish adornments used by those aforementioned, their power was not great enough, nor did their reasons carry enough clout to start a reformation movement throughout Europe: that job was accomplished by those already having some, however small, social or religious power, such as the monk Martin Luther, the accomplished priest and lawyer Jean Cauvin, and King Henry VIII of England. The Lutheran and Calvinist Reformations were very similar in principle, although the Lutheran Reformation was less widespread. Luther and Calvin held that not mere abuses of the Roman Catholic Church needed correcting, but that the Catholic Church itself was wrong in principle. Luther's cause for reformation of 16th century European religion came from his unnatural paranoia that he was damned. He had problems convincing himself that his spirit was pure and that he would go to heaven; internal distress raged within him about the awful omnipotence of God, his own insignificant existence in comparison, and his apprehensiveness of the devil. His personal problems would not yield to the existing manners of assuring oneself that he/she was headed for heaven such as sacraments, alms, prayer attendance at Mass, and assorted "good works." Luther solved the problem, however, by believing that good works were the consequence and external evidence of an inner grace, but in no way the cause of th is grace. He felt that if one had faith in themselves, the religion, and God, then good works would manifest themselves because of it. This was Luther's doctrine of justification by faith. Luther was then involved in various events that provided for the spreading of Lutheranism, albeit sometimes indirectly. The agitation that Lutheranism was creating throughout Europe had revolutionary side effects where the reforming religious spirit was mistaken for that of a social and economic one, especially in Germany in the 1520s. A league of imperial knights, adopting Lutheranism, attacked their neighbors, the church-states of the Rhineland, hoping by annexations to enlarge their own meager territories. In 1524, the peasants of a large part of Germany revolted due to thoughts stirred up by preachers that took Luther's ideas a little too far: anyone could see for himself what was right.

Compare and Contrast the Characteristics of a Leader and Jesus Essay

What makes a leader? Power? Authority? Status? What characteristics make up a perfect leader? These are one of the hardest questions to have a clear answer as all people have different perspective and standard in the picture of a leader. The best answer only comes from the Words of God which is the Bible. It is only Jesus’ leadership which is true, honest and righteous. Jesus describes a leader like this: â€Å"You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave—just as the Son of Man did not come to be saved, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many† (Matthew 20:25-28, NIV). Jesus’ life was pure, honest and humble. The reason He came down to earth giving up His throne was to save the people from their sins. He gave so many teachings and showed miracles to many people so that they could believe Him and follow His name. He respected others as well as little children and helped people become saved. The relationship of Jesus’ ways and the ways of the skills of normal leader are somewhat similar and different. There are some leaders who are sincere and faithful to his or her people but there are also leaders who are infamous and criticized because of poor leadership skills. The standard of having great leadership is different from Jesus and the world. First to explain the leadership skills of worldly leaders, there are some qualities of being a good leader. They are empathy, consistency, honesty, communication, flexibility, ability to delegate, confidence, commitment, positive attitude and lastly creativity. With these leadership skills, there would be no problem in running a company or leading a union, making lot of followers as well. The skills above show the best way to get along well with the followers. However, the most of the leaders find difficult having all these leadership skills as human by nature become Jesus, as a leader of the 12 disciples and thousands of people who followed him to hear his Words, he showed great skills of leadership and this is shown in the Bible, precisely in the Books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Some of his distinct actions that showed his teaching were the washing of the disciples’ feet. It is shown in John chapter 13 verses 1 to 20. Although he was in a position of a leader, he humbled himself and showed first to the disciples of how to serve. There are some leaders in the world who followed God’s way to be a leader. One example is Apostle Paul; I would say was a man in history who was very similar to Jesus’ leadership skills. He is one of the important characters who met Jesus personally and completely changed his life according to Jesus’ ways. Apostle Paul was a leader of many churches. He led his people quite differently from the leaders of the normal world today. Apostle Paul, not only served the members of the church by writing letters and spreading the gospel but also he put his leadership into action. He was suffered and persecuted by many gentiles and he tried to tell the truth just as he taught his people to always be faithful in God. Also his important aspect of being a leader like Jesus was praying for his people. Jesus prayed for his disciples and even in his crucifixion, He prayed to God to forgive all the people in the world (Luke 23:34, NIV). In the books of the Bible which Apostle Paul wrote, he greets in the letter by saying that he is praying for all the members of the church (Philippians 1:3~5, NIV). Another leader in the past whom many people admired and respected was Abraham Lincoln who was the President of America. He was a Christian who prayed for his people. He was not self centered but listened to others’ thoughts and opinions. He saw his country in many viewpoints so understood the people in different classes. He was always aware of his weaknesses and asked God to help and guide in whatever problems or situations he was in. He did not forget to share the happiness and grievances of any events that occurred in America. This showed that he was not just acting as a leader but involving all his citizens and letting them participate in his concerns. These are the examples of deal leaders who followed Jesus’ way. Although there were amazing leaders in the past that everyone admired, there were also leaders in the past who were infamous and blamed. Their leadership skills brought pain and suffering to many people. Kim Jung Il, North Korea’s president is one example that shows how he misused the leadership skills and made the North Koreans suffer with poverty. His worst leadership skill is having absolute authority. This totally goes against the characteristics of Jesus’ leadership. Jesus taught in his life to serve others first as a leader and be humble. This can also be seen in the Bible, it says â€Å"Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up† (Jacob 4:10, NIV) â€Å"And the most proud shall stumble and fall, and none shall raise him up: and I will kindle a fire in his cities, and it shall devour all round about him† (Jeremiah 50:32, NIV). President Kim’s haughtiness of having all the authority eventually led the North Koreans suffer and die and also made the country be one of the worst countries in the world. He ruled the country all in his way and order; he received all the goods coming from the foreign countries which tried to help the poor North Koreans; he had serious nuclear obsession and used all the money in inventing new war weapons. He commanded all the North Koreans to worship and bow down before him only and no one else. Kim Jung Il had no leadership skills of serving others, having good communication, and he tried to ignore the conditions of his people. In conclusion, although leading like Jesus can seem the hardest way, it is the real true way to be a leader. There are many aspects in worldly leadership skills which are important and helpful, however I believe that is not the ultimate skill to be a good leader. Just as Jesus showed us through His life of how to live like God’s children as a role of leader, we have to try hard to act in that way so that we could be a true leader who helps the follower go in a correct direction. Jesus’ main emphasis was being a humble leader, serving others first before being served. I believe this is correct that leaders should be examples first before just demanding the followers to do it.