4 ms·
Side question: why don't we actually encourage and fund research into developing solid, reliable, and standardized tests for carcinogenicity? Everybody with at
by nnq 9y ago
Side question: why don't we actually encourage and fund research into developing solid, reliable, and standardized tests for carcinogenicity? Everybody with at least some above basic knowledge of molec bio realizes that things like the Ames test are like complete jokes... so we don't even f know which of the substances around us actually cause cancer in humans :|
Yeah, this is the kind of research that would never advance anyone career, bring anyone glory, or bring science closer to a "cure" for cancer. And yeah, once you'd want to start actually employing a reliable test in the wild, you'd probably severely reduce your changes of a successful career (and maybe even of continued personal survival), because you'll soon step on some pretty huge toes.
But really, improving tests and sensors should be a top priority of bio-medical research... It might slow down some industries, but hopefully not that much. "Moonshot" projects like "curing" cancer or diabetes are "fun", but we're building a world where we're surrounded by stuff of which we have no idea what's safe or what not.
My personal current worry is actually with the cornucopia of chemicals with neurodegenerative effect that could be all around us, but this reminded me of the fact that we're also basically in the "dark ages" when it comes to determining carcinogenicity in a practical way (hint: it's not about what you can do as part of a funded research project in a few years, it's about having a portable test kit that any average Joe could use to test the hundreds of thousands of chemical compounds and mixtures of them that are all around us, and then in the tones of likely mostly wrong data resulting from it "fish" for maybe actually relevantly dangerous stuff, and then do real research to confirm those ...but then again modern medical research is allergic to "fishing data for patterns" too, so maybe this would need some reframing).