Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Gutting of America's Medical Research

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 98 posts

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#71

Post by biophysboy »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #61
biophysboy wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think reproducibility will improve if funding is cut significantly? That is less money for labor, instruments, and consumables, which means less money for experiments, particularly for follow up experiments that have no deliverable.

I agree that cutting it won't solve the issue, especially without that long term plan, but at the current sky-high level of fraud, this just isn't science anymore. At what level of fraud do you suggest pulling the plug if not right now? Funding research until 90% is fake? 95%? 99%? Taxpayer money can be spent on many other life-critical areas with tangible results.

Irreproducibility is not the same as fraud. In any case, I would support high-risk research - stuff that may not be repeatable - if it has a high direct ROI, economic spillover (USA has a big biotech/pharma ecosystem), and leads to cost savings (e.g. no more dialysis machines).

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#72

Post by biophysboy »

nothercastle wrote: post #59
biophysboy wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think reproducibility will improve if funding is cut significantly? That is less money for labor, instruments, and consumables, which means less money for experiments, particularly for follow up experiments that have no deliverable.

Competition is higher people are hungrier, fraud will go up not down

Yes, exactly

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#73

Post by mystraline »

bediger4000 wrote: post #66
Spivak wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I go further and say that you should be able to buy any drug from the pharmacy without a prescription*. As well as testing kits. Having to have an ongoing relationship with a doctor just to refill your medication or get antibiotics when you get strep is a huge waste of everyone's time and money. And there are countries where you can already do this and they haven't collapsed. It makes the job of pharmacist actually m…

If use of a drug had no, or very little externalities, id agree. Overuse of antibiotics creates resistant bacteria, endangering everyone. I am forced to disagree civilly, sir.

A large portion of antibiotic resistance comes from patients taking a partial prescription, feeling better, and discontinuing the rest of the pills.

In that situation (the only one at this time), is the majority of resistances are made.

Controlling the supply, especially if you know you have a bacterial disease, can be solved readily.

In fact, on a camping trip, I was bit by 15 ticks. Was bad. When I got back to civilization, I started getting spots all over my body. Surprise, it was rocky mountain spotted fever. But if I could determine the 2 drugs for curing spotted fever and Lyme, I absolutely would have did both. But the shitty gatekeeper (doctor) wouldn't do Lyme course. Again, logically made a lot of sense, especially that Lyme tests are 60% accurate. And, 15 ticks.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#74

Post by walls »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #61
biophysboy wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think reproducibility will improve if funding is cut significantly? That is less money for labor, instruments, and consumables, which means less money for experiments, particularly for follow up experiments that have no deliverable.

I agree that cutting it won't solve the issue, especially without that long term plan, but at the current sky-high level of fraud, this just isn't science anymore. At what level of fraud do you suggest pulling the plug if not right now? Funding research until 90% is fake? 95%? 99%? Taxpayer money can be spent on many other life-critical areas with tangible results.

> Taxpayer money can be spent on many other life-critical areas with tangible results.

... but it won't be.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#75

Post by sorokod »

mystraline wrote: post #68
sorokod wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But why shouldn't I be able to treat myself? Consider this analogy: you should be allowed to put a gun to your own head and pull the trigger. You should not be allowed to put on a suicide vest and blow yourself up in a group of people.

To the first, yes, I do believe that we humans SHOULD have a right to commit suicide. It should be a right to end your own life. We have a 'right' drink a handle of whiskey a day, up to the point we get liver disease. Same with smoking 3 packs a day of cigarettes. Same with horrendous diet. But those ways of killing yourself are "acceptable" and also legal. But they're slower. The second, you're harming other people.…

"you're harming other people", yes as in the case where you are contagious.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#76

Post by 1970-01-01 »

biophysboy wrote: post #71
1970-01-01 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that cutting it won't solve the issue, especially without that long term plan, but at the current sky-high level of fraud, this just isn't science anymore. At what level of fraud do you suggest pulling the plug if not right now? Funding research until 90% is fake? 95%? 99%? Taxpayer money can be spent on many other life-critical areas with tangible results.

Irreproducibility is not the same as fraud. In any case, I would support high-risk research - stuff that may not be repeatable - if it has a high direct ROI, economic spillover (USA has a big biotech/pharma ecosystem), and leads to cost savings (e.g. no more dialysis machines).

Yes, exactly. Defund the junk science, the circles that are put around the results and called targets, and all the questionable research activity until merit has returned to scientific research and the vast majority of empirical studies can be replicated without p-hacking it.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#77

Post by kylehotchkiss »

It's questionable if the health secretary even believes that germs are real, so this checks out. Unfortunately, as a county, once you set a poor governing standard like this, it's hard to recover back to where we were. Biology is not convenient nor does it follow the ruling political parties platform. The leadership of this country seems to believe it can in fact influence biology to take its positions.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#78

Post by mystraline »

add-sub-mul-div wrote: post #62
mystraline wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This will also compound the Qanon fascination with "medical freedom", where the patient gets to dictate to the doctor what to do (i.e. use ivermectin against COVID, or whatever other superstition rises to the top of the Qanon imagination cauldron). That's very double-edged. The open question is should humans have the right to take substances individually? Sure, you get Ivermectin/covid deniers. But you also get hom…

Combatting medical Dunning-Kruger should be within the scope of public health.

What happens when your benign dictator (FDA), turns not so benign?

Like, covid shots. Now you need to beg a doctor to get them. Hope you pass their gatekeeping test.

Or now women are being arrested and charged with murder for miscarriages and missing periods.

And there's another round of "get rid of ACA, which includes banning non-coverage of preexisting conditions. Treating yourself is a strong protection of not being covered.

RFK is going through medical records across the country for anybody with autism, ADD, and ADHD. What and how are these lists being used for? (I know how the German nazies used them...)

My body, my choice.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#79

Post by find »

Basic research has a lot in common with startups. The unicorn rate is The current research system has serious problems, but we need accurate criticism to build a better future. "YC is all wasteful spending; why doesn't YC just choose to only fund the hits?" is absurd, but somehow we allow this argument when discussing NSF/NIH/DOE/DARPA.

Re: The Gutting of America's Medical Research

#80

Post by LorenPechtel »

MandieD wrote: post #67
Spivak wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I go further and say that you should be able to buy any drug from the pharmacy without a prescription*. As well as testing kits. Having to have an ongoing relationship with a doctor just to refill your medication or get antibiotics when you get strep is a huge waste of everyone's time and money. And there are countries where you can already do this and they haven't collapsed. It makes the job of pharmacist actually m…

Two words that explain why it hurts everyone else when you can go buy antibiotics whenever you want (you think you have strep): Antibiotic Resistance. Longer explanation: how do you know exactly which bacteria you’re infected with, and which antibiotics will work well against them, and which ones they’ll throw a middle finger at? Even if you have the exact same symptoms as the last time, how do you know that taking t…

This.

I believe all recreational drugs should either be legal or else available by prescription with the explicit statement in the law that addiction management is a valid reason for a prescription. None of the controlled substances hoops. And I think *renewing* maintenance meds should be within the realm of the pharmacist.

But I think all agents for which resistance is a factor should be doctor only.

Post reply on HN