3 ms·
I believe the original comment wasn't written to say that he doesn't know how iPSCs can be useful (obviously they are very useful), but he doesn't know how this
by whoisshop 3y ago
I believe the original comment wasn't written to say that he doesn't know how iPSCs can be useful (obviously they are very useful), but he doesn't know how this breakthrough/paper makes much of a difference.
He's getting at the fact that we've known how to induce pleuropotency for quite some time (I did some reach in this in orthopaedics in 2010), which is what the article title is misleading us to believe.
- pfisherman 3y agoI was adding in a little bit of context to explain why people should care about iPSCs - even if they are not used as therapies. Mainly because the last paragraph in GP comment focused on the dearth of direct clinical applications. My point is that iPSCs are still quite useful in pharmaceutical research and development - a therapy adjacent area. Improved cell models are still a pretty big deal. Part of the reason for high costs and failure rates in pharma R&D is that experimental models we use to generate data are imperfect. Better models = better data = better decisions.
- JimtheCoder 3y ago"Mainly because the last paragraph in GP comment focused on the dearth of direct clinical applications." I am not sure why everyone is convinced that they will not be very useful in therapies... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6357081/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6357081/
- pfisherman 3y agoWell, when one compares to other cell therapies such as CAR-Ts… https://www.nature.com/articles/s41571-023-00754-1 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41571-023-00754-1
- vikramkr 3y agoI was responding to the article which focused really heavily on therapeutic applications, hence my focus in the last paragraph there