3 ms·

Thanks for your answer, but we either don't understand the biology of the animal models that we use. I think that medicine and drug regulations do not use the

Thanks for your answer, but we either don't understand the biology of the animal models that we use. I think that medicine and drug regulations do not use the same conceptual framework as biology. Medicine and drug regulations are pragmatic, hence the concept of clinical trial: They test if something works while minimizing the confounding factors. They do not try to understand the biology down to cellular force fields of the animal model. So why not have the same approach with software? Anyway, drugs authorities have already approved drugs based on software simulations [0, 1]. [0] https://www.fda.gov/media/163156/download https://www.fda.gov/media/163156/download [1] https://www.fda.gov/science-research/about-science-research-fda/modeling-simulation-fda https://www.fda.gov/science-research/about-science-research-...

salomon812 2y ago
> Anyway, drugs authorities have already approved drugs based on software simulations The simulations you have linked aren't on the same scale. The paper uses the phrase "are powerful tools that COMPLEMENT traditional methods for gathering evidence" And I'd argue this is more like detailed analysis rather than a simulation. It's like hoping you've found an immersive computer world like The Matrix, but it's a 2D side-scolling video game like Mario Bros. I'd also question "approved drugs based on..." and instead argue they "didn't reject drugs based on..."
jryb 2y ago
Yes, but while animals are a black box to some extent, the outcomes of the experiments are not. And you don't have to worry about whether your results are an artifact of your simulation. Your instincts are good - if we could simulate people in silico we could basically understand and cure every disease - but the scale of such a simulation is literally (not figuratively!) astronomical. Biological systems are way, way, way more complex than they appear and our computers are (currently) hopelessly inadequate.

salomon812 2y ago

> Anyway, drugs authorities have already approved drugs based on software simulations The simulations you have linked aren't on the same scale. The paper uses the phrase "are powerful tools that COMPLEMENT traditional methods for gathering evidence" And I'd argue this is more like detailed analysis rather than a simulation. It's like hoping you've found an immersive computer world like The Matrix, but it's a 2D side-scolling video game like Mario Bros. I'd also question "approved drugs based on..." and instead argue they "didn't reject drugs based on..."

jryb 2y ago

Yes, but while animals are a black box to some extent, the outcomes of the experiments are not. And you don't have to worry about whether your results are an artifact of your simulation. Your instincts are good - if we could simulate people in silico we could basically understand and cure every disease - but the scale of such a simulation is literally (not figuratively!) astronomical. Biological systems are way, way, way more complex than they appear and our computers are (currently) hopelessly inadequate.