Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Cancer-Detecting Bra Could One Day Surpass Mammograms In Accuracy

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the doctor-clothes dept.

Medicine 110

fangmcgee writes "Reno-based First Warning Systems is working on a new bra that could detect if you are developing breast cancer. Integrated sensors and a data controller regularly monitor your breasts and can watch for irregularities which may signal the growth of tumors. Tests so far are showing that the bra is far superior and may be able to detect cancerous growth up to 6 years sooner than self-exams or mammograms."

cancel ×

110 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Victoria has a secret (5, Funny)

Eightbitgnosis (1571875) | about 2 years ago | (#41662073)

but the secret is now cancer :(

Re:Victoria has a secret (4, Insightful)

Rei (128717) | about 2 years ago | (#41663007)

What I'm wondering is, what is the concept here, that you wear the same bra every day? Or do you have a dozen separate anti-cancer bras, and if so, how expensive are these things expected to be? And how do you wash them? And when they wear out, does the data transfer to the next bra? Does it have to be recalibrated? Does it come in different types (for example, some people prefer underwire, some hate them)? Will I have to plug in and charge my bra every day?

Just seeing some potential real-life challenges here...

Re:Victoria has a secret (4, Interesting)

aardwolf64 (160070) | about 2 years ago | (#41663061)

From the article, around $1,000 each and only for high risk patients.

Still, they don't don't have to be worn every day... what kind of granularity do you want? You could wear it once a week and still be way ahead of the game.

Re:Victoria has a secret (2)

LifesABeach (234436) | about 2 years ago | (#41663245)

I was wondering about other forms of Cancer, but I refuse to wear a bra around my rear to check to see if I have Prostrate Cancer!

Re:Victoria has a secret (5, Funny)

Belial6 (794905) | about 2 years ago | (#41663805)

Good news! It's a suppository!

Re:Victoria has a secret (1)

cvtan (752695) | about 2 years ago | (#41663865)

Prostrate?

Re:Victoria has a secret (2)

bkaul01 (619795) | about 2 years ago | (#41668473)

Yeah, he's just gonna take it lying down.

Moore's law and economy of scale. (2)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | about 2 years ago | (#41664707)

From the article, around $1,000 each and only for high risk patients.

That's for initial deployment. With Moore's law, economy of scale, and amortization of development and regulatory costs, it could get a LOT cheaper after a few years. Especially if it becomes widely adopted.

Why stop with breasts? A body stocking could search for hot spots across nearly the whole surface of a person. Knitting machines upgraded to include a distribution of sensors and their wiring could make such a device quite inexpensively. (The electronic package could be re-used with multiple "suits".)

Still, they don't don't have to be worn every day... what kind of granularity do you want? You could wear it once a week and still be way ahead of the game.

Agree.

Re:Moore's law and economy of scale. (1)

cdrudge (68377) | about 2 years ago | (#41667631)

That's for initial deployment. With Moore's law, economy of scale, and amortization of development and regulatory costs, it could get a LOT cheaper after a few years. Especially if it becomes widely adopted.

Or it stays obscenely expensive since it's a "medical device".

Re:Victoria has a secret (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 2 years ago | (#41663639)

What I'm wondering is, what is the concept here, that you wear the same bra every day?

Don't worry, they'll soon develop the whole concept into cancer-detecting breast implants.

Re:Victoria has a secret (2)

denzacar (181829) | about 2 years ago | (#41663929)

From the video, [youtube.com] the bra itself is just the housing for the sensors.
So they could probably have it as a washable insert to the regular bras.

Regarding the data, it all gets "uploaded to the internet" where it gets analyzed, so it does not depend on one particular bra or insert.

As for plugging it in, my guess is that it is much more likely going to run on disposable "button cell" batteries, for safety and convenience reasons.
Being that a Li-Ion, wrapped in cloth and recharged over and over may not be the safest thing in the world to carry strapped to ones breasts.

And I don't think that it will need much calibration for a single user.
At least the original sports bra model shouldn't, as it is basically a housing for an array of heat sensors.

When one part of the array starts getting warmer by some percentage that means new blood vessels, which indicate existence of new tissue growth inside the breast, which is probably cancer.
So, moving the sensor array around a few centimeters won't make much of a difference cause the distance between the sensors doesn't change and cause they are measuring the heat of a wider area from several points and not a single spot per sensor.
I.e. It does not look at the heat of a single cell, but of the entire breast.

Re:Victoria has a secret (1)

kryliss (72493) | about 2 years ago | (#41668993)

Probably tied directly to one's gmail account.

Re:Victoria has a secret (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41667069)

I prefer checking manually.

How to pay for these?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662081)

We could pay for the tech with the profits from the webcams they will put in the bras!

My hands!! (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662087)

FYI : My hands are the most advanced detector to date.

Re:My hands!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662811)

That's odd. I have something similar, but it's my face that does the actual detecting ....

special request (2)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | about 2 years ago | (#41662105)

Please add Bluetooth connectivity. That way, I can figure out my date's cup size without staring at her chest all night.

Re:special request (5, Insightful)

csnydermvpsoft (596111) | about 2 years ago | (#41662127)

If you stopped staring at her chest, maybe she'd eventually give you the chance to examine her bra more closely...

Re:special request (2)

game kid (805301) | about 2 years ago | (#41662303)

"You know, I would love to get naked for you, but my doctor told me that if I take the bra off I might get false breast cancer detection results. No, really, it's not you, it's my bra."

(Now they just need to make the cervical cancer detection panty and humanity will never have sex again!)

Re:special request (1)

PPH (736903) | about 2 years ago | (#41662505)

Protip: Always maintain eye contact [youtube.com] .

Re:special request (1, Informative)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about 2 years ago | (#41662685)

It was a joke. LOL! Men can estimate a cup size with accuracy. Yeah, once in a while, a girl will surprise you when her lovely sweater puppies pop out, but as a rule it's pretty easy to judge.

And no, "maybe she'd eventually give you the chance to examine her bra more closely" is a fallacy. A woman knows within five minutes of meeting you if she'll have sex with you or not. Your personality determines her reaction to your checking out her assets: "OMG he really likes me" or "eww pervy". If you're a dominant male, the former...if not, the latter.

Re:special request (1)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | about 2 years ago | (#41662785)

My bad, I forgot to put the "Bazinga!" at the end of my comment. Sorry for the confusion.

Re:special request (1)

Rei (128717) | about 2 years ago | (#41662955)

A woman knows within five minutes of meeting you if she'll have sex with you or not. Your personality determines her reaction to your checking out her assets

That statement seems contradictory. Either she's made the decision and the personality is irrelevant, or she hasn't and it is. Or are you describing the "meeting" as when conversation begins, rather than when you see the other person?

I can only speak for myself, but a guy seems a lot more attractive if he has a good personality, and vice versa. The difference can be quite significant. A good personality can't make an ugly person look good, but it definitely can make a more marginal person look good (and a personality bad can make me question a person who I previously found attractive).

BTW, am I the only person here who ever made a User's Guide to yourself for potential dating partners? ;) I really should add some technical diagrams after the first "This page intentionally left blank"...

Re:special request (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about 2 years ago | (#41665361)

BTW, am I the only person here who ever made a User's Guide to yourself for potential dating partners? ;)

No, you're not [catb.org] .
Are you lonely, though? Interested? Pretty? I promise you, I have full Unicode support.....

Re:special request (1)

Rei (128717) | about 2 years ago | (#41665803)

Haha, skimmed that and most of it is right, although I personally strongly disagree with the "Fact: Women love long hair! It's an instant chick magnet." - to each their own! Got a number of my own comments that aren't in there, too. But in general, looks pretty solid.

And lol, I'm currently in the middle of playing the Reykjavík circuit, so unless you live in the 101... ;) Oh, and there should be a extra addendum to that guide, just for Icelandic guys: Stop talking about your penis! I get it, it's really impressive...

Oh, and another thing about that guide - it focuses on evolution too much. For example, they stress the confidence, boldness stuff, which is really good. But then they mention it as if it's *only* a side effect of evolution, when it can have some... um... practical applications. ;)

Oh, and at risk of going too far off tangent, my favorite thing (in the context of "amusing") that a guy I was dating said to me.... Context: we were driving home to my place, and he had previously been talking about how much he wanted to sleep with me, what he planned to do to me... then it was suddenly derailed by an offhand comment I made on a side tangent of conversation. Him: “Wait, you've never seen Dr. Who!?!" (beat) "Okay, we're going to get to your place, download and watch the first episode of Dr. Who, and *THEN* we're going to have sex!”

Nerd priorities - so endearing. ;)

Re:special request (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 2 years ago | (#41666231)

Oh, isn't the 101 like the high-class, rich part of Reykjavík? lol

I am not Eric Raymond. I am more looking for a long-term companionship with someone I love. I've heard all Iceland girls are pretty though, so no doubt you are pretty.

Re:special request (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41668165)

A woman knows within five minutes of meeting you if she'll have sex with you or not. Your personality determines her reaction to your checking out her assets

That statement seems contradictory. Either she's made the decision and the personality is irrelevant, or she hasn't and it is. Or are you describing the "meeting" as when conversation begins, rather than when you see the other person?

Five minutes, usually 5 first minutes of interaction. So basically from the moment you notice each other. Looking away immediately when your eyes cross is not going to reflect good. (Seems your hiding something, like being a perv)

I can only speak for myself, but a guy seems a lot more attractive if he has a good personality, and vice versa. The difference can be quite significant. A good personality can't make an ugly person look good, but it definitely can make a more marginal person look good (and a personality bad can make me question a person who I previously found attractive).

It's not so much as making them look good physically. But good character lends to confidence and charisma and those are attractive to women. Women will take confidence and charisma over looks most of the time.

Oh and one more pro tip: forget about tilting heads, pupils dilating and all those things. You know when a woman is interested if she keeps talking to you!

Re:special request (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41663137)

80-85% of American women are wearing the wrong bra cup size. If that many women can't estimate their own cup size with accuracy, how can you claim that men can?

Re:special request (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41664623)

Because men pay more attention to the important details. Plus, for most men there are four sizes of concern: too small, adequate, this is going to be a lot of fun, and I'm gonna need ropes and pitons. Not all that hard to classify with those categories.

Re:special request (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41667619)

I question your definition of "important." Unfortunately, most men pay attention to the least important and most ephemeral of details.

Re:special request (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662987)

Very likely. Stare at her eyes. A lot. Eventually realise what you're doing, and apologise. Tell her that her eyes are beautiful, and you get lost in them.

Re:special request (1)

kryliss (72493) | about 2 years ago | (#41669109)

The difference between a young man and a mature man..... A young man looks directly at her breasts. A mature man looks directly into her eyes while using peripheral vision to examine her breasts.

Re:special request (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662197)

Who are you kidding? You'd still be staring at her chest all night.

Re:special request (1)

mooingyak (720677) | about 2 years ago | (#41662313)

Please add Bluetooth connectivity. That way, I can figure out my date's cup size without staring at her chest all night.

So it's a purely intellectual exercise for you? Stops being interesting once you've figured out the answer?

Re:special request (1)

vawwyakr (1992390) | about 2 years ago | (#41667859)

You spend your date nights trying to figure out your date's cup size? Wow sad....who are you Barney Stinson?

Re:special request (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 2 years ago | (#41668229)

Who cares really? I mean it's a point to ask of curiosity but let's face it, if she's got nice tits then daaaaaaaaaaamn, get a squeeze or twelve in and suck those sweet pink nubs...

I support (3, Informative)

Dyinobal (1427207) | about 2 years ago | (#41662117)

I support watching breasts.

Re:I support (1)

i.r.id10t (595143) | about 2 years ago | (#41662495)

And I like to watch breasts being supported... but then, swinging free is good too... oh heck, I just like looking at boobies!

It's not going to help you unless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41667101)

you are a robot.

Well, I never! (3, Funny)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 2 years ago | (#41662131)

Integrated sensors and a data controller regularly monitor your breasts and can watch for irregularities which may signal the growth of tumors.

Look, I know I could stand to shed a few pounds, but I don't think I'm anywhere close to the point where a bra would be entering the picture.

Re:Well, I never! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about 2 years ago | (#41662355)

Men get breast cancer, too. If there's breast cancer in your family, particularly in male members, you would probably be wise to wear one of these.

Re:Well, I never! (1)

sconeu (64226) | about 2 years ago | (#41662831)

Definitely true. My stepfather died from breast cancer.

Well, I never!-Ball joint. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41663371)

Testicular cancer. Guess we guys will have to start wearing a monitoring cup daily.

Re:Well, I never! (1)

The Wild Norseman (1404891) | about 2 years ago | (#41665657)

If there's breast cancer in your family, particularly in male members

If there's breast cancer in male members, wouldn't it be called penis cancer?

Re:Well, I never! (1)

burning-toast (925667) | about 2 years ago | (#41665749)

Well, I can't comment on where specific things are attached on your body. But no. It wouldn't.

Re:Well, I never! (1)

burning-toast (925667) | about 2 years ago | (#41665755)

Have you ever clicked preview and then submit (after reading parent post and reply twice over) only to get the joke immediately after that? Ignore me, I'm up without caffeine...

Misread that (5, Funny)

rot26 (240034) | about 2 years ago | (#41662159)

At first I thought it said "bro". My bad.

Re:Misread that (0)

tjonnyc999 (1423763) | about 2 years ago | (#41662227)

Mod parent +1 Funny. I'm out of mod points. You do it.

Re:Misread that (4, Funny)

mcmonkey (96054) | about 2 years ago | (#41662471)

At first I thought it said "bro".

It's the "manzier"!

Re:Misread that (1)

sconeu (64226) | about 2 years ago | (#41662821)

Mod parent +1 funny.

Though it's 'mansierre', not 'manzier'

Re:Misread that (1)

mcmonkey (96054) | about 2 years ago | (#41663353)

If you go by the number of hits on Google, 'manzier' beats 'mansierre' by about 18k to 13k results.

However, I do not go by Google results for such matters. Since it is derivative of brassiere, manssiere (or mansiere) it is.

Re:Misread that (1)

sconeu (64226) | about 2 years ago | (#41663487)

Since I misspelled it as well... I'll go with your spelling.

Dude, thanks for replying in the spirit I intended.

Guys I Thought of A Funny Joke (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662189)

I don't have time to figure out the wording, but it's something about how I like breasts. Just thought I'd let you know I thought it was pretty funny.

Re:Guys I Thought of A Funny Joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662293)

How about- Is this detector available shaped as a glove?

Next up...... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662195)

Anal probe for early prostate cancer detection.......

Re:Next up...... (2)

tjonnyc999 (1423763) | about 2 years ago | (#41662251)

Bonus feature: WiFi connectivity with regular (pun intended) Facebook status updates.

Machine has a fatal flaw which reduces accuracy (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662349)

This machine has a fatal flaw which will decrease it's maximum possible accuracy to only 96.8% (3.2% undetected): It will only be worn by women.

Re:Machine has a fatal flaw which reduces accuracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41664353)

That's okay .. for guys we have underpants that monitor balls and prostate.

Re:Machine has a fatal flaw which reduces accuracy (1)

alexgieg (948359) | about 2 years ago | (#41667357)

It will only be worn by women.

Well, google "male bra japan"...

In all honesty... (3, Insightful)

zakkudo (2638939) | about 2 years ago | (#41662365)

If in high school guys were taught how to detect breast cancer, the detection rate would probably be quicker than even these bras. No joke. Everyone wants to protect the things they love ;-;

Re:In all honesty... (2)

fermion (181285) | about 2 years ago | (#41662847)

Seriously, we do need to learn to take care of each other and not constantly be afraid that someone, somewhere, might be doing something we object to. It is like the HPV vaccine. There is a battle not to give it to young people because they might have sex. Might, really? I think that was the reason we give it to them. It is not like there are not already multitudes of excuses. When I was growing up it was that the bible commanded us to go forth and procreate. Who needs an excuse beyond this?

I must admit there is a wide range of maturity issues in boys, even those that are 18, and such a program while noble might not be feasible. If girls were treated equal and the male football or hockey or golf program were not treated as supirior to anything that girls did maybe we would have more success.

Re:In all honesty... (1)

formfeed (703859) | about 2 years ago | (#41665611)

If in high school guys were taught how to detect breast cancer, the detection rate would probably be quicker than even these bras. No joke. Everyone wants to protect the things they love ;-;

Because women don't have hands?
If you want to practice your love with women all over this country, you should become an ObGyn.

That is a very pretty bra... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662503)

Ever notice they always reply telling you whether it opens in back or in front?

Cancer-Detecting Bra Could One Day Surpass (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662557)

Mammograms In Accuracy.

Virtually anything can surpass mammograms in breast cancer detection because they are so crap at finding breast cancer.

Seems um... stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662565)

Hey lets load up a power pack and all these sensors into clothing you wear all the time! Instead of putting it in a specialized machine for daily use.... which would make sense.

And by the time they actually make 'smart' clothing that would do all this without extra weight, power, ect.... I suspect you'll be able to tell the nanobots swimming in your blood to go check out your tits for cancer instead of using clunky external devices and 'clothing'.

More Than Cancer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41662651)

Sounds like it could also detect if you're pregnant. Do breasts start to grow as soon as your body knows you're pregnant or do they wait a few weeks first?

Idle (2)

gnomff (2740801) | about 2 years ago | (#41662731)

Why is this tagged as idle? It looks like a great idea for at risk women. I didn't realize this was /. - news for 6th graders.

Because there is no room for debate (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#41666731)

It is just a little fluff piece, important and good news but what you can't get into a heated debate about this. Nobody could be against this, so it is for Idle because all the comments will be either jokes or praise.

And as someone who lost all members of his family to cancer. Good news everyone!

I for one... (4, Funny)

BradyB (52090) | about 2 years ago | (#41662735)

I for one welcome our under wire overlords.

Prostate Cancer (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | about 2 years ago | (#41662763)

Oh, please don't tell me what device they'll use to monitor my prostate 24x7....

My wife doesn't let me check anymore (1)

BLToday (1777712) | about 2 years ago | (#41662793)

I took too long checking her for breast cancer.

Men (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | about 2 years ago | (#41662807)

Anyone else feel like men get the sort end of the stick in cancer research? Yes, I could technically get breast cancer. But I am a lot more likely to get prostate cancer. Yet everyone from the NFL to the WWE have their pink ribbons on and I've never seen a benefit for prostate cancer. While I am happy for the funding and interest, I just wish money were allocated according to reason, not just "I like boobies".

Re:Men (5, Informative)

MyLongNickName (822545) | about 2 years ago | (#41662889)

A little more info

* Breast cancer is the second leading cancer killer of women, behind lung cancer
* Prostate cancer is the second leading cancer killer of men, behind lung cancer
* Death rate for prostate cancer is slightly higher in men than breast cancer is for women
* Median death age for breast cancer is 68, median death age for prostate is 80
* Prostate cancer tends to be detected later and develops slower.
* Prostate cancer is likely underreported because men don't go to Doctor as often.

Re:Men (1)

BeanThere (28381) | about 2 years ago | (#41663641)

I was going to suggest a brown ribbon for prostate cancer awareness.

Interestingly though, I see someone already picked light blue ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancer#Society_and_culture

Re:Men (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41664097)

I would choose two upside-down blue ribbons for testicular cancer, or maybe just one...

Re:Men (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#41664245)

Stats are a little misleading here.

If you're a male and you make it to age 80, you are virtually guaranteed to have prostate cancer. It may or may not be the eventual cause of death but since human males don't usually make it much past 80 (for a variety of reasons) 'early' deaths due to prostate cancer are less common. Since breast cancer affects a younger age cohort, it is responsible for many more 'early deaths'. Could you push the average male age out by eliminating prostate cancer? Probably, to some degree, but 80 year old men are likely to succumb to a bunch of other common diseases as well (namely heart disease). Breast cancer more often hits otherwise healthy individuals and thus is a bigger health issue overall.

Prostate cancer is definitely under reported because of the fact above. However, clinically, that may not be much of a big deal (unless you make money diagnosing the cancer).

But this whole thermal imaging bra stuff sounds a bit warm to the touch - it can beat standard cancer detection methodologies by six years? Pics, or that definitely isn't happening. Breast cancer cells have a doubling time on the order of 100 days (varies, remember it's really 'breast cancers). I'm too tired to go through the math but i don't think you can go back that far unless you change some underlying assumptions of the model that everybody seems to be using.

Re:Men (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41665335)

You are right that breast cancer strikes younger on average. But prostate cancer is still the 2nd leading cause of cancer in men, same as breast cancer from women.

If you argue that we should fund proportionally to the number of total years lost, we'd see breast cancer funded more heavily than prostate cancer, but not as lopsided as what you see today.

  A short snippet from a business week article

"he Prostate Coalition report noted the Provenge setback. It also found that spending on breast cancer research by the National Cancer Institute, which funds much of the academic research into cancer in the U.S., rose from $382 million in 1996 to $715 million by 2006. Over the same decade, prostate cancer funding soared from $86 million to $376 million.

News coverage of prostate cancer has also lagged behind breast cancer over the past decade, the report found. Analyzing seven leading news outlets, it found that between 1996 and 2006 there were 2.6 times as many stories about breast cancer as those about prostate cancer. The researchers also found that only 28 states and the District of Columbia mandate insurance coverage for routine prostate cancer screening, while 49 states mandate coverage of breast cancer screening."

Re:Men (1)

curunir (98273) | about 2 years ago | (#41664705)

...and I've never seen a benefit for prostate cancer.

Watch baseball instead of football. Every year, they do a whole day [mlb.com] around prostate cancer awareness and fundraising.

Idiot (2)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#41666743)

Because cures for breast cancer don't work for prostate cancer of course.

But the main reason you don't see the same public attention is that the color for breast cancer is pink. The color for prostate cancer would be?

If you said brown, your the reason there are fewer public benefits, people snicker about the prostate to much. But cancer research isn't split on just curing breast cancer and leaving other cancers be. It is just that if you want to save the jungle, you focus on the fluffy cuddly animals that people want to hug and squeeze and then the ugly animals will have their habitat saved as well.

Donate to breast cancer and save your own ass. And don't snicker.

Re:Idiot (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | about 2 years ago | (#41668237)

You are rude. The title of your post is 'Idiot'. I can assure you I am not, but you are in fact a very rude, narrow mined person.

You make an idiotic comment about the color of a ribbon, which I have no idea what it has to do with prostate research. Then you make another idiotic comment about focusing on "fluffy cuddly animals". So basically, women and their breasts are cuter and therefore more worthy of being saved. That is just wrong.

And yes, there may be some carry over from one type of cancer research to another, but that doesn't justify focusing predominantly on one type of research. I take care of myself so have a very low risk of lung cancer. My risk of heart disease is lower because I take care of my weight, diet and cholesterol. But prostate cancer is something I have very little control of and am at an elevated risk (I'm in my 30's) due to other medical issues. Yet, you tell me to sit at the back of the bus.

From your sig, I'm guessing you are female. You are biased toward your own gender, and feel you can shout down people who disagree. You are disgusting.

And I'm not the only one you exhibit this behavior with. Another post you say the following "No? Then SHUT THE FUCK UP!"

Absolutely brilliant. You have the maturity of a middle school child.

Control Group (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41662843)

I offer my manual breast examination services to the control group, and promise to spend far more time fondling da boobies than medically necessary.

Needs a Catchy Name (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41662871)

I'm thinking, "Kon-Kup"

This [wikia.com] Kon, for our non-anime fans out there.

6 years sooner to get on the pre-existing conditio (2)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 2 years ago | (#41662885)

6 years sooner to get on the per-existing condition list under the GOP plan.

Up next DNA testing.

Who the hell would wear that? (2)

sandytaru (1158959) | about 2 years ago | (#41663001)

Seriously. It's a sports bra. You know when I wear sports bras? NEVER. Because they are uncomfortable, ugly, and offer little actual support for anyone bigger than an A cup. For ladies with higher letters in the alphabet, it'd be a useless tank top. I'm glad TFA says it probably just needs to be worn a few hours a day. Maybe when I sleep at night (although my husband will probably grumble about that.)

Re:Who the hell would wear that? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41663271)

Serious question (from a guy): Is it actually more comfortable to wear a bra than not? I have heard this from a couple of women. Is it a function of breast size maybe?

Re:Who the hell would wear that? (2)

Rei (128717) | about 2 years ago | (#41663361)

I'd personally say it's more comfortable, although I sleep without one.

Re:Who the hell would wear that? (1)

sandytaru (1158959) | about 2 years ago | (#41663715)

It depends on the bra. If they are the wrong type, or fitted wrong, they are extremely uncomfortable. Also, they tend to break with alarming frequency (most good bras have a half life of about a year) and broken bras end up poking you in annoying places.

Re:Who the hell would wear that? (1)

JRR006 (830025) | about 2 years ago | (#41667751)

A bad bra is a dozen times worse than no bra. A good bra over no bra... depends on the person. I always wear one in public. If I'm wearing something thinner or more delicate at home, I wear one for support. I don't like the 'exposed' or unsupported feeling. But if I've got a t-shirt on, a shirt with material that is a little thicker/tighter, I prefer to be without. For science, I wear a C cup.

Re:Who the hell would wear that? (1)

BeanThere (28381) | about 2 years ago | (#41663663)

Yeah, I guess the fact that it could save your life is not that important compared to the concerns you raise.

Re:Who the hell would wear that? (1)

sandytaru (1158959) | about 2 years ago | (#41663737)

I'll be a bit forgiving because it is just a prototype, but if they want women to actually wear it, it needs to look less like a life vest and more like modern lingerie. Perhaps they could hire a designer from one of the big bra companies to come tidy it up for them?

Re:Who the hell would wear that? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 2 years ago | (#41665385)

It's not likely to fit, anyway.

.... oh sure (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#41666763)

I can just imagine THAT task, your the techie at the hospital and have to sew sensors into a piece of lady clothing. What would you pick? A relatively harmless sports bra that looks like it could be worn as over-clothing or a frilly lacy bra?

Every single female on the staff would make your life a living hell.

Oh and this sports bra could mean you are alive in ten years with both bra's attached. Has you husband seen a loved one with massive surgery trauma, poisoned by chemo and still dying slowly until finally they choke to death in your arms?

No? Then SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Defective by design (3, Funny)

RogueWarrior65 (678876) | about 2 years ago | (#41663395)

And teenage boys will still have trouble unhooking them.

Look, let's get real here (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about 2 years ago | (#41663987)

Just do a search of #SCCAbc for what's really going on with breast cancer research.

First: self-exams do work. In fact, they're the most useful thing young women can do, due to the density of their breast tissue.

Second: mammograms before age 40 and after age 70 are at best problematic in terms of risk/reward ratios. If you're in the 40-70 year range, get periodic exams at the schedule determined by your physician or nurse. If you have BCRA1 or BCRA2 genetic risks, this may mean Annual exams. For other women, it may mean less frequent exams. Men with significant breasts may wish to ask their doctors about their risks. No, I'm serious.

Third: do not interpret BCRA1 or BCRA2 genetic risk factors yourselves. A lot of people mess this up and overreact. Diet, environment, stress, normal breast shape/type for your ethnic background - all have significant impacts. Genetic counselors in established medical settings can help you decide what your real imputed risk factors are, in consultation with your doctor or nurse.

thanks.

FrIsit stop (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41664213)

coul3 sav3 it

I wouldn't trust anything this company says! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41664219)

They were saying all the same sorts of things back in 1999 when I first invested money under LBTI. Five years later they were still saying the same things only they had reverse split, and the penny stock was now a 10,000th of a penny stock. When I got out they were using the symbol LBTT, who knows how many times they have reverse split and changed symbols since (now LLBO at $0.0004, with only about 5 BILLION shares). BEWARE!

Why is this on Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41664375)

Nobody here is going to buy one.

Really... Thermography??? (1)

p_a_dev (2750735) | about 2 years ago | (#41665195)

So they say that it is effective in 90% of women and that it detects up to 7 years earlier than a mammogram. How did the 3 clinical trials prove that this is effective? Talking to my wife (an Medical Imaging Professional) Mammograms are the Gold standard. Thermography has been refuted for years as ineffective and a sham... From http://sunleitehealth.ca/breastthermography.html [sunleitehealth.ca] which is a proponent of similar technology "Does thermography have the ability to show exactly where there is a tumor? Thermography does not have the ability to pinpoint the location of a tumor for biopsy purposes. Consequently, for a comprehensive analysis, if indicated, an ultrasound and/or mammography are recommended to complement breast thermography if breast cancer is suspected." Mammography today can detect micro-calcifications in the breast. it seems that they are using Mammography as it was 20 years ago not as it is today. I think this is just a bunch of guys wanting to get thermal images of Women's breasts.

Re:Really... Thermography??? (1)

The Wild Norseman (1404891) | about 2 years ago | (#41665783)

I think this is just a bunch of guys wanting to get thermal images of Women's breasts.

Isn't that what the TSA is for?

Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41667969)

How long before this becomes a Dr. Who episode?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>