Researchers reverse dog paralysis

Discussion in 'Off-topic Zone' started by Rackat, Nov 21, 2012.

  1. Rackat

    Rackat Active Member

    2,134 Messages
    0 Likes Received
  2. rocboy22

    rocboy22 Active Member

    1,606 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    holy crap, that is awesome
  3. Denim Chicken

    Denim Chicken Well-Known Member

    6,378 Messages
    5,587 Likes Received
    I really hate these kind of stories b/c it seems so promising and then you never here about it again.
  4. Reality

    Reality Administrator Staff Member

    14,437 Messages
    9,325 Likes Received
    The problem is that they release promising information in order to get additional funding and grants. It is the equivalent of a salary-based worker showing his work to his boss and saying, "Only I was able to do this so you should keep me around another few years."

    Of all the "promising" breakthroughs I have read about in the last 10 years, I cannot remember any actual breakthroughs being announced and practiced today. Are we smarter than we were yesterday? Yes. Have we fine-tuned previous practices in order to better treat patients today? Sure.

    Yet we still treat cancer with surgery and chemotherapy as we have done forever. We have seen more devices built to assist paralyzed patients than treatments that offer any improvements in their paralysis.

    I remember hearing about stories of paralysis being cured in mice and other animals 10+ years ago. I have remember hearing stories of certain new treatments curing multiple forms of cancer. Where are those?

    Anti-aging? People are still using the same creams and treatments they were many years ago. Arthritis? Same pain pills and treatment as they were many years ago.

    At some point, people (like myself) become immune to the "hopes and promises" of the medical research industry. I am cynical as to their motives as I see them as only out to secure more funding so they can keep their status in the research community and their nice paychecks and way of life.

    With all of the brain power and billions of dollars being dedicated to curing and improving all of the major diseases, illnesses, etc. of the world, it is amazing, or rather depressing, how very little real-world usable results have come from it. Sure, we have seen minor improvements and advances in treatments, but nothing ground breaking or earth shattering.

    After watching family members and friends die from diseases over long periods of time where promising studies early in their diagnosis never came to fruition years later when they died, I see articles like this as nothing more than an ongoing "dangling carrot" situation with the only real results being that people get their funding and maintain their cushy lives.

  5. Derekmtl85

    Derekmtl85 Well-Known Member

    1,545 Messages
    520 Likes Received
    To add to Reality's post, the medical industry doesn't want permanent fixes, they want fixes they can sell every week/month/year.

    They will make sure studies like this, close down or stop. So we never hear about it again.

    But as a dog lover and owner, this would be awesome if it was available for everyone one day.
  6. CashMan

    CashMan Well-Known Member

    2,166 Messages
    599 Likes Received

    Most of what you say, involves a person to spend and spend and spend, where as, if they were to fix something and it was one and done, someone isn't making money. I think things become clouded, when big money is involved.
  7. Reality

    Reality Administrator Staff Member

    14,437 Messages
    9,325 Likes Received
    I think my comments have been taken out of context. I am not railing against pharmaceutical companies, but rather researchers in general.

    While I can agree that pharma companies are all about the money, most of them invest heavily in research and development because if they find some new treatment, they are guaranteed a patent on it for enough time to make it worthwhile.

    My issue is with researchers themselves who announce "big news" and other "groundbreaking breakthroughs" in medicine yet, 5-15 years later, there's still no public benefit from their research.

    My point was that many people have grown immune and cynical to their amazing announcements, but we have heard them over and over for the last 20 years. Their motives are geared more toward securing additional funding and grants rather than actually actually producing results that will benefit the public even in the years to come.

    To me it is no different than the sports star or coach who during the off-season claims their team is going to win the Super Bowl next year, yet year after year, they fail to make the playoffs, much less go far into the post-season. At some point, it's all hype and potential rather than results.

    Every article you read on amazing breakthroughs in medical research always end with the "we are still early in our research and only limited testing in mice has been done so far" disclaimer.

    My point is, why even announce it then? How about they actually for once announce it after it reaches the point of human trials? The reason? Simple. Early research announcements of minimal success leads to additional funding and research grants which keeps them in their well-paid jobs and living the nice cushy lives they enjoy.

  8. hipfake08

    hipfake08 Well-Known Member

    9,132 Messages
    1,668 Likes Received
    They want fixes you have to buy pills for the rest of your time.
  9. DallasCowpoke

    DallasCowpoke Fierce Allegiance

    5,533 Messages
    300 Likes Received
    The argument concerning pharmaceutical Co's and researchers suppressing and/or overrating findings with their underlying motives to solely benefit themselves, is so illogical.

    Does it ever occur to any of you conspiracy-theorists, that these Co's and researchers are human beings too...and as such, susceptible to the same diseases, injuries and afflictions?

    Do you REALLY think the CEO of "ACME Bio-Metrics & Research", who has a wife, child or even themselves, suffering from a disease or injury they've discovered a cure for, and/or have made significant strides in research on, are just going to go, "Naaaa guys...Let's not do that, 'cus we'll make WAY more $$$ if we just sit on this for awhile"?

  10. Derekmtl85

    Derekmtl85 Well-Known Member

    1,545 Messages
    520 Likes Received
    Who cares if they are humans? They have a business to run. The whole point of a business, is to make money.

    In Canada, a scientist found a cure for cancer. A CURE, not just something to help manage it. For lung, brain and breast cancer. But no big pharma company has even tried to buy it/use it. Even if it's 100% proven as effective...Know why? Because it wouldn't make much money for them, and once cancer is cured..well, who would need to buy pills every week? That's billions of dollars gone.

    Just google "Cancer cured in Canada", you'll see the article and realize you're wrong. But if you rather stay blind to the truth of how big business works, just ignore my message.

    "Canadian scientists tested this dichloroacetate (DCA) on human's cells; it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells and left the healthy cells alone."

    That's just a tiny bit of the article, but it's a complete cure. Pharma companies just don't want it because it's a one time thing, not something they can continue making money on.

    You think these companies want the best for humanity? How about insurance companies? Hilarious.
  11. DallasCowpoke

    DallasCowpoke Fierce Allegiance

    5,533 Messages
    300 Likes Received

    This exact article crops up every month or so, and then a bunch of people swoop in and disprove it, and then the conspiracy theorists start coming in and claiming that we're hiding a cure to make drug companies rich, and a bunch of people come in and show why that's nonsense, then the next month it repeats.

    It's like we're in some kind of time loop, I swear. It wouldn't be so bad if it were actually a different article each time.

    There is no tin foil hat theory here. In addition to the story having been proven false, a company would grab this and sell it because it would make money. Or, some venture capitalist somewhere would grab this, produce it, market it, make billions etc etc. There is no vast conspiracy to keep humanity sick.

    No ones withholding the 'cure' for cancer for uber amounts of money, or you'd see the ultra rich magically be cured after going into a secret lab in a remote island that probably has a volcano and someone plotting to take over the world.

    No regulatory body (such as the FDA) is withholding cancer research and advances for money, that's just ludicrous and too stupid to argue against. Hint: other countries have different regulations if the FDA was such a scary big bad wolf they could just hop over to Canada or Mexico or any country that isn't the USA. Further, the cost of cancer on a government, of which the FDA is a part of, would far exceed revenues generated by a drug.

    A cure for cancer would not eradicate the disease, thus all arguments of it being withheld for money are stupid, as cancer would still occur, thus providing recurring revenue of selling these magical cancer cure-all pills or vaccinations. Apply the same argument to withholding a vaccine for Polio or another infectious disease we currently are vaccinated against. People are born, more vaccinations must be produced, money is generated, argument for withholding is invalidated.

    9/11 wasn't an inside job, no ones hiding a magic cancer pill, radio stations don't subliminally send mind control messages, and all other stupid conspiracy "I'm the only one who can see the light its everyone else that is sheeple!" argument are, to purposefully repeat a very fun and powerful word, stupid.
  12. Idgit

    Idgit That sounds really boring Staff Member

    45,247 Messages
    29,752 Likes Received

    There have been ridiculous breakthroughs and therapies during the last 20 years. It's not like they're developing magic ointments over there. But drugs--herceptin, for example, or rituxin from Genentech have done a lot of people a world of good. AIDS drugs have readily addressed that disease. There have been great strides in treating autoimmune disorders and diabetes during that time, and the whole SSRI class of drugs has been a panacea to a lot of people.

    The problem is that the cost and time involved for developing new therapies is astronomical. When it costs $600--800M and takes six years to get a product through a phase three clinical trial, and you've got a 17 year patent that's a third-expired before you can make a dime off it, you better be developing something that a lot of people can use regularly at a relatively high cost, or there's little point in developing it. Bear in mind that whatever you bring to market has to defray the costs of everything in your pipeline that doesn't actually make it out of trials, and that there's a grey market for reverse-engineered versions of whatever it is you get to sell almost immediately, and it's no mystery why bio/pharma concentrates its efforts where it does.

    To the OP, though, this stuff is super-cool. Scientific innovation and creation: just about as cool as it gets.
  13. Rackat

    Rackat Active Member

    2,134 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Heh, I thought it was a cool story. I didn't think it would be controversial. :laugh2:
  14. Reality

    Reality Administrator Staff Member

    14,437 Messages
    9,325 Likes Received
    As I said in my posts, I do not deny the researchers are coming up with improvements in the areas of treatments and technology.

    My problem is that it seems like every week we read this miracle story about how new treatments cured cancer, repaired paralysis, etc. in lab animals as if it's some modern miracle breakthrough that we can look forward to in a few years. Then it never happens yet we hear the same stories and announcements by researchers year after year.

    It is the same situation with researchers in non-medical fields. I have read several stories over the last 10 years where a group of researchers somewhere have developed a car that can get 200/mpg, yet most cars today continue to remain in the same mpg range of cars made years or decade ago.

    I am not down on research, researchers, corporations or universities performing the research. They have and will continue to improve our treatments, technologies and our general way of life. My problem is that they keep regularly releasing these miracle breakthrough announcements and press releases in an effort to gain personal recognition and additional funding, yet years later the miracle breakthroughs are still as far away as they were years ago when the article or press release came out.

    For example, if I were to take the mound for a professional baseball team and strike out the first batter I faced, using the common tactics by those researchers, I could walk off the mound and talk about what a great pitcher I am and how I have already thrown a perfect game in a limited setting. All I need is some team to pay me $30 million and I will be glad to go back and strike out the other 26 batters to complete the perfect game. Yet, I would be lucky if I ever struck out another batter.

    I want researchers to stop boasting about miracle breakthroughs and providing false hope to desperate people who are suffering from terminal or debilitating diseases or injuries and instead, wait until they have tangible results that can truly give hope to those who need it.

    Let them announce the improvements in treatments and other advances they make as they make them and leave the amazing breakthrough announcements in the desk drawers until they are actually legitimate and proven.

    In other words .. I want them to stop crying wolf until there really is a wolf.

  15. Eskimo

    Eskimo Well-Known Member

    12,821 Messages
    496 Likes Received
    Just a couple of points in this thread.

    The first thing you have to realize is that animal physiology and human physiology is very different. In particular, the organization of dog and cat spinal cords to human spinal cords is very different so that which works in dogs and cats often will not work at all in humans. The same is true of rat brains and human brains so that which seems to work in rat brains often won't work in a human brain.

    The second thing is that I never cease to be amazed by the general public's willingness to believe that the best mind's available in business would pass up trying to monetize cures for conditions like breast cancer and lung cancer. Sure, you could give them a bunch of cheap and off-patent chemotherapies that have been around for a long time and don't earn much money or you could have a patented "monopoly" on the cure for breast cancer for the next 15 years. You could say maybe someone else could earn more money off something that can be sold over and over and over. That may be true but that guy's treatment will be worthless the moment the "cure" hits the market.

    Anyhow, cancer is a very common disease so it is not surprising it has taken so long to get an understanding of how it works and what things we can do to try and stop it. One thing you have to realize is that there are probably all kinds of pre-cancerous cells in your body right now. The question is why don't they all develop into cancers, how can you stop them from becoming cancer, how can you detect them before they cause disease and how can you treat them before they cause serious harm. While we often like to think of cancer as a "disease" it is really a bunch of many different types of diseases that behave like cancers do - reproduce like crazy and ignore the body's rules on which tissues go where.

    Anyhow, major advances have been made. We can now go ahead and figure out someone's genome within a day for around $1000 whereas a decade ago it took several teams more than a decade to do just one human. What has emerged is an understanding of how complicated the gene machinery is - how it moves and how it sleeps and wakes up versus just how it looks. Now what we have to try and understand is how does one person's genome interact with its environment to create disease. This is an immensely complex construct so it is not surprising that we have only picked out the simplest of such diseases thus far because it is complicated at a level that few of us can even comprehend.

    One of the next set of advances will also start to come from the ability to build designer drugs to treat certain conditions. As we get a better understanding of how biological molecules work we have also started to understand how we can build drugs to interfere in diseases. Anti-TNF alpha blocking medications have made a huge difference in the treatment of conditions like ankylosing spondylitis and rheumatoid arthritis.

    Another huge change will be coming in cancer therapy. It will be about medications used to tweak the immune system to treat cancer. There is already one medication out to treat prostate cancer. There is another with amazing results being tested for a dangerous kind of brain cancer (glioblastoma multiforme) and there is another being used in some forms of breast cancer. These aren't pie in the sky things either - they may be available in 3 years or so to the general public. There is also potential to use viruses to treat a certain type of cancer that uses a certain genetic pathway that is utilized by about 7 of 10 of the most common cancers.

    So major advances continue to be made but everyone wants it all right now. Part of it is researchers, often well-meaning researchers, think they are much closer to the "cure" than they really are. There are a lot of mis-steps along the way. But no one is really hiding cures from the public - they are just way too valuable and CEOs will figure out ways to monetize cures. That's what they are paid to do.
  16. Idgit

    Idgit That sounds really boring Staff Member

    45,247 Messages
    29,752 Likes Received
    Since you mention it, it's getting even cheaper. $299, though it's subsidized by your consent to let them share the data collectively.
  17. Boom

    Boom Just Dez It

    1,037 Messages
    154 Likes Received

    My wife just started using Humira after a nasty flare up in her Ulcerative Colitis. So far it's like magic. Now to just hope her weakened immune system doesn't cause problems.
  18. Eskimo

    Eskimo Well-Known Member

    12,821 Messages
    496 Likes Received
    Humira is a very selective medication so it really doesn't cause widespread immunosuppression the way more blunt chemotherapies and steroids do. There is a fairly significant increase relative rate in the increase of serious infections compared to the general public (somewhere around 50% or so) but you have to remember that the background rate of serious infections is actually quite low.

    These anti-TNF alpha meds have been utilized in other conditions but classic uses right now are the Spondyloarthropathies (ie. Ankylosing Spondylitis, Psoriatic Arthritis), Rheumatoid Arthritis, severe psoriasis, Ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease. They have really made a huge difference to quality of life for many people. The bad part is it is horribly expensive right now at around $1600/month so not many people can afford it without a drug plan and those plans will usually only cover more severe cases. There are also many people who have only a partial response so more solutions need to be found.
  19. SaltwaterServr

    SaltwaterServr Blank Paper Offends Me

    8,124 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Thank you.

    The "Canada Cured Cancer" cult never sleeps. :bang2:

Share This Page