Few conventions were left unchallenged in the 1970s as Americans witnessed a decade of sweeping social, cultural, economic, and political upheavals. The fresh anguish of the Vietnam War, the disillusionment of Watergate, the recession, and the oil embargo all contributed to an era of social movements, political mistrust, and not surprisingly, rich cultural diversity. It was the Me Decade, a reaction against 60s radicalism reflected in fashion, film, the arts, and music. Songs of the Ramones, the Sex Pistols, and Patti Smith brought the aggressive punk-rock music into the mainstream, introducing teenagers to rebellious punk fashions. It was also the decade of disco: Who can forget the image of John Travolta as Tony Manero in Saturday Night Fever decked out in a three-piece white leisure suit with his shirt collar open, his hand points towards the heavens as the lighted disco floor glares defiantly below him? While the turbulent decade ushered in Ms. magazine, Mood rings, Studio 54, Stephen King horror novels, and granola, it was also the decade in which over 25 million video game systems made their way into our homes, allowing Asteroids and Pac-Man games to be played out on televisions in living rooms throughout the country. Whether it was the boom of environmentalism or the bust of the Nixon administration and public life as we knew it, the era represented a profound shift in American society and culture.
Modem philosophy of science has turned out to be a Pandora's box. Once opened, the puzzling monsters appeared: not only was the neat structure of classical physics radically changed, but a variety of broader questions were let loose, bearing on the nature of scientific inquiry and of human knowledge in general. Philosophy of science could not help becoming epistemological and historical, and could no longer avoid metaphysical questions, even when these were posed in disguise. Once the identification of scientific methodology with that of physics had been queried, not only did biology and psychology come under scrutiny as major modes of scientific inquiry, but so too did history and the social sciences - particularly economics, sociology and anthropology. And now, new 'monsters' are emerging - for example, medicine and political science as disciplined inquiries. This raises anew a much older question, namely whether the conception of science is to be distinguished from a wider conception of learning and inquiry? Or is science to be more deeply understood as the most adequate form of learning and inquiry, whose methods reach every domain of rational thought? Is modern science matured reason, or is it simply one historically adapted and limited species of western reason? In our colloquia at Boston University, over the past fourteen years, we have been probing and testing the scope of philosophy of science.
Every year, more than a million men undergo painful needle biopsies for prostate cancer, and upward of 100,000 have radical prostatectomies, resulting in incontinence and impotence. But the shocking fact is that most of these men would never have died from this common form of cancer, which frequently grows so slowly that it never even leaves the prostate. How did we get to a point where so many unnecessary tests and surgeries are being done? In The Great Prostate Hoax, Richard J. Ablin exposes how a discovery he made in 1970, the prostate-specific antigen (PSA), was co-opted by the pharmaceutical industry into a multibillion-dollar business. He shows how his discovery of PSA was never meant to be used for screening prostate cancer, and yet nonetheless the test was patented and eventurally approved by the FDA in 1994. Now, doctors and victims are beginning to speak out about the harm of the test, and beginning to search for a true prostate cancer-specific marker.
Criticism and the History of Science deals with Thomas Kuhn's, Imre Lakatos's and Paul Feyerabend's criticism of Karl Popper's falsificationist conception of science. It argues that this criticism is based on two important methodological problems: the problem that observations and tests statements are fallible and impregnated with theory, and the problem of how to test complex theoretical systems. In order to solve these problems it shows how problematic test statements can be criticised and whole theoretical systems falsified. In this way the falsificationist conception of science is developed and defended in a way making a deeper understanding of science and its history possible.
This text provides a comprehensive, state-of-the art review of this field, and will serve as a valuable resource for clinicians, surgeons and researchers with an interest in early prostate cancer. The book reviews new data about genetic markers, transperineal mapping biopsy and mpMRI, how to apply each of these technologies in patients with elevated PSA, when a prior prostate biopsy performed by the standard TRUS method is negative and in cases where low risk disease is already diagnosed, how to differentiate those men who might harbor more aggressive disease from those who do not. Over 75% of newly diagnosed prostate cancer meets the criteria for low risk disease which has created a dilemma for both patients and clinicians. Active surveillance programs have been initiated and are reviewed. How the new technologies impact surveillance programs is addressed. Clinical stage designation is updated and a new intra-prostatic staging system is discussed. Prostate biopsy techniques utilizing transrectal ultrasound, transperineal mapping, elastography and mpMRI are compared. Finally, utilization of this new technology in the application of focal therapy is reviewed. The Prostate Cancer Dilemma will serve as a very useful resource for physicians and researchers dealing with, and interested in this challenging malignancy. Chapters are written by experts in their fields and include the most up to date scientific and clinical information as well as links to procedural video content.
'This study was conducted and published under an interagency agreement between the Center for Census Use Studies, Bureau of the Census, and the Administration on Aging, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.'