Live data from Hacker News

Scientist who cured type I Diabetes in mice was denied funding for human trials

columbiaspectator.com

111–120 of 126 posts

Re: Scientist who cured type I Diabetes in mice was denied funding for human trials

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My sense is that he followed the basic science, working deeply in stem cell biology and adding significantly to our knowledge. This is another important route to convincing people that they should pursue something like stem cells - if you know how they do what they do, then you can make educated guesses about how to prevent side effects, too. So, to the contrary, I think he's done many things over the past 10 years t…

Do you think his research will result in type I diabetes being cured in humans in our lifetimes?

Do you think his research will result in type I diabetes being cured in humans in our lifetimes?

Should it not be obvious that such a question exceed the ability of even the most sophisticated doctors and biologists today, not to mention anyone on HN. I'd agree that conspiracy and collusion is always part of human behavior but this doesn't prove that anyone knows the path that future efforts at cures will follow.

Re: Scientist who cured type I Diabetes in mice was denied funding for human trials

#112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excellent examples. A free marketeer, as you say, would say that the reason nobody is making more antivenin is because the "process for applying" is so expensive - but of course, there has to be quality control, and more importantly, there's every reason to believe that the manufacture would be more expensive than the applying. Govt regulation is used as a scapegoat. The market for creating this product is just not d…

I am not against government or rules. I am against the idea that coercion is the means. Voluntary cooperation, not the use of force, is the means by which we create solutions to all sorts of problems. Health is no different. It suffers over the long term when people think the use of force to get some short term benefit. Somehow we live our lives with the understanding that forcing those around to do what we want woul…

Yes, voluntary compliance with regulations works so well to preserve the Commons - it was clearly in BP's interest to comply with regulations in the Gulf, for instance, and clearly in Goldman-Sachs's interest to preserve the global financial structure. Only idiots would choose short-term savings or profit-taking over long-term global stability, after all; enlightened self-interest will take care of everything!

I like your overall philosophy that coercion is wrong, and in principle I agree with it. I wish that human nature didn't contradict it. Sadly, on every hand I see that actual, real live human beings must be coerced to do good if even the slightest amount of consistency is required.

Re: Scientist who cured type I Diabetes in mice was denied funding for human trials

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in the wrong business.

Find a cure for old age. Millionaires would give you virtually anything.

I think you mean a "maintenance regimen". Cures are for suckers.

Re: Scientist who cured type I Diabetes in mice was denied funding for human trials

#114
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What percentage of the technologies that people cite as being made possible by the government were developed for non-military purposes? Edit: The NSF started out as a way of enhancing military research: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Foundation

What's wrong with the NSF starting that way? Are they not a significant source of funds for "basic science" research? Even if you want to be cynical about this issue, haven't we been doing this long enough to know that research for military purposes often translates to advances in non-military applications? EDIT: and don't get me wrong; I would love to see some shift in the way funds are allocated.

My point isn't that central coordination doesn't work, it was just that central coordination is extremely unsophisticated and is typically not a source of added insight, just a source of funds.

In my experience in academe, researchers tailor their work to what the NSF is funding, not what they consider most interesting/important.

Re: Scientist who cured type I Diabetes in mice was denied funding for human trials

#115
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not against government or rules. I am against the idea that coercion is the means. Voluntary cooperation, not the use of force, is the means by which we create solutions to all sorts of problems. Health is no different. It suffers over the long term when people think the use of force to get some short term benefit. Somehow we live our lives with the understanding that forcing those around to do what we want woul…

Yes, voluntary compliance with regulations works so well to preserve the Commons - it was clearly in BP's interest to comply with regulations in the Gulf, for instance, and clearly in Goldman-Sachs's interest to preserve the global financial structure. Only idiots would choose short-term savings or profit-taking over long-term global stability, after all; enlightened self-interest will take care of everything! I like…

I'm not talking about voluntary compliance to government regulation.

I'm talking about regulation and government freely agreed to by people when they decide to engage in an activity in an area. And these rules should be decided upon by those whose property is at stake, not by people who just collect tax revenue off in Washington.

The problem is that no system of property has been worked for territorial waters. So no one has any direct financial stake or right to investigate and sure over pollution from rivers. That must wait until the government decides to give it its fully divided and compromised attention.

Human beings only need to be coerced when they fail to live up to their agreements or when they violate the rights of others. But that is not the wrong use of force I seek to stop. Its authorized by your human rights and by the contracts people freely agree to.

Beyond that, coercion is destructive and should be avoided. There is no right that authorizes its use.

Re: Scientist who cured type I Diabetes in mice was denied funding for human trials

#116
post #107
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One such case is of Barry Marshall and H.Pylori, he was awarded the nobel price in 2005 for discovering the cure to ulcers, (antibiotics) but he first discovered the cure in 1983 and after about 10 years of 'trying' to convince the medical community of which (Glaxo who was dominant in that market) was making 90% of their profits from Zantac (an anti acid treatment) - (known inside as the 'Zantac years'), they were ac…

This story seems to have at least the air of exaggeration around it. See http://www.csicop.org/si/show/bacteria_ulcers_and_ostracism_... for the history around the adoption of H. Pylori hypothesis.

There is nonsense in the above article:

"Perhaps more important was that the subject, who was none other than Marshall himself, failed to develop an ulcer. Note also that the disease resolved without treatment."

This story suggest that he didn't get an ulcer (but he did get all the first symptoms) and that he didn't treat it with (antibiotics) which he did and which eventually cured his own symptoms (and nearly cost him his marriage as his wife left him shortly after doing this).

http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/E/8270/22025/189048.htm...

"As with many tales of dedicated discoverers, you marvel at the tolerance of the family. When Marshall conducted his experiment on himself, he and his wife Ariadne, a psychologist, had four children aged between 10 and 3. He didn't inform Ariadne, or any of his colleagues, about what he was doing, mainly because he knew they'd object.

“I'm a selfish so-and-so”

“A few days after taking the bacteria I began to feel this heavy fullness after eating, and then on day five the vomiting started. One of the reasons I didn't tell my wife about it was that she had whiplash from a car accident. There was a lot of chaos in the family and in the middle of this each morning I would wake before dawn and run to the toilet to vomit. I had bad breath and I looked terrible. You have to admit I'm a selfish so-and-so to even go ahead with the experiment.”

Ten days after drinking the bacteria, Marshall had an endoscopy and other tests to show that his previously bug-free stomach was thoroughly infected and that he was showing the same signs as his patients.

“At that point I couldn't restrain myself; I had to tell the wife. She was speechless.” He laughs. “But it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.” She insisted that he took antibiotics to clear up the infection straight away, though Marshall wanted to continue until he had a full-blown ulcer."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/artic...

Also gastronome enteritis and related diseases was responsible for over 5k deaths (globally) -- a week -- during the period it was known but not accepted 1983 - 1997.

http://www.aips.net.au/97.html

"Marshall swallowed a culture of the bacterium. A week later, he began suffering acute symptoms of gastritis, and biopsies revealed that he had developed both infection with H. pylori and severe acute gastritis. Fortunately, the sequel was a successful case of "Physician, heal thyself"!

further:

"At this stage, bismuth subcitrate was commonly used to treat ulcers, although it was uncertain how the drug worked. Marshall surmised that it might kill the H. pylori bacteria, and he subsequently discovered that a combination of bismuth with antibiotics completely eradicated the bacteria. He then set out to test the hypothesis that elimination of H. pylori could result in a permanent cure of gastric ulcer."

"From 1985 to 1987, Warren and Marshall studied the use of antibiotics as treatment for ulcer. Their finding that 80% of patients were permanently cured of their ulcer if H. pylori were eradicated, proved a landmark in clinical gastroenterology practice. It resulted in a complete reassessment of ulcer treatment, and this therapy is now accepted as an essential part of the management of ulcer disease."

Re: Scientist who cured type I Diabetes in mice was denied funding for human trials

#117
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, massive strawman. The government sucks at innovation? Who do you think funded and developed ARPANet? You know, the network we're using to communicate right now. Upon which countless businesses have been built. Nuclear power? Government. First electronic computer? Government. Furthermore, when it comes to drug discovery, that 'evil government' has one advantage over businesses, because they have no profit motive.…

Could anyone please point me to government scientific or technology accomplishments in the last 30 years? Something that noticeably improved our quality of life. Something on par with achievements by IBM (Business PC), Microsoft (OS, Office, and other software), Google (search), Apple (smartphones, music, ...), Intel (microprocessors), Pfizer (drugs). It was surprising to see down-voting just on the basis that you di…

WWW (1989): Developed at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, a multinational, government-funded research organization.

edit: I've found your post http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1466419 in which you exclude CERN. Could you give an example for a valid organization?

Re: Scientist who cured type I Diabetes in mice was denied funding for human trials

#119
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, voluntary compliance with regulations works so well to preserve the Commons - it was clearly in BP's interest to comply with regulations in the Gulf, for instance, and clearly in Goldman-Sachs's interest to preserve the global financial structure. Only idiots would choose short-term savings or profit-taking over long-term global stability, after all; enlightened self-interest will take care of everything! I like…

I'm not talking about voluntary compliance to government regulation. I'm talking about regulation and government freely agreed to by people when they decide to engage in an activity in an area. And these rules should be decided upon by those whose property is at stake, not by people who just collect tax revenue off in Washington. The problem is that no system of property has been worked for territorial waters. So no…

What you are implying is that because nobody owns the Gulf of Mexico, BP had no reason not to kill it.

I call that insanity.

Re: Scientist who cured type I Diabetes in mice was denied funding for human trials

#120
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was also ignored totally by all the main stream publications, it was later alleged they had close ties to Glaxo and the editors were fully aware of the significance the impact would have had on Glaxo. http://www.orc.ru/~yur77/pylori.htm

The article claims, without evidence, that Nature and Science didn't publish Marshall because of ties with Glaxo. Even if that's true, there are a lot of other journals out there. Are they ALL in Glaxos pocket? I doubt it. But they're all reviewed by his peers, who made a living by giving endoscopies and prescriptions to patients every year or so.

Peer review is usually by scientist peers, and not professional peers. I doubt that most academic researchers in medicine were prescribing anything, really.
Post reply on HN