3 ms·

I think his point is that those mice are misleadingly bad and it is a fixable problem that for some reason the scientific community is refusing to address.

by rapsey 6y ago

dmatech 6y ago
The scientific community often comes to an incorrect consensus, and this consensus becomes dogma that must not be questioned because the consequences would be too damaging to reputation/credibility/whatever. Here's another example from a while back: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21911225 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21911225 - "How an Alzheimer’s ‘cabal’ thwarted progress toward a cure" When you've got enough incentive, it's hard to resist the urge to use your power to simply decide what is and is not allowed to be true.
- vikramkr 6y ago
  The consensus on mice models is that they suck and we need something better, and until we do, everything needs to he tested in humans before widespread approval is given so we arent ever relying on mice data alone to make regulatory decisions. Seems like a reasonable consensus to reach
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  >The scientific community often comes to an incorrect consensus, and this consensus becomes dogma that must not be questioned because the consequences would be too damaging to reputation/credibility/whatever While this does happen, science at least allows the possibility of enough evidence to force people into accepting the new model. Without science, many more things are considered untouchable dogma and there is no method to challenge that. Scientists are still human and make dumb ego driven mistakes, science still provides the best theory out there.
vikramkr 6y ago
Fixable and refusing to address? At the end of this I've linked a grant request from the NIH for better models, and this isn't a u ique or one of grant request. Hundreds of researchers and companies are working tirelessly on things like organ on a chip. Every drug required human trials to prove they work and could never get approved on mouse trust alone. Preclinical work will use animals up to monkeys if needed to get the best data. Neuroscience is developing brain organoids we can use that are created from actual human cells so we can move away from mice. This is millions of dollars of research being poured into this space because it turns out the scientific community does not like spending billions of dollars on failed drugs that we might have known about if we had better models. Saying the problem is fixable and that the scientific community just doesnt care is incredibly naive - it's like saying higher energy density batteries are trivially achievable but battery researchers are just too lazy right now. Its difficult, and many mainstream researchers have literally dedicated their lives to it. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-19-369.html https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-19-369.html

I think his point is that those mice are misleadingly bad and it is a fixable problem that for some reason the scientific community is refusing to address.

by rapsey 6y ago

I think his point is that those mice are misleadingly bad and it is a fixable problem that for some reason the scientific community is refusing to address.

dmatech 6y ago

The scientific community often comes to an incorrect consensus, and this consensus becomes dogma that must not be questioned because the consequences would be too damaging to reputation/credibility/whatever. Here's another example from a while back: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21911225 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21911225 - "How an Alzheimer’s ‘cabal’ thwarted progress toward a cure" When you've got enough incentive, it's hard to resist the urge to use your power to simply decide what is and is not allowed to be true.

vikramkr 6y ago
The consensus on mice models is that they suck and we need something better, and until we do, everything needs to he tested in humans before widespread approval is given so we arent ever relying on mice data alone to make regulatory decisions. Seems like a reasonable consensus to reach
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
boomboomsubban 6y ago
>The scientific community often comes to an incorrect consensus, and this consensus becomes dogma that must not be questioned because the consequences would be too damaging to reputation/credibility/whatever While this does happen, science at least allows the possibility of enough evidence to force people into accepting the new model. Without science, many more things are considered untouchable dogma and there is no method to challenge that. Scientists are still human and make dumb ego driven mistakes, science still provides the best theory out there.

vikramkr 6y ago

Fixable and refusing to address? At the end of this I've linked a grant request from the NIH for better models, and this isn't a u ique or one of grant request. Hundreds of researchers and companies are working tirelessly on things like organ on a chip. Every drug required human trials to prove they work and could never get approved on mouse trust alone. Preclinical work will use animals up to monkeys if needed to get the best data. Neuroscience is developing brain organoids we can use that are created from actual human cells so we can move away from mice. This is millions of dollars of research being poured into this space because it turns out the scientific community does not like spending billions of dollars on failed drugs that we might have known about if we had better models. Saying the problem is fixable and that the scientific community just doesnt care is incredibly naive - it's like saying higher energy density batteries are trivially achievable but battery researchers are just too lazy right now. Its difficult, and many mainstream researchers have literally dedicated their lives to it. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-19-369.html https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-19-369.html