3 ms·
I feel like the frequency of the "scientific breakthrough" headlines that led to nothing has muted my enthusiasm for remarkable findings like this. There is a
by iaw 10y ago
I feel like the frequency of the "scientific breakthrough" headlines that led to nothing has muted my enthusiasm for remarkable findings like this.
There is a huge difference between the NIH announcing a finding and the sensationalist science journalism that is typically inaccurate. I wonder if this divergence erodes the public trust in science.
- nneonneo 10y agoAn earlier antibody in the same family, VRC01, is in Stage IIb clinical trials for the treatment of HIV. Medical science is slow and extremely methodical, but it can produce practical results. You just have to have patience.
- ufo 10y agoI think the problem is that in popular news you often just get the impression that a "breakthrough" happened but it isn't super clear what the scientist actually did, what are the limitations of their work and what you should expect from future research. So instead of seeing news that say specific things like "this might lead to a monoclonal antiboody treatment in 10 years" or "this could help vaccine research" you end up with a bunch of headlines that sound as if AIDS is going to be cured tomorrow.
- iaw 10y agoThanks ufo, that's the point I was trying to make.
- codecamper 10y agogrumpy