(づ •. •)? Medical Dilemmas Blog!

Hey guys! So, recently there has been a breakthrough in the cancer world, specifically a new cure. The recent development of the mRNA Cancer Vaccine. According to SciTechDaily, the vaccine iteself delivers stunning results. The new expieremental mRNA vaccine has shown the ability to awaken the immune system and wipe out tumors in mice! This is amazing news as studies that work on mice often work similarly on humans due to biological makeup. The effects of radiotherapy are devistating, most patients stating that their faces age, their immune systems weaken rapidly, and survival is not guaranteed. So, being near a possible vaccine to one of the most deadly genetic mutations is beyond incredible. However, miracles don't always come true. According to USN, Robert F. Kennedy made some major budget cuts for the oncologists and scientists involved in creating the vaccine. Now, many oncologists and scientists warn that extensive cuts to mRNA funding will have devastating impacts on cancer vaccine development. As stated by USN; "While HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has expressed support for using the science for oncology and the funding cuts don’t extend to oncology research, scientists warn that the larger campaign against the technology and funding cuts to other areas like viruses and infectious diseases will cause confusion and significant delays to what could be a groundbreaking lifeline." Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman were the pioneering scientists whose dedication to understanding messenger RNA (mRNA) has reshaped modern medicine. Their foundational contributions to mRNA technology moved it from a theoretical concept to a practical tool. This work has paved the way for advancements in various therapeutic areas, creating a new approach to disease prevention and treatment. However, their work is now at risk due to these budget cuts which I find obscure and dispicible. This is due to the fact that if something is proven to be working that could benefit all of humankind, whi stop it? According to Canadian Cancer Society, 1 in 4 Canadians die every year to some form of cancer, and many early on in their lives. So why stop now? The expieremental aspects of creating the cure follow ethical guidelines, and are effective. This puzzles me, primarily the fact that we have the resources to solve a grand issue, but haphazardly the budget is cut and for a partially plausable reason. Issues like this really make me think "why?"

Hello fellow concerned HS students, okay so I know well all have the same questions about the EXACT same thing; Why do some university programs regarding the medical field are more recognized than others (when most of them do the same stuff). I know we all try hard for the sole purpose to be successful in life, so here's my answer to this lingering question (keep in mind, my answer), so we all know universities mostly divide programs into life science, health science, bachelors of sciences (then into physical, chemical, and biological sciences). Keep in mind that life sciences focuses on studying living organisms and their relationships to the environment. If you like bio specifically genetics, zoology, botany or microbiology this is for you! This also relates to the biological sciences. Then if you like learning about practical applications about medicine, Health Science focuses on the study of health, well-being, and the prevention and treatment of diseases through scientific research and education, essentially, if you like biology and want to be a doctor, nurse, nutrition or epidemiology this is for you!. Depending on what you are interested to persue in your future, it can relate to more of the chemical side or biological side of science. Then physical sciences (not fitting into life or health sciences much, rather just listed as a bachelor of science that you choose a major in) like medical physics (which I want to persue) and earth sciences, these sciences focus more on the physical aspects and their practical applications. Since I would like to persue radiology, I would choose a bachelor of science as a pre-requiste to become a radiologist is to persue some type of medical physics (***You can also do health science and be fine, but I just wanted to hone into the physical aspects of radiography). Now regarding prestige, I believe this whole system came along due to selectivity first of all, cause certain programs (cough, cough, Mac) are harder to get into due to their selectivity. However, this doesn't neccessarily mean that they are better. More times than not, you will recieve the same quality of education from any university you apply to, you just have to commit to one that suits your needs. For example, instead of applying to one because of name-sake, attend open houses, and talk to professors, see how they teach and see if you can succeed in that enviornment. Rest assured that just because it is considered a "better" program, more times than not you will recieve average or even worse teaching (and possibly even grade deflation). Recently, I went to a university and even though it is not #1 in the program I want to go into, I still found the enviornment more engaging and suited towards my learning needs. Half of this prestige is honestly all a bunch of hocus-pocus, even though a program is popular and considered more difficult to get into (and woos your aunties and uncles), it does not mean it's better, and it is not very achievable (esepcially if you want to be able to enjoy your uni life). So, my fellow comrades, be wise when choosing your programs, and choose what is best for you not your mom, dad, uncle or even your dog.