3 ms·
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 t
by 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 agoThis 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 agoHas 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 agoMaybe 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 agoI 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 agogetting 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 agoAdmittedly 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.