8 ms·

Is this trope necessary every time? It's clearly in mice in the article. Just consider it an update if you're skeptical, now they'll be moving on to the next s

Is this trope necessary every time? It's clearly in mice in the article. Just consider it an update if you're skeptical, now they'll be moving on to the next set of mice w/ sporadic or non-inherited ALS....

ekianjo 5y ago
It took them 6 paragraphs to mention mice. Thats astonishing how much they oversell this kind of stuff.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- shawnz 5y ago
  Is it really such a big deal for them to build hype around a potentially promising medical advancement? What's the downside of this kind of reporting? Even if the drug fails, maybe it will spur more research into similar candidates
  - toast0 5y ago
    This type of reporting contributes to announcement fatigue. What use is all this hype now for something that is probably 5 years out from the market, if it even works (which past results suggest is unlikely).
    - shawnz 5y ago
      Has that actually been demonstrated? I don't personally feel fatigued by medical advancements which ended up not panning out. In fact they make me feel hopeful about the future and glad to exist in a society where such research is even possible.
      - ekianjo 5y ago
        Maybe you are still young? When you have seen 30 years of such revolutionary tech in pharma every other week with 0.001 % actual outcomes on the market, yes, you get tired of it.
        shawnz 5y ago
        I am approximately 30 if that's what you meant. I think a 0.001% success rate is pretty good for revolutionary technologies and I'm glad to have those successes. I think it is wrong to downplay the importance of the failed attempts just to increase that success rate. More absolute successes is strictly better than a higher success rate.
  - ekianjo 5y ago
    getting clicks for overhyping stuff that in 99.99% of the case does not even make it to human trials. Shoving ads in your face at the same time.
    - shawnz 5y ago
      Admittedly I'm using an adblocker and didn't notice the latter problem, which sounds annoying. But I don't see why the former is a problem on its own.

ekianjo 5y ago

It took them 6 paragraphs to mention mice. Thats astonishing how much they oversell this kind of stuff.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
shawnz 5y ago
Is it really such a big deal for them to build hype around a potentially promising medical advancement? What's the downside of this kind of reporting? Even if the drug fails, maybe it will spur more research into similar candidates
- toast0 5y ago
  This type of reporting contributes to announcement fatigue. What use is all this hype now for something that is probably 5 years out from the market, if it even works (which past results suggest is unlikely).
  - shawnz 5y ago
    Has that actually been demonstrated? I don't personally feel fatigued by medical advancements which ended up not panning out. In fact they make me feel hopeful about the future and glad to exist in a society where such research is even possible.
    - ekianjo 5y ago
      Maybe you are still young? When you have seen 30 years of such revolutionary tech in pharma every other week with 0.001 % actual outcomes on the market, yes, you get tired of it.
      - shawnz 5y ago
        I am approximately 30 if that's what you meant. I think a 0.001% success rate is pretty good for revolutionary technologies and I'm glad to have those successes. I think it is wrong to downplay the importance of the failed attempts just to increase that success rate. More absolute successes is strictly better than a higher success rate.
- ekianjo 5y ago
  getting clicks for overhyping stuff that in 99.99% of the case does not even make it to human trials. Shoving ads in your face at the same time.
  - shawnz 5y ago
    Admittedly I'm using an adblocker and didn't notice the latter problem, which sounds annoying. But I don't see why the former is a problem on its own.