Interesting Newsweek Article

If it's on your mind and it has to do with multiple sclerosis in any way, post it here.

Interesting Newsweek Article

Postby patientx » Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:54 pm

Why don't more medical discoveries become cures

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/05/15/desp ... cures.html
User avatar
patientx
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1068
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:00 pm

Advertisement

Postby cheerleader » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:05 pm

Great article, patient. Thanks for posting--seems like a new medical model is desperately needed.

If we are serious about rescuing potential new drugs from the valley of death, then academia, the NIH, and disease foundations will have to change how they operate. That is happening, albeit slowly. Private foundations such as the MMRF, the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, and the Myelin Repair Foundation (for multiple sclerosis) have veered away from the NIH model of “here’s some money; go discover something.” Instead, they are managing and directing scientists more closely, requiring them to share data before it is published, cooperate, and do the nonsexy development work required after a discovery is made.


Scott Johnson of the Myelin Repair Foundation has a great new site for patient advocacy-
http://wherearethecures.org/
cheer
Husband dx RRMS 3/07
dx dual jugular vein stenosis (CCSVI) 4/09
http://ccsviinms.blogspot.com
User avatar
cheerleader
Family Elder
 
Posts: 5031
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: southern California

Postby patientx » Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:14 am

cheerleader wrote:Great article, patient. Thanks for posting--seems like a new medical model is desperately needed.

If we are serious about rescuing potential new drugs from the valley of death, then academia, the NIH, and disease foundations will have to change how they operate. That is happening, albeit slowly. Private foundations such as the MMRF, the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, and the Myelin Repair Foundation (for multiple sclerosis) have veered away from the NIH model of “here’s some money; go discover something.” Instead, they are managing and directing scientists more closely, requiring them to share data before it is published, cooperate, and do the nonsexy development work required after a discovery is made.


cheer


True, but unfortunately this might be uncharted waters, and there might be no model to build on. Maybe this is where big drug companies, with deep pockets and incentive to do the "grunt work" to see a drug through devlopement, are a necessary evil.
User avatar
patientx
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1068
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:00 pm

Postby Lyon » Fri Jun 04, 2010 8:12 am

.
Last edited by Lyon on Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lyon
Family Elder
 
Posts: 6063
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm

Re: Interesting Newsweek Article

Postby NHE » Sat Jun 05, 2010 4:34 pm

I read the article and forwarded the link on to one of the research professors that I worked with in graduate school. Here is his reply...

I disagree with the article, from my perspective, basic science is not doing well. Now in order to get funding you have to do translational, read in vivo, research. Some of the best basic scientists I know cannot get funded. Now one of my colleagues is talking about doing in vivo first, i.e. dose the rat with drugs and measure behavior, then if that works, do the bench work. I think that is backwards and is going to lead to more stuff getting into the clinic for which we do not know the mechanism. Add on, most clinical trials are paid for by drug companies, so they will pay to test their new drugs regardless of whether it is the best treatment. Drugs and treatments they cannot make $$ on will not get into trials. We are fucked until Joe Sixpack and whomever he elects get their freekin' fingers out of research and let it go back to peer review so we have a good mix of basic and applied research. As it is now, it leans too far toward applied, so we don't learn enough about mechanism.

Oh well.


This reminds me of the old joke, "A drug is a substance which, when injected into a rat, will produce a scientific report." In contrast, the process of understanding the biology through basic research should lead to potential treatments knowing how the biology can be mechanistically altered in desirable ways for a particular disease.

NHE
User avatar
NHE
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 3316
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 4:00 pm


Return to General Discussion

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service