7 ms·
99.9% of the time sharing mice studies has negative value. Too many of those findings don't pan out for humans for non-researchers to get anything useful out of
by Tenoke 4y ago
99.9% of the time sharing mice studies has negative value. Too many of those findings don't pan out for humans for non-researchers to get anything useful out of.
- Silverback_VII 4y ago99.9% of people who claim that 'mouse studies dare useless' are from Reddit and not from the forefront of science. As a result of this reasoning, they may never experience the 300% testosterone boost of onion juice.
- groestl 4y agoGiven the number of mouse studies, 0,1% non-negative seems promising ;)
- quickthrower2 4y agoBut can you reproduce that result?
- heftig 4y agoWhat are time sharing mice?
- eCa 4y agoMaybe a comma helps: > 99.9% of the time, sharing mice studies has negative value.
- timbit42 4y agoWhat are 'sharing mice'?
- mahmoudhossam 4y agoMice using a time-sharing OS?
- acuozzo 4y agoFinally! We now know the true expansion of the M in MULTICS.
- Kinrany 4y agoMice shared among many studies at the same time
- Maxion 4y agoOn the other hand, if it doesn't pan out in a mouse model, it most likely won't in a human. So these are still useful studies to make, as it is not viable and ethical to test everything on humans first. Also, one should never read into a single study too much.
- Aaargh20318 4y agoSince a lot of these studies that show good results in mice won't work on humans, I can't help but wonder how often it is the other way around. How many good treatments did we miss out on because our current methodology only allows us to find medications that work in humans + at least one other species ?