The Student Room Logo
This thread is closed

Cambridge Chat (previously New Cambridge Students Entry 2004)

I thought you were meant to have atleast 4 weeks off each year:confused: (well, that's what rosie was explaining to me earlier today)
Reply 17541
thats only 20 days if you work 5 days/week, take off bank hols etc..
Reply 17542
Bleh I'd be rubbish at teaching, I'd just get so frustrated when they didn't understand. I think I could do supervisions but not lecturing or teaching :/

4 weeks? I don't think so, the last I heard was 12 days was the absolute minimum. Which I'm getting more than, silly American companies :frown:. (That's excluding mandatory public holidays though, if you add them it's about 25 days I think.

Right, I should head to bed, I need to get up at 6 this morning to condition myself to get up at 4:30 tomorrow. Stupid 700 mile journey, stupid 6:45am ferry :frown:. I'm going to leave at 5:30am and in the best case get back at 9pm. If I miss the intercity or the train from Oban to Glasgow then I won't get in until 1:20am.

And it's going to be a Thursday so I'm blatently going to be blown up by policemen for carrying large bags on the underground :rolleyes:

A.
Reply 17543
good luck :biggrin:
Reply 17544
it's law according to the Working Time regulations that workers are entitled to 4 weeks' paid holiday per year, pro rata if they aren't full time.

In the UK there is no obligation for employers to add bank holidays etc. on to the 4 weeks so many people (including me) have to take the bank holiday out of our holiday time (4 weeks) if we want it off.
I always worked for places that paid double - or triple :eek: - on Bank Holidays and so Iwas more than happy to work... :smile:
Reply 17546
Lauren
"i want that one" and "eh eh ehhhhhh" were the main catchphrases of the natsci arran B trip. every so often we had a complete rendition of a random andy and lou sketch courtesy of caius, christs and fitz ppl. little britain rules.


my 12year old brother watches it religiously. he's a particular fan of 'i want that one'
Why does Nigella have to wobble from side to side while she's talking?
Reply 17548
Helenia
Hell yes :cool: - bounces around the stage like a loon, talking about the most complex stuff but somehow making it comprehensible.


Cancer cells have several characteristics different from normal cells - they are dividing rapidly, often have incomplete genomes and therefore partial surface protein expression, they are unresponsive to growth inhibitors and their DNA damage/repair mechanisms are buggered basically.

There are several intracellular signalling pathways that can lead a cell to go into apoptosis. In cancer cells apoptosis is turned off in these cells due to mutations in genes coding proteins in one or more of these pathways so that ineffective proteins are made and the pathways can't be completed. However, in most cancer cells there are still SOME potential pathways available that would work; it's finding out which they are and working out how to activate them in just those cells that is the key.

Prof Wyllie is head of the Dept of Pathology and back in the 70s was the first person to describe apoptosis as an alternative method of cell death (previously necrosis was the only one known about) - since then both he and many others have done massive amounts in elucidating the mechanisms behind it and what happens when it goes wrong.


Prof Wyllie sounds like a cool lecturer! :biggrin:

You know, if there're other apoptosis pathways that still work, why don't the cell activate those? Would you be able to target just those cancer cells with recognising carrier proteins etc - although I'd imagine you need to do more than just that to target JUST the cancer cells? And when is a tumour "cancer" and when is it just a tumour? (what are the terms again? Maglinant and something else?) What makes the cancer spread etc?

Hehe sorry to everyone else for interrupting everyone with all this science stuff :biggrin:

*hopes Helenia keeps on replying*
irisng
Prof Wyllie sounds like a cool lecturer! :biggrin:

You know, if there're other apoptosis pathways that still work, why don't the cell activate those? Would you be able to target just those cancer cells with recognising carrier proteins etc - although I'd imagine you need to do more than just that to target JUST the cancer cells? And when is a tumour "cancer" and when is it just a tumour? (what are the terms again? Maglinant and something else?) What makes the cancer spread etc?

Hehe sorry to everyone else for interrupting everyone with all this science stuff :biggrin:

*hopes Helenia keeps on replying*


Gosh, right...

The other apoptotic pathways are not activated because the cell has lost its DNA damage sensing mechanism and doesn't "realise" there is something wrong and that it needs to die. They are only activated under certain stimuli and if these aren't present, they won't activate - the key is finding the trigger to these. Current therapy involves simply targetting rapidly-dividing cells (hence fairly horrific GI side effects and problems with skin/hair). There's a long way to go yet.

Re. when does something become cancer: The two you mean are malignant and benign. A benign tumour is one that just sits and grows, within its own capsule, not invading surrounding tissue. These can be absolutely fine for years, but can cause problems if in an enclosed space (brain) where they cause compression on surrounding tissue, or if they become malignant.

Malignancy is the ability to invade surrounding tissues and disseminate in the blood and lymphatic system. This causes problems because even if the primary tumour is removed/destroyed, secondaries may still remain and can be fatal.

Hope that helps - and don't worry, a bit of science is just balancing out the pages and pages of compsci we used to have!
Reply 17550
Helenia
Gosh, right...

The other apoptotic pathways are not activated because the cell has lost its DNA damage sensing mechanism and doesn't "realise" there is something wrong and that it needs to die. They are only activated under certain stimuli and if these aren't present, they won't activate - the key is finding the trigger to these. Current therapy involves simply targetting rapidly-dividing cells (hence fairly horrific GI side effects and problems with skin/hair). There's a long way to go yet.

Re. when does something become cancer: The two you mean are malignant and benign. A benign tumour is one that just sits and grows, within its own capsule, not invading surrounding tissue. These can be absolutely fine for years, but can cause problems if in an enclosed space (brain) where they cause compression on surrounding tissue, or if they become malignant.

Malignancy is the ability to invade surrounding tissues and disseminate in the blood and lymphatic system. This causes problems because even if the primary tumour is removed/destroyed, secondaries may still remain and can be fatal.

Hope that helps - and don't worry, a bit of science is just balancing out the pages and pages of compsci we used to have!


Are there any theories as to just what causes apoptosis - eg, a specific trigger to a specific pathway? - and what are these theories?

But when/how do these cells develop the ability to invade other cells etc? - why would it do that? I think I read somewhere usually it is the secondary cancer (whatever the official term) that causes the death.

Brain tumours are interesting it's what got me onto oncology! :biggrin: Wanted to study oncology before I realised it's only for postgrads :redface: The only cancer I really read about scientifically is astrocytoma - which is a truly freaky cancer (I think it's a cancer right? and not benign) The site I read about that cancer made it sound like it's a separate creature on its own in your head :eek:

How would pressure on surrounding tissue affect the brain? Cut off blood supplies and then cause brain damage I presume? Is it possible to treat brain cancers? - I'd imagine there obviously are treatments but I mean, how high are the success rates etc? How would you treat brain cancers?

Out of interest - what would be classed as a tumour? - it'd be abnormally growing rapidly and not stop, DNA damage etc. I dunno I'm just wondering if there's anymore to tumours than just an out of control and rapidly dividing lump, on the surface of organs or maybe within organs? Hope I'm not sounding stupid here now :biggrin:

Hehe yeh I remember the Maths and Compscis and Physics that filled this thread it'll go on for pages and I wouldn't understand a thing! :biggrin: Time for some good old science! *yay* Wooo and thanx for all your replies do keep replying :biggrin: You can go off on tangents and tell me other stuff too cus I don't really know the questions to ask but it's interesting! :biggrin:
Reply 17551
Iris, I continue to suggest you get a textbook or just look on the internet. I'm sure Helen doesn't mind telling you, but I think you'd find it interesting to be able to read up on it for yourself. Get yourself a good intro textbook from the library (or buy one online, you don't really need a super up to date edition for this kind of stuff) and give yourself a head start for next year. Your library can order you any book from the Brit. Library (pretty much) for about £2 if no libraries in your area have it.
Reply 17552
hmph :mad: *seeks out kelly and richyrich for artsy farty talk*
priya
hmph :mad: *seeks out kelly and richyrich for artsy farty talk*

*goes and looks at rock collection. smiles benevolently at pet rock*
Reply 17554
crana9
Iris, I continue to suggest you get a textbook or just look on the internet. I'm sure Helen doesn't mind telling you, but I think you'd find it interesting to be able to read up on it for yourself. Get yourself a good intro textbook from the library (or buy one online, you don't really need a super up to date edition for this kind of stuff) and give yourself a head start for next year. Your library can order you any book from the Brit. Library (pretty much) for about £2 if no libraries in your area have it.


Lol didn't know about that with the library. Thanx. But textbooks have this boring thing about them I don't really know why - perhaps it's cus it reminds me of exams.

I don't need to know about cancer for my first year in Neuroscience. we don't do the medical side til 4th year I think, if I get in. Who knows, if I have the money and interest, I might go for Oncology or even Medicine after Neurosci :smile:
Reply 17555
Get one you like the look of and that you want to use from choice. If you have a hunt around you can probably find some good popular science books, too. I had a good one on the immune system but it's a bit outdated.

You might not need to know about cancer specifically, but the information you gain on wider principles will be very, very useful to you, as will the practice in understanding that level of material. Biology is such an interconnected subject that it's hard to learn something about one thing that doesn't in some direct way increase your knowledge or understanding of what it is you're actually studying.
Reply 17556
also: how do you plan to specialise in Oncology, but have that separate from Medicine ("I might go for Oncology or even Medicine...")
crana9
also: how do you plan to specialise in Oncology, but have that separate from Medicine ("I might go for Oncology or even Medicine...")


Well, if she's just doing research, though I'm not sure that would really be called oncology - or if that's just the name for the medical branch of it.

Iris - I can try to answer some of your questions but realistically you need a more in depth look at how DNA replication and repair works because there is only so far I can go by speaking in generalisations.

irisng
Are there any theories as to just what causes apoptosis - eg, a specific trigger to a specific pathway? - and what are these theories?


They're not just theories - there are a lot of pathways already elucidated. I have a picture of them but it's too big to upload. Shall see if I can find it on the net to link to...this is the picture

But when/how do these cells develop the ability to invade other cells etc? - why would it do that? I think I read somewhere usually it is the secondary cancer (whatever the official term) that causes the death.


It doesn't invade other cells; it invades other tissues. It does this by expressing enzymes that break down the extracellular matrix so cells can get in between other cells and continue to expand. It also expresses proteins that cause blood vessels to grow out from existing ones into the tumour.


How would pressure on surrounding tissue affect the brain? Cut off blood supplies and then cause brain damage I presume? Is it possible to treat brain cancers? - I'd imagine there obviously are treatments but I mean, how high are the success rates etc? How would you treat brain cancers?


Well, you've got the simple physical effect of pressure - the skull is an enclosed space so if something is expanding inside it, neurones are going to be pushed around and crushed, and mechanical damage will occur. There is also the problem of blocking off blood vessels by pressure, which can cause areas of the brain to become oxygen starved and die.

Brain tumours are actually quite often non-malignant, and are mainly a problem because of where they are. Depending on location it is sometimes possible to operate and remove them. Aside from that there's the usual chemo and radiotherapy. I have no idea about success rates I'm afraid.

Out of interest - what would be classed as a tumour? - it'd be abnormally growing rapidly and not stop, DNA damage etc. I dunno I'm just wondering if there's anymore to tumours than just an out of control and rapidly dividing lump, on the surface of organs or maybe within organs? Hope I'm not sounding stupid here now


I don't know of a technical definition but I'm sure there is one - just google it. There are generally about 6 mutations that need to occur before a cell becomes fully cancerous, but sometimes one occuring increases the probability that another one will so the process is accelerated.

This article is very detailed for your level but is really only a review - it should give you more information than you'll ever need!
Reply 17558
Helenia
Well, if she's just doing research, though I'm not sure that would really be called oncology - or if that's just the name for the medical branch of it.


I think that's just the medical side and "pure science" would be "cancer biology" or similar.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=oncology

Most of the definitions specify "branch of medicine.." although CancerWEB's dictionary (and you'd think they'd know) says <study> The study of diseases that cause cancer.

So maybe not.
Reply 17559
crana9
also: how do you plan to specialise in Oncology, but have that separate from Medicine ("I might go for Oncology or even Medicine...")


Oh okies didn't know they were one and the same and you can't do oncology separately :biggrin: So you *have* to do medicine to learn about cancer etc? :confused: and I'm wondering if Pathology had anything to do with cancer research? I remember someone saying it has, although the truth is I don't know exactly what Pathology is :biggrin:

So I'm assuming you would need Medicine to go into stuff like oncology/pathology etc? like you do with psychiatry? Who knows maybe I will get into Medicine after Neurosci - I love the Med course at Notts, which is just as well when I'm going there and part of my lectures will be at QMC :smile:

How would you know when a book is particularly good? You know, maybe I will hunt around for one some time! I have all of summer doing nothing, after all! :biggrin:

Woo Helenia that cell diagram looks complicated :eek: I'll give it a more detailed look later - reading the article although some of the terms don't make sense to me :frown: Thanx though! :biggrin: