PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 27, 2012
Prostate Cancer Detection Research and Education Act - Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), acting through the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), to establish an advisory council on prostate cancer to draft a plan for the development and validation of an accurate test or tests to detect and diagnose prostate cancer. Terminates the advisory council on December 31, 2016.
Requires the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to coordinate and intensify research in accordance with the plan developed under this Act, with particular attention provided to leveraging existing research to develop and validate a test or tests, such as biomarkers or imaging, to detect and accurately diagnose prostate cancer.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) carry out a national campaign to increase the awareness and knowledge of prostate cancer, and (2) award grants to nonprofit private entities to test alternative outreach and education strategies to increase the awareness and knowledge of Americans with respect to prostate cancer.
People & committees
Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4676)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.3345 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.3345 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.3345 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.3345 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.