Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    08 Aug '12 21:03
    http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-07-gene-permanently-cancer-cell-proliferation.html#ajTabs

    Looks like a real breakthrough!
  2. Standard member Soothfast
    0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,
    09 Aug '12 20:05
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-07-gene-permanently-cancer-cell-proliferation.html#ajTabs

    Looks like a real breakthrough!
    I often wonder where these sensational breakthroughs disappear to. Some wonderful new technique is found to cure some ailment or another in, say, 1985, and then there's not a peep about it for the next quarter of a century.
  3. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Do ya think?
    09 Aug '12 20:28
    Originally posted by Soothfast
    I often wonder where these sensational breakthroughs disappear to. Some wonderful new technique is found to cure some ailment or another in, say, 1985, and then there's not a peep about it for the next quarter of a century.
    Oftentimes they get bogged down in government regulations. I have a friend who devoted his life to working on immortality. He said the government was really slow to approve new drugs, every step of the way, years and years for each new step in the research.
  4. 09 Aug '12 20:51
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Oftentimes they get bogged down in government regulations. I have a friend who devoted his life to working on immortality. He said the government was really slow to approve new drugs, every step of the way, years and years for each new step in the research.
    You don't need government approval for research. Only for actually using the drugs on people. If he was trying to make money out of it to fund the next project then you might have a case.
  5. 09 Aug '12 20:55
    Originally posted by Soothfast
    I often wonder where these sensational breakthroughs disappear to. Some wonderful new technique is found to cure some ailment or another in, say, 1985, and then there's not a peep about it for the next quarter of a century.
    Some of them are so successful that you forget that they exist. Vaccines against deadly diseases are like that.
    But a large part of it is the way News has a strong bias on reporting the negatives and our minds work that way to some extent too.
    I guess the biggest news in my life time is AIDS medications and those have been developed gradually over time and transformed an imminent death sentence into a near manageable disease.
  6. Subscriber Kewpie
    since 1-Feb-07
    10 Aug '12 01:17
    Anyone who's been through the cancer mill - and I have, twice - knows that improvements in cancer treatment are filtering through to the patients all the time at a rapid rate. They just don't get the publicity that the initial discovery got. When it comes to "terminal" diseases the FDA doesn't slow things down half as much as they do when it's something like a diuretic or appetite suppressant.
  7. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Do ya think?
    10 Aug '12 05:26 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    You don't need government approval for research. Only for actually using the drugs on people. If he was trying to make money out of it to fund the next project then you might have a case.
    He wanted to research on people.

    I'm surprised you, an African, know so much about US pharmaceudical laws.
  8. 10 Aug '12 06:41
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    He wanted to research on people.

    I'm surprised you, an African, know so much about US pharmaceudical laws.
    I know very little about US pharmaceutical laws. But most Americans know very little too. How much you know about such things depends on what you read or who you know much more than what country you live in.
    There are good reasons for strict laws regarding research on people there is a well known a history of abuse.
    I believe a lot of ageing research can be carried out on other animals similar to us, though I realise that there is sometimes no substitute to human 'guinea pigs'.
  9. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    12 Aug '12 01:29
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I know very little about US pharmaceutical laws. But most Americans know very little too. How much you know about such things depends on what you read or who you know much more than what country you live in.
    There are good reasons for strict laws regarding research on people there is a well known a history of abuse.
    I believe a lot of ageing research ca ...[text shortened]... similar to us, though I realise that there is sometimes no substitute to human 'guinea pigs'.
    You do know this op is about genes not drugs, right?
  10. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Do ya think?
    12 Aug '12 19:21
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    You do know this op is about genes not drugs, right?
    You need some tool to manipulated genes. Whether chemicals, viruses or whatever, you need government approval before they'll let you start screwing with peoples' DNA.
  11. 12 Aug '12 19:22
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    You do know this op is about genes not drugs, right?
    Yes, I was responding to AThousandYoungs post (which was about drugs).