<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: aneuploidy</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'aneuploidy'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22aneuploidy%22&t=%22aneuploidy%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:49:54 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>New test for Down Syndrome - safer than amniocentesis</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1856096&amp;cid=t_129303_131_f&amp;fid=34989&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FGeneticsHealth%2F%7E3%2F5lxUIOcHXDU%2F</link>
            <description>There was one compelling reason why I opted out of genetic testing with my last pregnancy. The risk of miscarriage due to amniocentesis was the same as the risk of having a baby with Down Syndrome.
Amniocentesis is considered the gold standard, but it&amp;#8217;s an invasive procedure with a 1/100 risk for miscarriage, the same risk for Downs. I quickly realized I would rather give birth to a baby with Downs than be responsible for a miscarriage.
Fortunately, now there is a new, totally non-invasive procedure for genetic testing of Down Syndrome. It only requires the maternal blood sample (basic blood draw) to spot chromosomal abnormalities in the fetus. Scientists from Stanford University utilized fetal DNA fragments in the mother&amp;#8217;s blood and read the fragments using DNA sequencing. Wom...</description>
            <author>Genetics and Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1856096</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2008 08:08:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1856096</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>I hate it when I lose chromosomes</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=971454&amp;cid=t_129303_131_f&amp;fid=35005&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2Ffungalcompgenomics%2F%7E3%2F173623765%2F</link>
            <description>A paper on &quot;Effects of Aneuploidy on Cellular Division in Haploid Yeast&quot; describes what must be a very stressful situation for a cell, when it loses or gains a chromosome and the detailed effects this has on cell cycle and physiology.

	
	
	&amp;copy; Jason Stajich for Fungal Genomes and Comparative Genomics, 2007. |
	 Permalink |
	 No comment
	Add to del.icio.us
	Search blogs linking this post with Technorati
	Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under aneuploidy, copy number variation. (Source: Fungal Genomes and Comparative Genomics)</description>
            <author>Fungal Genomes and Comparative Genomics</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=971454</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 23 Oct 2007 03:39:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">971454</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Aneuploidy Hampers Yeast Cell Proliferation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=816834&amp;cid=t_129303_107_f&amp;fid=36045&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fbayblab.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F08%2Faneuploidy-hampers-yeast-cell.html</link>
            <description>We recently discussed on the bayblab whether gross chromosomal abnormalities such as aneuploidy, frequently observed in cancer cells, are cause or consequence of tumor formation. A new paper from Torres et al. shows that yeast with extra chromosomes actually grow slower, suggesting that the relationship between aneuploidy and cancer might be a bit more complex (if the phenomenon holds true on human cells). Then again, maybe yeast are just, well...yeast. (Source: Bayblab)</description>
            <author>Bayblab</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=816834</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:32:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">816834</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Which came first? The cancer or its chromosomes?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=713248&amp;cid=t_129303_131_f&amp;fid=35743&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fthegenesherpa.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F07%2Fwhich-came-first-cancer-or-its.html</link>
            <description>Every now and again I like to throw out the old paradigms and put in some new. Geneticists love this......The So Called &quot;Paradigm Shift&quot;Back in 2005 this was done with Marfan's disease. It is an example I use to teach my students that what they may have learned is wrong. It is wrong because medical teaching is only built on science that has a very limited set of knowns and an immense set of unknowns.This paradigm shift is already in the making. The classical model of how a cancer develops is called the &quot;two-hit&quot; hypothesis. It states that in order to have uncontrolled growth of cells i.e. cancer, you need two hits to genes. Mostly you have to have at least 2 mutations. Sometimes you activate a gene by mutation and other times you may silence the genes. For the last 30 years the view of can...</description>
            <author>Gene Sherpas: Personalized Medicine and You</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=713248</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2007 01:20:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">713248</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

