9 ms·

I think one of the major turning points in the future will be to trigger a "space race" which makes a grand project of developing substantive improvements to me

by grueful 14y ago

I think one of the major turning points in the future will be to trigger a "space race" which makes a grand project of developing substantive improvements to medical care and quality of life. There have been significant improvements here motivated by e.g. battlefield medicine, and great results out of academic or humanitarian labs, but much of our current work is stuck in a loop between patents and the FDA approval process. Good intentions aside, the system acts to motivate certain patterns of action in order to stay profitable and continue growing year-to-year which aren't optimal for our long-range interests. How one would go about motivating such a grand project - I have no idea. Perhaps it's a matter of continuing to make such small improvements as we can until the system is primed for one giant leap. The road of progress was never a well-paved or straight one except in hindsight. I think that small teams and open sharing of knowledge are both key ingredients. The amount of resources currently in play in medicine is staggering, but social systems tend to lose efficiency very quickly as they scale. Perhaps startup culture will be a key piece in making this happen, but the timescales involved in speculative medical research tend to be beyond the scope of the typical VC-backed endeavor.

gcb 14y ago
To get rid of this rationale read any of the many Nietzsche biographies.
derleth 14y ago
> a "space race" which makes a grand project of developing substantive improvements to medical care and quality of life. How about a "space race" to destroy destructive nonsense like homeopathy, anti-vaccine idiocy, reiki, and all of the other non-scientific crap people try to use instead of real medicine. Getting rid of quackademic medicine would be a good first step. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quackademic_medicine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quackademic_medicine http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/quackademic-medicine-trickles-out-to-community/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/quackademic-me...
- grueful 14y ago
  I'm all for that. The key problem is defining it. There exist historical examples of quackery which wasn't, e.g. hand washing. Stricter rules about null hypothesis testing would be a start, but the bigger problem is one of education. We're still plagued by government that gives the nod to creationism and horrifically distorted sex ed in public schools. I'd like to say we've become empirical enough about what practices we place belief in that we could just treat all cases of quackery as malicious fraud - but the very prevalence of such issues tends to support the opposite conclusion.
  - Alex3917 14y ago
    "There exist historical examples of quackery which wasn't, e.g. hand washing." And homeopathy, which even James Randi admits was more effective than western medicine in the 1800s. (In the video that was submitted to HN recently.)
    - derleth 14y ago
      > homeopathy, which even James Randi admits was more effective than western medicine in the 1800s I hope you realize how worthless this statement is in a discussion of modern medicine. Also, it's incredibly racist to call 'medicine that works' 'Western medicine'. Do you also call 'math that works' 'Western mathematics'?
      - Alex3917 14y ago
        "Also, it's incredibly racist to call 'medicine that works' 'Western medicine'." I assure you that's not how I'm using the phrase.
        derleth 14y ago
        > I assure you that's not how I'm using the phrase. Except it is. Medicine can be practiced by anyone who knows how, not just people with the right-colored skin.
ippisl 14y ago
At the academic level , there seems to be a "space race". Maybe it could be improved by making the NIH invest in more radical high risk stuff. But the commercialization process sure sucks. Testing and verifying a drug is expensive, long and complex. But there seem to be some work going to improve that: 1. The FDA is becoming a bit more friendly[1]. 2. There are some new innovations in how to run clinical trials. One example is [2].They claim they might bring drugs 1-3 years faster to market. 3. Organs on a chip are starting to become available and this might be more accurate than the mouse models used today. Since some of the new innovations in clinical trials do use web/mobile technology, i wonder what role startups can take in this area. [1]http://www.xconomy.com/national/2012/09/10/the-fda-turns-friendly-toward-pharma-in-2012/ http://www.xconomy.com/national/2012/09/10/the-fda-turns-fri... [2]http://disruptiveinnovationsinclinicaltrials.blogspot.co.il/2012/08/a-peak-at-dpharm-2011.html http://disruptiveinnovationsinclinicaltrials.blogspot.co.il/...
agumonkey 14y ago
I was just wondering if there was or were companies like google or spacex/tesla for medicine. One that do away with the status quo. Things like chuck pell opener http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txVM07D4bbA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txVM07D4bbA . And aiming at a smaller 'time to market', practical effects.

by grueful 14y ago

gcb 14y ago

To get rid of this rationale read any of the many Nietzsche biographies.

derleth 14y ago

> a "space race" which makes a grand project of developing substantive improvements to medical care and quality of life. How about a "space race" to destroy destructive nonsense like homeopathy, anti-vaccine idiocy, reiki, and all of the other non-scientific crap people try to use instead of real medicine. Getting rid of quackademic medicine would be a good first step. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quackademic_medicine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quackademic_medicine http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/quackademic-medicine-trickles-out-to-community/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/quackademic-me...

grueful 14y ago
I'm all for that. The key problem is defining it. There exist historical examples of quackery which wasn't, e.g. hand washing. Stricter rules about null hypothesis testing would be a start, but the bigger problem is one of education. We're still plagued by government that gives the nod to creationism and horrifically distorted sex ed in public schools. I'd like to say we've become empirical enough about what practices we place belief in that we could just treat all cases of quackery as malicious fraud - but the very prevalence of such issues tends to support the opposite conclusion.
- Alex3917 14y ago
  "There exist historical examples of quackery which wasn't, e.g. hand washing." And homeopathy, which even James Randi admits was more effective than western medicine in the 1800s. (In the video that was submitted to HN recently.)
  - derleth 14y ago
    > homeopathy, which even James Randi admits was more effective than western medicine in the 1800s I hope you realize how worthless this statement is in a discussion of modern medicine. Also, it's incredibly racist to call 'medicine that works' 'Western medicine'. Do you also call 'math that works' 'Western mathematics'?
    - Alex3917 14y ago
      "Also, it's incredibly racist to call 'medicine that works' 'Western medicine'." I assure you that's not how I'm using the phrase.
      - derleth 14y ago
        > I assure you that's not how I'm using the phrase. Except it is. Medicine can be practiced by anyone who knows how, not just people with the right-colored skin.

ippisl 14y ago

At the academic level , there seems to be a "space race". Maybe it could be improved by making the NIH invest in more radical high risk stuff. But the commercialization process sure sucks. Testing and verifying a drug is expensive, long and complex. But there seem to be some work going to improve that: 1. The FDA is becoming a bit more friendly[1]. 2. There are some new innovations in how to run clinical trials. One example is [2].They claim they might bring drugs 1-3 years faster to market. 3. Organs on a chip are starting to become available and this might be more accurate than the mouse models used today. Since some of the new innovations in clinical trials do use web/mobile technology, i wonder what role startups can take in this area. [1]http://www.xconomy.com/national/2012/09/10/the-fda-turns-friendly-toward-pharma-in-2012/ http://www.xconomy.com/national/2012/09/10/the-fda-turns-fri... [2]http://disruptiveinnovationsinclinicaltrials.blogspot.co.il/2012/08/a-peak-at-dpharm-2011.html http://disruptiveinnovationsinclinicaltrials.blogspot.co.il/...

agumonkey 14y ago

I was just wondering if there was or were companies like google or spacex/tesla for medicine. One that do away with the status quo. Things like chuck pell opener http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txVM07D4bbA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txVM07D4bbA . And aiming at a smaller 'time to market', practical effects.