Live data from Hacker News

Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

sciencealert.com

131–140 of 215 posts

Re: Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're being a little mean to the dark ages. Galen was a pretty accomplished medical researcher, and Roman-era medical implements were quite sophisticated, and were well-established by the time of the dark ages. By the late dark ages, we also saw a lot of modern medical techniques coming in from the Middle East. There's this stereotype of people being filthy, ignorant, and dumb, but it's not really true. And…

> Galen was a pretty accomplished medical researcher, and Roman-era medical implements were quite sophisticated, and were well-established by the time of the dark ages. Were those implements actually practiced throughout the dark ages or did they go the way of the Roman road networks? When people talk of the dark ages they're usually talking of post-Roman Western Europe rather than Asia or the Middle East. I'm not su…

Wikipedia defines the Dark Ages as lasting through the 15th century, by which point, Islamic medical advancements would have made it into Europe. Obviously, in 500AD, they didn't yet exist.

One of the reason for the decline of the term "dark ages" is that there is increasing evidence that people in this period didn't actually crawl under a rock of ignorance. Large-scale armies and infrastructure projects were gone, but at the same time, a lot more knowledge persisted than is given credit for -- the sorts of things which don't require a massive Roman central government administration to maintain.

Re: Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

#132
post #68

I find this weirdly amazing, as to this day I was reading some medical news and documentaries where it was said that entire human bodies were sliced by millimetre slices. So, somehow I always imagined that each part of body and tissue is 100% known and that only left is to find out what are inner workings on the nano-meter scale, deep molecular levels or genetic level. But in 2018 there was a similar news about Inter…

That we still find new structures within our own bodies should be deeply troubling to anyone in the medical sciences. I for one would be deeply ashamed if I suddenly found that bytes had a ninth bit we never suspected was there in the first place.

> I for one would be deeply ashamed if I suddenly found that bytes had a ninth bit we never suspected was there in the first place.

http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/f_by_b...

Re: Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

#133
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our field is vastly simpler than medicine. We're working on the edge of theory and practice is much, much, much messier. Cut it out with the arrogance. http://johnsalvatier.org/blog/2017/reality-has-a-surprising-...

Agreed. Though, to be fair, I have met my share of arrogant medical practitioners.

I'm sure, but in the case of medical practitioners, that arrogance may be borne by confidence rather than ignorance. You certainly need to be confident in your abilities if you're going to take the responsibility of someone's health in your hands.

Re: Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

#134
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you decide to attribute something to "modern medicine" versus "The Game of Telephone, Medical Style"? For example, >Giving patients highly addictive narcotics for pain relief. Is the opioid epidemic modern medicine 's fault? Or is it more the fault of doctors who over-prescribe coupled with the lack of a sane healthcare system? Also, are there viable (read: equally effective) alternatives to opioids for pain r…

If by modern medicine you mean only "the best conclusions derived from the best meta-analyses based on the best evidence" then very little of what any doctor does is grounded in that. I wouldn't call that medicine. I'd call that, maybe, "research biomedical science". I think OP's comment is precisely that the practice of medicine has very little to do with what top-quality research would prescribe, and is more like m…

Thank you for the more thorough take on that perspective.

Yes, there are "parallels to the Dark Ages" in the sense that "medical practitioners prescribe treatment based on the best information available at the time".

That doesn't mean medical knowledge, practice, research, and equipment has been stagnant or that medical practitioners should not be trusted with their advice.

Statements like "the lunacy of modern medicine" are not truthful and not productive, especially when the minimal supporting evidence for the statements are misleading at best.

Re: Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

#135
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> drugs developed with a specific purpose, but then afterwards found to have a completely different effect to what was originally intended I don't find that surprising. You have to do the early phases of drug development in model systems like cell cultures for practical reasons: It makes evidence obtained more reproducible and has less ethical concerns than experimenting on humans immediately. It's like how software…

What seems weird about this is that the process for deciding that an approved drug is useful for a certain condition (not the one it was intended for) is really informal, it seems to rely on common knowledge circulating in the guild. For the initial approval, we have this very formal process, the FDA wants this kind of data from trials of this size to show this statistical level, etc. All very scientific-looking. But…

> I'm just a bit shocked how pre-modern our system for collecting this knowledge appears to be.

I'm not an expert, but I imagine any more advanced system would be extremely problematic from a data protection point of view (think HIPAA etc.). In a study, patients sign multiple pages of legalese to allow the researchers to collect all the required data. You don't have that with regular patients in a GP's office.

Re: Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

#136
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh dear, I should not have to labor the obvious but I will. With all the medical schools, hundreds of thousands of doctors, pathologists, diagnostic tools, xrays, MRIs, etc. etc. that we've had available in the 'modern' era of medicine - in the last 100 or so years - how the fucking hell did we miss something as 'obvious' as this? QED!

Because no one is looking for tissue that secretes saliva (not very interesting medically), coupled with the fact that this requires special PET/CT to find. You are a buffoon.

[deleted]

Re: Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

#137
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh dear, I should not have to labor the obvious but I will. With all the medical schools, hundreds of thousands of doctors, pathologists, diagnostic tools, xrays, MRIs, etc. etc. that we've had available in the 'modern' era of medicine - in the last 100 or so years - how the fucking hell did we miss something as 'obvious' as this? QED!

Because no one is looking for tissue that secretes saliva (not very interesting medically), coupled with the fact that this requires special PET/CT to find. You are a buffoon.

"Because no one is looking for tissue that secretes saliva (not very interesting medically), coupled with the fact that this requires special PET/CT to find. You are a buffoon."

et2o: yes—a buffoon—that's very likely true, but at least I admit it!

However, you medicos have a damn lot to answer for. Where would you like me to start? Perhaps with the thalidomide fiasco, or more recently the abysmal lack of preparation for COVID-19 even though we knew it was coming decades ago, or the current opioid epidemic, the policies of which were sorted out nearly a century ago with both government regulation and tightly controlled international treaties, all of which have recently been [conveniently] forgotten by the pharmaceutical industry, the FDA, along with a disreputable mob of doctors who disbanded their Hippocratic Oaths for a few shekels from mafia-like Purdue. Right, the law should bring them all to account.

Perhaps the most tragic aspect of the opioid crisis is that the thousands of 'good' doctors stood knowingly by and effectively did nothing, seemingly ethics flew out the window. In words loosely attributed to Edmund Burke: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing".

"(not very interesting medically)"

Whilst many areas of medical science have done wonders, in others research has been almost non-existent. You're right, certain diseases/subjects are not interesting or boring and concomitantly that they fail to attract funding is a problem, and it's always been that way. In this regard, the trouble is (and has always been) that the self-governing medical profession has never been able to prioritize patients above their own interests, not to mention money. In essence, medical researchers do not exercise granularity evenly over the field of medical knowledge (as you implied yourself); and that's aided and abetted by large pharma, et al whose principal interest is money, not medicine.

___

Lear: My wits begin to turn.

Fool: He that has and a little tiny wit,—

(Lear III/I)

Re: Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

#138
post #111
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alright, but on the range from nothing to perfect, we are... Far more than 2x the dark ages. More like 1000x.

That's not what Dr. McCoy thinks. "Dialysis? My God, is this the dark ages!"

"Sewing people with needles and thread!"

Re: Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

#139
post #12

It seems almost unbelievable that in this day and age we could have missed something like this. In my opinion, it put modern medicine into perspective. I've suspected for some time that medicine is actually closer to the dark ages than we like to think it is, and this report seems like a good validation of that notion.

> I've suspected for some time that medicine is actually closer to the dark ages than we like to think it is What does that even mean? Nobody's claiming that modern medicine is anywhere close to perfect but the "dark ages" medicine was Humorism, blood letting and faith healing. Surgeons didn't start washing their hands before childbirth until the 19th century. It's really weird to look back at the mind-boggling progr…

Humorism probably produced observable benefits just by encouraging people to eat a balanced diet. Its basic notion that you have different things in your body that need to be balanced is not wrong.

Re: Researchers discover new salivary glands in the human head

#140
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've suspected for some time that medicine is actually closer to the dark ages than we like to think it is What does that even mean? Nobody's claiming that modern medicine is anywhere close to perfect but the "dark ages" medicine was Humorism, blood letting and faith healing. Surgeons didn't start washing their hands before childbirth until the 19th century. It's really weird to look back at the mind-boggling progr…

Oh dear, I should not have to labor the obvious but I will. With all the medical schools, hundreds of thousands of doctors, pathologists, diagnostic tools, xrays, MRIs, etc. etc. that we've had available in the 'modern' era of medicine - in the last 100 or so years - how the fucking hell did we miss something as 'obvious' as this? QED!

You should have to because the original comment was seeping in dramatic hyperbole to fish for points. At the end of the day, I'd much rather live with modern medicine than dark age medicine.
Post reply on HN