the premed perspective

Volume 09: Issue 01http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~pmpnews

The PreMeD Perspective October 2008

Editor In ChiefSarah Pan

Design / Layout EditorsLarry Cai

Financial CoordinatorsAditi GuptaEric Trieu

Publicity CoordinatorYoungwon Youn

Copy EditorKristi Jhangiani

Associate Copy EditorsAyesha Punjabi

Eric Trieu

Contributing WritersSaad MohammadYoungwon YounStephanie NgDhruv Marwha

Akshay NathawatAditi GuptaSusan Chen

Eric TrieuKevin J. Li

Andrew Tran

Interested in receiving the newsletter via email or becom-ing part of the staff? Email:[email protected]

Editor’s Note

About the Newsletter

The PreMed Perspective is not an official publication of the Associated Students of the University of California (ASUC). The views expressed herein are the views of the writers and not necessarily the views of the ASUC nor the views of the University of California, Berkeley.

Recently, many controversial issues have been thrown into the political arena for a good debate-- one of them being healthcare. If you think that politics has a

firm grasp over almost anything in the United States, you’re probably right. Even in medicine, the field where physicians have expertise, the politician remains as the author of healthcare policies. From Obama’s health care plan to government funding in scientific research, our writers explore the role that politics plays in the decision-making process for the future of healthcare. In less than a month, many of you will make an important decision in choosing the next leader for the United States. When that day arrives, it is our hope that you will become a well-informed voter, especially in the realm of healthcare and politics. Enjoy.

Sarah PanEditor-in-Chief

Each month, our newsletter covers a themed topic and includes feature articles related to this theme that may be relevant and of interest to the pre-med community here at Berkeley. Every month the newsletter includes interviews with important fig-ures in healthcare, as well as graduate/medical school information and local volun-teering highlights. Working in conjunction with various pre-medical organizations, we seek to educate the community on events held by these organizations for the better-ment of the entire pre-med population.

2 The PreMedPerspective

StAff

in this issueMcCain’s Health Care Plan

Universal or PrivateHealthcare systems in Canada have proved to be more efficient than United States’ healthcare system, but which one is ultimately better?

Political Stem Cells

With a debatable topic like stem cell research, both parties must work together for the society’s benefit.

Medical School Profile Women’s HealthJohns Hopkins medical school is evaluated in this week's installment of Medical School Profiles.

Controversies related to female reproductive health

are as prominent now as they have been in the past.

Government and Research Science and PoliticsResearch plays an important role in our lives here at UC Berkeley, but how does the United States Government factor in?

Politics play a big part in scientific research. Scientists

are returning the favor by entering the realm of policy

themselves.

05 . . . . . . . . . . .

15 . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . 04

. . 12

3The PreMedPerspective

Learn about Obama’s position on Health Care for the upcoming elections.

Obama’s Health Care Plan

An extensive report on the specific aspects of McCain’s Health care plan.

British Healthcare. . . 07Interested in differing healthcare systems? How does the British system measure up?

Chinese Medicine . . . . . . . . . . 13Relationship between two leading countries is fostered through research into the integration of modern and traditional medicine.

The Joint Policy14 . . . . . . . . . . . .A quick review about the current status of medical

marijuana- and why it’s such a big deal.


Med

icAL

School

Prof

ile

The Johns Hopkins University’s School of Medicine, established in 1893, was the first medical school to admit women in the United States, the first to use rubber gloves during surgery, and the first to develop renal dialysis and CPR. Clearly, Johns Hopkins has a history filled with innovation. Some of the most significant advances in the medical field have been made at Johns Hopkins, including the discovery of restriction enzymes, discovery of the brain’s natural opiates lead to the study of neurotransmitter pathways and function, and the identification of the three types of polio viruses. Johns Hopkins has also witnessed the founding of many disciplines within medicine, ranging from urology to neurosurgery and endocrinology.

Johns hopkins medicAl School

History

Student LifeLocated in Baltimore, the largest city in Maryland, Johns Hopkins is a vibrant and

active campus. With many newly renovated living facilities on and off campus, Johns Hopkins has many flexible options for housing. Students have vast options to take advan-tage of ranging from hundreds of student organizations to many athletic events, not just to watch but also to participate in. Less than an hour away from Washington D.C., Johns Hopkins allows students the opportunity to explore the social, cultural, and historical en-tertainment of America’s capital.

Johns Hopkins requires a year each of university biology with lab, general chemistry with lab, organic chemistry with lab, and physics with lab. Also, admissions requires at least 3 years of studies in the humanities or social and behavioral sciences and one year of mathematics including calculus and statistics. Students are strongly encouraged to have a working knowledge of computers and to take mammalian biology. Recent MCAT scores, an AMCAS application, a secondary application, and two letters of recommenda-tion are required for a complete application.

Admissions Requirements

At Johns Hopkins, the focus of the first year is to eliminate the typical stresses that accompany the transition to medical school. The curriculum for the first year emphasizes the normal human structure and function. It is designed gradually to adjust the students to their new environment and new profession. Molecules and Cells, Anatomy and Devel-opmental Biology, Neuroscience, and Organ Systems are the four main topics that are covered in the four quarters of the first year. To cover all aspects of a medical career, each week students accompany physicians to patient diagnosis and attend a weekly presentation of research papers by faculty researchers. In the second year, the pace quickens, involving organ systems in human pathophysiology, learning to take patient histories and giving physical examinations, as well as more specific laboratory classes throughout the year. The third and fourth year in the program involves individualized plans for each student. Depending on intended specialization, clinicians are assigned and work with the students in clinic covering certain required fundamentals as well as career spe-cific techniques.

Type o f Schoo l :P r i va te

Schoo l Uses AMCAS?Yes

Ro l l i ng Admiss ions?Yes

Ave rage MCAT:35Q

App l i can ts Accep ted :5 .8%

App l i ed ( I n -S ta te ) :442

In te rv i ewed ( I n -S ta te ) :38 .4%

App l i ed (Ou t o f S ta te ) :5706

I n te r v i ewed (Ou t o f S ta te ) :13 .6%

Class S i ze :118

In S ta te Tu i t i on :$31 ,300

Ou t o f S ta te Tu i t i on :$31 ,300

Just the FActs

By: kevin J. Li

Curriculum


By: AyeshA punjAbi

Unquestionably, a society’s political code of ethics will influence the manner in which it practices medicine.

Everything from fourteenth-century Europe’s superstitious response to bubonic plague to Eastern medicine’s distinctive approach to the ailments that affect us worldwide is rooted in some sort of societal morality that is inevitably intertwined with politics. Even Madame Pomfrey’s running of the Hogwarts clinic in the Harry Potter series reflects a reverence for effi-ciency that underlies the entire magical community.

Twenty-first century America is no exception to this general trend. This is particularly apparent in our approach to women’s health; historically as much as today, the healthcare services offered to women tell us much about the gender-related as-sumptions that we make as a culture. When choosing policy-makers, it is important for voters to consider the implications that candidates’ political ideologies have for the practice of medicine.

When Margaret Sanger disseminated information about birth control in the early 1900’s, religious authorities were not the only ones to pose opposition. At one point, she was forced to leave the country when she was charged with distributing illegal information about birth control; she was arrested upon operating a birth control clinic, and it was her court appeal that led to the change in legal interpretation enabling married wom-en to seek birth control advice.

Today, our controversies are different. What happens when a birth control vaccine appears that protects against a sexually transmitted infection that afflicts seventy percent of sexually active persons and is strongly associated with cervical can-cer – but the vaccine is most effective for girls whom society deems too young for sex? The Food and Drug Administration approved Gardasil, a human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, in June of 2006 for females between the ages of nine and twenty-six.

Despite the fact that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recom-mend Gardasil, only two out of every ten women in the ap-

proved age group have received the vaccine. Certainly, the high cost of the vaccine has much to do with the fact that an insuf-ficient number of women have received it. However, trepidation about immunizing young girls against a disease related to sexual activity plays a significant role in the low number of vaccinations. Some physicians have recommended making Gardasil available to even younger children, so as to altogether remove the concept of the vaccine as sex-related; this is how the Hepatitis B vaccine attained prominence.

Because we don’t live in a Harry Potter book, our society cer-tainly faces controversies related to healthcare. What isn’t con-troversial, however, is the fact that we as a society must remain cognizant of the extent to which political morality is affecting our practice of medicine, and must question whether or not the moral codes by which we are abiding are in fact worth abiding by. Oth-erwise, the norms that govern our healthcare may prove to be detrimental.

The Academy of Evolutionary Metaphysics. Chapter 12, “Sexual Morality.” Shattering the Sacred Myths. Copyright 2005.

Springen, Karen. “Why are HPV Vaccine Rates so Low?” Newsweek web exclusive, http://www.newsweek.com/id/115329. 25 February 2008.

“Understanding Cancer Series: HPV Vaccine.” National Cancer Institute. June 2006. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/understandingcancer/HPV-vaccine/allpages.

Women’s Health: The Political Conundrum

Test names are the trademarks of their respective owners, who are not affiliated with The Princeton Review. The Princeton Review and The Princeton Review logo are trademarks registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by The Princeton Review, Inc., which is not affiliated with Princeton University.

800-2Review (800-273-8439) PrincetonReview.com/

Classes start soon. Call or click to enroll:

Because at the end of theday, it’s all about your

We don’t rest until you get thescore you want.

– 102 hours - more classroom hours thanyou’ll need– 17 full-length proctored practice MCAT's– 22 Hours of Verbal preparation– Specialist instructors -- An expertinstructor for each subject– Guaranteed results

MCAT score

MCAT

GE_FLY002.qxd 3/18/08 6:22 PM Page 1


The debate about the British healthcare system has been ongoing, and has recently become an

even more prevalent concern with the presidential elec-tion just around the corner. Many bloggers and news sites have argued that the British healthcare system is lacking and faulty. Astonishingly, kidney cancer patients are being denied critical drugs as a result of the univer-sal healthcare system. According to Telegraph news, “This decision will mean that the UK will have the poor-est survival figures [for cancer] in Europe.”

Could this really be true? Healthcare within the highly touted European system reporting low cancer survival rates? It took me a moment before I realized that the quote had the preposition “in Europe” at the end of the sentence. Aha. So compared to the rest of modernized world, it should still be relatively high, right? A quick Google search later yielded a table that provided sur-vival rates between countries for males that have con-tracted cancer. For those of you interested, the United States topped the charts at 66 percent, 6 percent higher than the 2nd highest (Sweden). England was a lowly 44 percent, just 6 percent above Poland. Interestingly enough, despite England’s nationalized health services (NHS) spending 3 times more on healthcare, England is still on par with Poland (Telegraph News). Cancer ex-perts in England claim these high national expenditures on “late diagnosis and long waiting lists” (Telegraph News).

According to NHS’s website:

“The NHS is committed to providing quality care that meets the needs of everyone, is free at

the point of need, and is based on a patient’s clini-cal need, not their ability to pay. The NHS will not exclude people because of their health status or ability to pay.”

Whoa. This almost makes too much sense. It is definitely at odds with the existing American health policy which seems to be primarily profit and com-petition-driven. Not that the American philosophy to-wards health is necessarily 100% bad—indeed, our doctrines certainly drives competition and is certainly more choice-based than that of England’s. Doctors in

the NHS, for instance, cannot prescribe drugs that the govern-ment doesn’t choose to buy. Furthermore, if English citizens want a private doctor, they are still required to contribute mon-ey towards the nationalized healthcare system.

Okay, so there doesn’t seem to be one absolute answer to the nationalized vs. privatized healthcare debate. I checked out some more scientific studies, here’s what I found: Accord-ing to one study, “93% agree that the NHS should continue to be funded from UK taxes and remain free at point of use.” This statistic is consistent with the fact that 8% of the UK utilizes private healthcare services. In America, 52% of doctors favor a nationalized healthcare system. Well, the British seem to like their healthcare system well enough and it seems to work well for them.

So at the end of the day, what can we take from all this? The most important thing, really, is to understand that there are plusses and minuses to both privatized and nationalized healthcare, and there is no absolute “better” of the two. I’ve seen too many people who blindly claim that [random policy A] is unequivocally better than [random policy B]. Even though it is important to hold opinions, I believe that it is more important to be as educated as possible on the matter, and to be able to appreciate what both sides of the argument have to offer.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/health/2512639/Kidney-patients-denied-too-expensive-life-extending-drugs.htmlhttp://www.bma.org.uk/ap.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/PDFnhssystreform2007/$FILE/48751Surveynhsreform.pdfhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560849/UK-cancer-survival-rate-lowest-in-Europe.html

LeArning About HeAlthcAre

Join Eric on a journey as he ventures into the world of British healthcare.

By: eric trieu

Test names are the trademarks of their respective owners, who are not affiliated with The Princeton Review. The Princeton Review and The Princeton Review logo are trademarks registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by The Princeton Review, Inc., which is not affiliated with Princeton University.

800-2Review (800-273-8439) PrincetonReview.com/

Classes start soon. Call or click to enroll:

Because at the end of theday, it’s all about your

We don’t rest until you get thescore you want.

– 102 hours - more classroom hours thanyou’ll need– 17 full-length proctored practice MCAT's– 22 Hours of Verbal preparation– Specialist instructors -- An expertinstructor for each subject– Guaranteed results

MCAT score

MCAT

GE_FLY002.qxd 3/18/08 6:22 PM Page 1


McCAin’s HeAlth CAre Position A Key to Victory?

November 4th is coming up fast, and that can only mean one thing: the 2008 Presidential elections. For some,

the decision will be effortless, but for others, choosing whom to vote for will not be quite as easy. Being an informed voter is key to a smooth decision making process. When it comes to the issues, health care is one of the most important topics for voters in this year’s election. Knowing where each candidate stands on this issue is key in deciding whom to vote into the White House.

John McCain, the official Republican candidate for the 2008 Presidential race, agrees that health care is an important issue, and has outlined a comprehensive plan in order to dis-tinguish himself from the other presidential candidates. Mc-Cain is against publicly funded health care, universal health care, or health coverage mandates. He would allow citizens to purchase health insurance nationwide instead of limiting them to in-state companies, and to buy insurance through any provider they choose as well as through their employers or buying direct from an insurance company. McCain favors tax credits of up to $2,500 for individuals and up to $5,000 for families that purchase health insurance without going through their employer. McCain would pay for these tax credits by

eliminating the tax break currently offered to employers for providing health insurance to employees. To help people who are denied coverage by insurance companies because of pre-existing conditions, McCain would work with states to cre-ate what he calls a Guaranteed Access Plan. This plan would reduce the number of uninsured by 1 million by 2009 and 5 million by 2013. It would also raise the national debt by $1.3 trillion over 10 years, according to one estimate.

McCain’s position on Medicare is that its overall growth must be reduced. Medicare is the social insurance program administered by the United States government that provides health insurance coverage to people 65 and over. In April 2008, McCain proposed that seniors with higher incomes should pay higher premiums for government-provided prescription drug benefits so as to reduce federal spending on health care.

His health care plan has an estimated annual cost of $7 billion, according to McCain’s health-policy experts. On April 30, his campaign acknowledged that the health plan he had outlined would have the effect of increasing tax payments for some workers, primarily those with high incomes and expen-sive health plans. However, to lower healthcare costs, McCain favors increasing competition amongst insurers as well as pharmaceutical companies.

McCain has certainly put an extensive effort into his health care reform program, and he is hoping that his plan for health care, along with his positions on other issues, will win him the ticket to the White House. Are the American people ready for a health care system controlled by them, as McCain is pro-posing, or controlled by the government, as McCain claims his opponent, Barack Obama, is proposing? The answer will be known in less than two months.

“Straight talk on Health System Reform.” JohnMcCain.com - McCain-Palin 2008. 18 Sept. 2008 <http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm>. “Political Positions of John McCain.” Political Positions of John McCain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 18 Sept. 2008. 18 Sept. 2008 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/political_positions_of_john_mccain#social_security_and_medicare>.

Are McCain’s views on health care going to get him the votes he needs to get the Presidential nomination?

By: SAAd MohAmmAd

http://www.digitaljournal.com/img/7/9/9/0/2/2/i/4/2/9/o/MccainVP.jpg


By: Youngwon Youn

Presidential candidate Ba-rack Obama has a plan to im-prove America’s health care system. What he hopes to push through upon election is a re-form that will lend a caring hand to the 46 million Americans who are currently uninsured, among which 8 million are children. In order to accomplish this, he intends to build a nationalized healthcare program that will provide essential medical care for everybody and anybody in need. Above all, he hopes to do away with the current health-care system—one that refuses coverage for those who have certain preexisting conditions or illnesses. In 2007 he stated, “The time has come for universal health care in America… I am absolutely determined that by the end of the first term of the next president, we should have universal health care in this country.”

With this goal in mind, Obama has put forth a proposition that guarantees healthcare eligibility for everyone, includ-

ing those who are self-employed or work in small businesses. The ben-efits that people will receive under this program will be mirrored after the Federal Employees Health Ben-efits Program (FEHBP), the health package that Senators themselves receive. The benefits of this package cover all essential medical needs such as maternity leave and mental health care. Furthermore, in order to ensure that the quality and efficiency of this new public program will re-main high, participating insurance companies will be required to submit reports to guarantee that standards

are being met. Further ensuring a high quality health

care system, the Obama-Biden plan also debuts what has been called the “Porta-

bility and Choice” feature of their new public program. This feature allows those with part of the new healthcare program to switch jobs without having to worry about what type of coverage they’ll be receiving. The National Health Insurance Exchange will serve as a regulatory program for private in-surances, guaranteeing that those who choose to purchase private insurance will receive, at minimum, similar benefits to those who choose national insurance. In addition to these propositions, The Obama-Biden plan will require mandatory coverage for all children and will make premiums more af-fordable. A greater contribution from the employer will be utilized in the new plan as well.

On the topic of national and worldwide healthcare issues, Obama is a huge supporter of medical research and if elect-ed will increase funding for projects that could potentially help millions. Obama also hopes to form better partnerships with governmental, private, and non-profit organizations to improve research efficiency. Similarly, Obama plans to main-tain America’s status as one of the leading countries against AIDS. To learn more about the Obama’s extensive plan on health care reformation, visit http://www.barackobama.com/

“Health Care.” Obama Biden. 20 Sept. 2008 <http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/>.

Coverage for EveryoneObama’s Position on Health Care

http://johnstodderinexile.files.wordpress.com/2006/06/barack-obama.jpg

http://a.abcnews.com/images/Health/pd_child_hospital_070705_mn.jpgUnder the Obama-Biden plan, coverage for child health care will become mandatory.


By: Dhruv MArwhA

UniversAl or PrivAte: the heAted heAlthcAre bAttle persists As elections

Imagine a child. Imagine that child sitting on the floor playing with his favorite toy, enjoying his newfound entertainment to

its greatest potential, and perhaps even sharing it with a select few. Unfortunately, this would leave the rest of the children with-out any toys, having to make do with other insignificant articles. Now, imagine the same child, the same child having a few more toys, but having to share it with everyone. Not only would this al-low everyone to be happy but it leaves the problem of the quality of enjoyment each receives.

This is the question of universal versus private healthcare. And it had sparked an immense controversy during the 90s only to be reborn for the upcoming 2008 presidential elections. The controversy has its roots in the comparison of America to our neighbor, Canada. Canada has a universal healthcare system in contrast to America’s system and it been said that this explains why Canadians also have a higher life expectancy than Ameri-cans. In my opinion this statistic is often exaggerated because even though I believe that healthcare does play a large part in life expectancy there are also many other variables that should be taken into consideration, including overall population, lifestyle, and cultural differences.

The main characteristic of universal healthcare is that every individual is insured no matter what the circumstance. How-

ever, while this may be ideal, there are many potential disad-vantages to consider as well. These disadvantages include but are not limited to: significant increases in governmental con-trol over health practices (and therefore a decrease in person-al freedoms), lack of competi-tion, and higher taxes. Most of these consequences go against the ideals of our nation in which competition and freedom of choice are embraced.

From the opposing view however, universal healthcare does assist in ridding America of the consequences of private healthcare. For example, the government has to spend con-siderably high amounts of money to keep such a system in place and cover the elderly and some of the poor. To reiterate this point, the US spends the highest percentage of its GDP on healthcare than any other developed nation.

The question then arises: which service is better for the United States?. Personally I believe that if we were to use a universal system that we would be forgetting who we are and where we come from. True, the universal system has much to offer in improving life expectancy and infant mortality, but we would also give up on our ability to provide quality service. The decision must be made with great care as it has the potential to both give and take away the good health of many.

Lack of healthcare in America suggests that our overall health has fallen below international standards.

http://www.westandfirm.org/blog/uploaded_images/canada01-717904.gif

“Queuetopia.” Cox &Forkum. 19 September 2008 http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/05.06.14.Queuetop-X.gif“Healthcare battle: Canada vs USA.” Vorg. 19 September 2008 http://vorg.ca/2283-Healthcare-battle-Canada-vs-USA“Universal care appeals to USA.” USA TODAY. 19 September 2008 http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2006-10-15-universal-usat_x.htm“Healthcare in the United States” Med Hunters. 19 September 2008 http://www.medhunters.com/articles/healthcareInTheUsa.html


While a stem cell may appear as a simple

water droplet under a mi-croscope, it is in fact the su-perhero of a cytologist’s lab. Each embryonic stem cell has the amazing potential to de-velop into a mature cell that is specific to a functional part of the human body. Seeing the possibility of using these pluri-potent stem cells as solutions for organ transplants, many scientists throw their full sup-port for further research in this exciting area. However, other authorities, including politicians and the President of the United States, object to this sort of research based on their firm belief that an embryo is a human in the developing stages. In order to continue the quest for scientific and medical advancements, researchers and politicians must come to an agreement.

Under the Bush Administration on August 9, 2001, federal funds were provided for research on embryonic stem lines that already existed prior to that date. While the federal government does not support the use of tax dollars for embryo destruction, the advancement in science remains a top priority for the nation. Contrary to popular belief, the federal government does not ban the use of embryo stem cells for research purposes. However, any research that requires damage to the developing embryo can only receive private funding, based on a decision made in 1999 under the Clinton Administration after the first human em-bryonic stem cells were collected. With President Bush’s policy in effect, more than $130 million of federal funding was given in support of human embryonic stem cell research for the past six years. Altogether, more than $3 billion funded the research of other stem cells, leading to a number of verified medical treat-ments.

Although the government has funded embryonic stem cell re-search with a considerable sum of federal money, it remains firm in the belief that the developing embryo is a human. In 2005, the President’s Council in Bioethics reaffirmed the government’s position, stating that imposing “risks on living embryos destined to become children, for the sake of acquiring stem cells for re-

search” was unacceptable. In the meanwhile, cytologists have discov-

ered a new star: the adult stem cell. Once believed to be restricted in cell differentiation, researchers are finding that adult stem cells can acquire the same plasticity as that of em-bryonic stem cells. This can lead to the de-veloping method of using a patient’s own stem cells to regenerate an organ and perform a self-transplant. In fact, many more discoveries were made in the last three years.

In August 2005, Kevin Eggan and Chad Cowan, researchers from the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, fused a human adult cell with an embryonic stem cell. This effectively reset the

clock of the adult stem cell, reprogramming it to a pluripotent state. Eggan and Cowan were certain that their discovery could lead to the use of genetically modified human

embryonic stem cells for further study in disease treatment.Two years later at Wake Forest University in January, re-

searchers learned that the embryonic stem cells from the am-niotic fluid possessed the same degree of flexibility as those from the developing embryo. These cells are also less likely to produce tumors and are easy to collect without harming life.

Just earlier in July this summer, a discovery at Johns Hopkins University introduced the Notch protein as the decision maker in an embryonic stem cell’s own fate. Such an important discovery might play an important role in cell programming for the develop-ment of stem cell therapies.

With the federal government’s firm position of maintaining respect and dignity of mankind, researchers have managed to work with the policies by finding alternate solutions to the current issue of destroying a life for the sake of science.

By: SArAh pAn

Stem Cell Crisis in the White HouseSupporting scientific advancement and having respect for a human life

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/08/23/science/24stem650.1.jpg

Report from the Domestic policy council: http://www.whitehouse.gov/dpc/stemcell/2007/stemcell_040207.pdfData obtained September 20, 2008Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Research:http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2008/07_22a_08.html Data obtained September 20, 2008Federal Policy [stem cell information]http://stemcells.nih.gov/policy/ Data obtained September 20, 2008Executive Order from the President of the United States: Expanding approved Stem Cell Lines in Ethically Responsible Wayshttp://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/07-3112.htm Data obtained September 20, 2008


By: Aditi guptA

The NAtion’s StAke in ReseArch

While we often cite statistics, poll numbers, and scientific facts in our papers and read about

them repeatedly in our textbooks, we seldom think about where these findings come from and who conducted the research behind them.

Relatively few people know that our government in-cludes the National Research Foundation. Established in 1999 under The NRF Act, the National Research Foun-dation’s goal is to “to facilitate the creation of knowledge, innovation and development in all fields of the natural and social sciences.” The National Research Foundation funds a wide range of research laboratories, including those in the astronomical sciences and the conserva-tion sciences. In fact, the National Research Foundation has recently begun collaborating with projects in South Africa to enhance the availability of research and make the knowledge networks there “globally competitive.”

However, while a large number of labs do receive money from the NRF, the application process is extremely com-petitive. Of the more than 950 applicants who applied for NRF grants in 2006, only roughly 200 were given any money.

To streamline national research, most U.S. De-partments hAve their own research institutions. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, for instance, has a program that operates within the NIH called the Office Extramural Research. The purpose of this Office, according to them, is to “advance biomedical research” in the United States, and it does so by provid-ing guidance and funds to labs across the country. One of the most significant premises behind the organization is their belief in peer review. Boasting the membership of some of the top physicians and scientists around the world, each application is given a thorough evaluation before being accepted to their grant system. More than 24 million dollars are given in grants every year from this office alone. Similarly, the National Science Foundation provides funding for not only some of the top research-ers in the country but also for individuals enrolled as un-dergraduate students in universities across the country.

It perhaps comes as no surprise that our government makes such an effort to fund research endeavors across the country. Research is an essential part of the innova-tion and ingenuity for which America is known, and it is through such government programs as the NRF and NSF that the government is able to make its mark on education, science, and knowledge.

Sources“NRF Profile.” The National Research Foundation. 19 Sept. 2008 <http://www.nrf.ac.za/profile/>.“OER and You: An Introduction in Extramural Research at NIH.” About OER. 31 July 2007. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, National Insti-tute of Health. 19 Sept. 2008 <http://grants.nih.gov/grants/intro2oer.htm>.

The Role the Government Plays in

this Rapidly Advancing Field

Research is an essential part of the advancements that the United States of America is so famous in housing,


By: AKSHAY NATHAWAT

New Found AppreciAtion of TrAditionAl Medicine Brings Together Two Superpowers

On June 16 2008, the United States Health and Human

Services Secretary Mike Leavitt and Chinese Vice-Minister of Health Wang Guoquiang signed a memorandum that will help to improve medicine worldwide by integrating two con-trasting forms of medicine. The study hopes to incorporate Eastern tradition-al medicine into medicine practiced in the West.

The memorandum was signed prior to a two-day roundtable on traditional medicine research at the National In-stitutes of Health. The roundtable was comprised of presentations about the collaboration of the two medical sys-tems, criteria needed to assess tradi-tional systems, and the use of modern technology to enhance the study of traditional medicine.

According to the 2002 National Health Interview Survey, approxi-mately thirty-six percent of all Ameri-cans use some form of alternative medicine to cure themselves of ailments. The branch of integrative medicine attempts to combine western medicine with alternative medicine for the benefit of hu-manity.

This branch of medicine hopes to use this research to study the medical benefits of traditional medical practices such as tai chi, acupuncture, and herbal remedies. The study also includes the understanding of diagnostic methods used in traditional method to pin point sources of disorders.

The roundtable was comprised of delegates from the Chinese State Administration on Traditional Chinese Medicine, academics from U.S. universities, and researchers from the Indian Health Service and Food and Drug Administration.

The memorandum is fueled by the growing number of biomedi-cal companies in China with connections to foreign companies.

The study hopes to integrate the traditional system and thereby help to bring about a co-hesive system where modern and traditional methods are used to diagnose problems.

Though many have expressed fears over the growing number of incidents involving medical dangers arising from China, few realize that these incidents are unlinked to the medical system offered in the country. In addition, traditional methods have shown to significantly improve recovery time due to the fact that medication is usually personalized for patients. This increases the overall confi-dence that patients have in the medication.

The memorandum comes at a convenient time where global harmony and integration of traditions are of high importance. With the Olympics fresh in the minds of many, it is a great backdrop to help foster this exchange of information and allow for cohesion of two great cultures.

This memorandum will not only bring to-gether two differing groups of medicine, but also bring together two nations through an

exchange of information and culture. It will help to bring about even greater realization and trust between the two countries, which will help foster relationships in the future.

SourcesArunachalam, Subbiah. “CHINA-US: Collaboration in traditional Chinese medicine.” University World News 6 July 2008. 20 Sept. 2008 <http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20080703155136677>.

“HHS Secretary and Chinese Minister of Health Sign Memorandum of Under-standing on Traditional Chinese Medicine Research.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 16 June 2008. 20 Sept. 2008 <http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2008pres/06/20080616b.html>.

“Memorandum of Understanding on Collaboration in Integrative and Traditional Chinese Medicine between the Department of Health and Human Services of the United States of America and the Ministry of Health of the People’s Republic of China.” Global Health 18 June 2008. 20 Sept. 2008 <http://www.globalhealth.gov/news/agreements/ia061608.html>.


Since this is the first Pre-Medical Perspective issue for the new 2008-2009 school year, I thought I might help you

readers clear out all the cobwebs in your brain and move bliss-fully and euphorically back into your academic cycle. To all you new first years coming in, let me be another to warmly welcome you to Cal. To the rest of you returning students, let me thank you for reading my first article. As a brand spankin’ new contributing writer to the PMP, I thought I might ease you all in slowly, and I mean sloooowwly: I’m gonna talk about pot. That’s right, I’m gonna clear your head by smokin’ it out.

Take a stroll anywhere around Berkeley, and you’re pretty much guaranteed to smell the sweet lingering smell of marijuana wafting through the air like so many of our future medical careers. For those of you who haven’t smelled it, good for you! For those of you who have, good for you too! But I’m not here to social-ize; I’m here to update you about the current (and past) status of marijuana, more specifically, medical marijuana.

Marijuana (Or cannabis, or even Delta-nine-tetrahydrocan-nabinol, pictured here) was first discovered and used for religious purposes as far back as the 3rd millennium BCE. From there, its recreational use naturally increased, earning today’s status as the fourth most common recreational drug in use (Alcohol, caf-feine, and nicotine are the top three). In 1937 the US passed the first federal law against cannabis despite the objections of the American Medical Association, and in 1970, under the Controlled Substances Act, it was instated as a Schedule I drug, denoting it had a high tendency for abuse and no accepted medical use. Even during its initial ban, there were many who supported its medicinal properties, such as its ability to relax muscles and most importantly its therapeutic properties. In 1997 there was a federal review of these properties, when the Office of National Drug Con-trol Policy commissioned the Institute of Medicine to study can-nabis as a therapeutic. The IOM concluded that cannabis was a safe and effective medicine, and that further research should be conducted on its abilities and applications.

The federal government ignored these findings and refused to act on its recommendations.

Previously however, in 1996, California (and other states)

passed the Compassionate Use Act, which decriminalized medi-cal marijuana. So California, as well as 11 other states, includ-ing Nevada and Oregon, ruled in favor of a decriminalization of medical marijuana, and physicians have been able to prescribe the therapeutic use of cannabis in those states, in conflict with federal law, for terminal or untreatable ailments, such as HIV, cancer, or multiple sclerosis. The policy is still enforced to this day.

But what makes medical marijuana (or marijuana in general) such an important issue? Marijuana is a psychoactive drug, usually ingested or smoked (as a “joint” or “doobie”). Accord-ing to WebMD, marijuana induces rapid heart rate, increased blood pressure and breathing rate, red eyes, increased appetite (“the munchies”) and a slowed reaction time. However, the most prominent feature (and popular reason for its use) is a strong sense of euphoria (“the high”). But smoking of cannabis is the most harmful method of consumption, due to inhalation of to-bacco, wood, gasoline, or tar, which can cause bronchitis, em-physema, and lung disease. Its psychoactive effects have been linked to depression, psychosis, and schizophrenia, and it has been reported to lessen the subjective enjoyment of sex, leading to some concern that marijuana may impair reproductive func-tion and contribute to birth defects. But there is no conclusive evidence addressing these concerns.

So there it is, a brief history of marijuana, its continued use today for therapeutic treatment of serious illnesses, and the controversies it stirred up, its use recreationally, and its pres-ent day status as a Schedule I drug prescribed, in conflict with federal law, on the state level to an unlucky few who truly need it. What’s my stand on its use? Well, I can’t say- I’m not allowed to take sides. But for those of you who are first years who just entered college and are thinking of experimenting with drugs, take my advice (at least for now): Stay away from smokin’ a joint. Maybe you won’t listen to me now, maybe you won’t listen to me ever, but that’s alright. I’m just here to tell you about it.

By: Andrew trAn

The Joint Policy- A Current Review of Smokin’ a Doobie…for Medical UseThe politics behind the pot.

SourcesCannabis. 18 September 2008. Wikipedia Inc. Available at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)>Controlled Substances Act. 18 September 2008. Wikipedia Inc. Available at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act#Schedule_I_drugs>History of Medical Cannabis. Americans for Safe Access. Available at <http://www.safeaccessnow.org/section.php?id=175>Legal History of Marijuana in the United States. 18 September 2008. Wikipedia Inc. Available at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_history_of_marijuana_in_the_United_States>Marijuana Use and Its Effects. 3 July 2008. WebMD. Available at <http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/marijuana-use-and-its-effects>


By: stephAnie Ng

Politics’ Role in the StAge of Science

Politics have much say in scientific research and development, the distribution of pharmaceuti-

cals and other medical products and equipment, and the health care system, even though lawmakers and politicians do not necessarily have a technical back-ground in a scientific field.

Most students entering the medical field assume the only politics in which they will be involved is related to hospital staff positions. However, there is increasingly more encouragement for those with a scientific back-ground to pursue involvement in politics. For example, the School of Pharmacy at Philadelphia’s Temple Uni-versity has even implemented a new course called “Practical Politics in Pharmacy.” Professors delve into aspects of pharmacy that are influenced by politics, such as healthcare providers, Medicare prescription plans for senior citizens, immunizations, and internal drug importation, according to the Temple Times.

Politics definitely influence the distribution and im-plementation of health care. K.R. Stebbins, in his paper “Curative medicine, preventive medicine and health status: the influence of politics on health status in a ru-ral Mexican village,” said that although most organiza-tions advocate preventive medicine to protect against the persistence of a disease, a majority of money, es-pecially in third world countries, is allotted for curative medicine, which provides immediate relief and care (to satisfy citizens) but does not prepare for the future. If scientists got involved in the policy-making process and brought concrete scientific and medical analysis instead of mere rhetoric to certain debates, then they could impact the implementation of healthcare.

Gaining a brighter public spotlight, science policy is the art of lobbying for policies or issues that have a scientific component, mostly advocating and justifying the need for supporting scientific research and devel-opment. Major issues today include stem cell research, climate change, and renewable energy. More and more

post-doctorates and scientists are delving into the po-litical realm, bringing a stronger scientific foundation to legislation. This alternative career in science is a great pathway for those who realize that lab work is not their ideal or want to make a greater impact in the govern-ment.

There are many paths a scientist could follow to pursue a career in science policy, according to the magazine Science. Many earn a Ph.D. in their techni-cal field and go straight into a lobbying organization or the government. A few even go back to school to earn a degree in public policy. Some opt for a one or two year internships or fellowships to prepare them for the politi-cal realm. For example, The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has multiple fel-lowships to help scientists gain experience in science and technology policy. Here at UC Berkeley, there are many undergraduate majors that provide a scientific background for a political career, including Environ-mental Science, Policy, and Management (ESPM) in the College of Natural Resources and the Public Policy and Management elective emphasis for Public Health in the College of Letters and Science.

Make an impact with your work and your words by getting involved in science policy. Many scientists grumble that politicians use a skewed view of certain scientific issues and even use wrong terminology—“global warming” versus “climate change.” With more professionals well-versed in their fields, science-relat-ed legislation can become more effective.

Scientists are starting to get more political, bringing a stronger technical foundation to legislative decisions.

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2003_02_28/noDOI.3128987010116336648http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2003_02_07/noDOI.2077985542189967389http://www.temple.edu/temple_times/2-17-05/pharmacy.htmlhttp://www.popline.org/docs/0737/268930.html

U p c o m i n g p r e m e d e v e n t s

On Camera Practice InterviewsCareer Center - Rm 104A, 2111 Bancroft Way

Thursday Oct. 2 @ 3PMFriday, Oct 10 @ 2PM

EECS Speed Networking - High TechBechtel - Rm 120AB

Thursday Oct. 9 @ 6PM

Writing a Winning Statement for Graduate SchoolMLK Jr. Student Union, Tilden Room, 5th Floor

Monday, Oct 13 @ 4:30PM

Letters of Recommendation: what every student should know

MLK Jr. Student Union, Tilden Room, 5th FloorWednesday, Oct 15 @ 4:30PM


The BAck PAge

Pre-Med Tip of the MonthA quick-tip inspired from the MCB department wall is to encourage all of you pre-meds to read and do crossword puzzles! This suggestion actually extends further to recommend all of you aspiring students to stimulate those brains and encourage all of you to read more varied material than your textbooks, especially since for most pre-meds, the verbal section of the MCAT tends to be the most difficult hurdle to overcome. Furthermore, studies have shown that constant brain stimulation helps people retain brain plasticity that would undoubtedly help in progressing into higher realms of education, so keep cramming in the trivia by doing those crossword puzzles, because it might ultimately be useful when you become a doctor!

Student Resources

Drop in Tutoring Sessions

113 Campbell Hall

A service of the Career Center, the tutoring sessions provide individual career counselor appointments on a drop-in basis (no appointment necessary). Coun-selors can talk about anything from jobs to classes to majors. Every Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thurs-day between 12-2 pm, located down the stairs in the basement of Campbell Hall.

URL: career.berkeley.edu/Info/MakeAppt.stm

the premed perspective

Documents