/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5823522
You mean either not follow the news, or think along the lines of cancer is one disease with a silver bullet.

>>5823522
Lack of funding? :/

Off top a bit, but they also keep droning on about exploring tissue regeneration (like that found in lizards). Been hearing about it for years now but so far no one's done anything remotely groundbreaking as far as actual work is concerned.

>>5823534

What the heck are you talking aboot

>>5823552
What the fuck are YOU talking about?

It's all about money. Biggest roadblock in a lot of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine research is small markets. True you need to spend money to make money, but in the case of many TE/regenerative medicine ventures, it's sometimes not financially worth it to spend hundreds of millions on R&D and clinical approval for a chance to capture a very small customer base.

>You will never be able to go into a store and say "I want to buy that nose" and have your nose removed and the new one grafted on

Doctors are testing a lab-grown nose on a human right now:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424
127887323699704
578328251335196648.html
Apparently it's on his arm right now where they're trying to get skin to attach to it, but if it works they'll move it to his face.

I thought it was all about christians and anti abortion fuckers that think cells have souls and proteins are alive who were stopping research on these projects involving stem cells.

I am 100% sure that not everything done has been published even a decade later, certainly not announced in the ordinary mainstream press.

Look for regeneration to emerge. Ia m telling you.

the new york times did a series of three articles months ago about how tissue engineering is being used to grow kidneys, brachial tubes, and hearts in animal trials; they did another piece about how they're also regrowing muscle for soldiers. here is the first one. on the top left is the bold heading Body Builders, with links to the other two articles in the series

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/health/research/scientists-make-progress-in-tailor-made-organs.html

I believe that in the next 50 years you will be able to have regenerative liver tissue etc. grown for you

>>5823565
Honestly, this would be a huge thing if it ever took one. There's no end to the amount of people who need to replace one or more of their 'parts'. Whichever company succeeds in perfecting these technologies first will make a mint.

>>5823611
Isn't it sad how people who have no idea what they're talking about get to make decisions that hamper the development of science? Personally, I think anyone without a doctorate in the field shouldn't be allowed to push and lobby for/against any of these emerging technologies.

>>5823617
>Look for regeneration to emerge.
We should have it within 2 decades, max. Hopefully. Biotech is moving far too quickly for this branch of the field to be ignored.

>>5823620
>Mr. Beyene’s stem cells were obtained from his bone marrow.
I read the whole thing, and if stem cells can really be pulled from the person's own bone marrow then there should be 0 ethical concerns. So why are we still seeing religious zealots campaigning against these procedures?

>>5823620
>I believe that in the next 50 years you will be able to have regenerative liver tissue etc. grown for you
Let's hope it's more along the lines of 15-20.

>>5823611
>>5824209
>people who have no idea what they're talking about
How ironic. No one has anything against stem cell research, it's just some people don't think you should be harvesting babies to do it. There's more than one source of stem cells.

bump

>see article on using nose stem cells to repair a human spine injury many years ago
>see recent article on it again
>in rats
>"in a few years we'll see a human trial"
>mfw
I think the rich do this shit on purpose.

>breakthrough in memory drug!
>depression drug!
>schizophrenia drug!
>lighting technology!
>processor technology!
>ram technology!
>memory technology!
>battery technology!
>monitor technology!
>oops someone got sued or the company doesn't want to pursue it, enjoy living in the dark ages forever
meanwhile billions are funneled into shit like cancer research and trying to circumcise everyone on the planet

>>5823582
I don't know about the grafting procedure. But I feel as if working with cells will be as popular as programming, and will greatly resemble the practice. You won't go to a store to buy a new genetic program, you'll go to the app store on your Ibrain (iphone stored in your skull) purchase an "app" and apply the information to some petri dish machine, and viola a new nose will develop. Again don't know how you'd attach it but w/e, who doesn't want some spare body parts lying around

>>5823522 -----> >>5823605
This field will take off, I agree it is not a the place you'd think it would be from the hype of the last decade. Its not cheap or easy for experiments of this nature, once the field enters either of these catagories it'll take off

The time between human and animal trials is a long one, unless you're big pharma pushing a new drug.

>>5825853
In which case, they typically lose vast amounts of money, because it turns out not to actually work in human trials.

>>5825878
When you're charging 5000% mark ups you only have the be right occasionally

>>5824413
What's wrong about it? babies aren't conscious, they don't think. They're pure reflex.

There was a lot of hype from some greedy scientists but once people seriously started studying it the roadblocks became real and numerous. Just a hard technology to get right and be "safe" which is key for the FDA. Also just a huge amount of logistical/manufacturing/scaling/technological problems too. Again to be consistent and safe for the FDA.

iPSCs seem to be the way forward. Theres been a few trials around putting stem cells into bad hearts and it has worked. But nothing really landmark yet.

The first therapy to be approved may be from an outfit in san diego that's got a treatment to fix baldness lol

>>5825880
They're also charging that much because, by the time a drug makes it to market, it's only got a few years left before the patent runs out.

And they're still losing enormous amounts of money and laying off people left and right.

The absurd markups are the only way Big Pharma can make enough money to stay afloat- no matter how unethical it is. BP is dying, and dying men do desperate and terrible things. It's getting harder and harder to discover new drugs, and the market simply won't bear the higher prices needed to make the business sustainable.

>>5825880
It's more that they're charging that much BECAUSE they're only right occasionally. It costs fuckloads to get a drug all the way to human trials, and if it fails, that's a lot of money down the drain. And the vast majority of drugs fail.

>>5825886
>>5825888

>They only fuck us over because they have to, they're good people really

This has to be stockholm syndrome.

http://healthcareforamericanow.org/2013/04/08/pharma-711-billion-profits-price-gouging-seniors/

>>5825881
Babies have such clean minds and a pure world, factory defaults are great some times.

>>5825891
>good people

Where did I say that? I said that they're doing what they're doing because they have to. That doesn't make them good people. They're still assholes, they're just Lawful Evil, not Chaotic Evil.

>>5825896
>I said that they're doing what they're doing because they have to

Asserting a false point does not make it true.

>>5825897
>they're doing it to make a profit and blow it all on charity.

>>5825897
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2012/02/10/the-truly-staggering-cost-of-inventing-new-drugs/

And the cost is going up all the time. We've pretty much gotten all of the "easy" diseases, and we've gotten all the low-hanging fruit in the chemical space we know how to handle.

Big Pharma is still incredibly shady- see also, all of >http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/why_everyone_loves_us/ , but they're shady and rapidly going broke.

>>5825901
>We've pretty much gotten all of the "easy" diseases

That's not a problem, Big Pharma likes to invent/sensationalize new diseases that no except their teams have heard of.

>>5825915
Examples, please.

>>5825921
>He thinks ADHD is a real epidemic

>>5825901
Even if they're actually spending 4 billion per successful drug, they're spending the same amount on advertising alone.

http://www.drugwatch.com/manufacturer/

>>5825891
>healthcareforamericanow.org
gee sounds like a totally unbiased and reliable site that definitely wont misrepresent information or try to push an agenda

>>5825930
Not exactly.
>http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/05/20/how_much_do_drug_companies_spend_on_rd_anyway.php
>http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/05/20/but_dont_drug_companies_spend_more_on_marketing.php
>http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/05/23/another_look_at_marketing_vs_rd_in_pharma.php

>>5825932
Was the second link in a google search

>>5825933
>He's worked for several major pharmaceutical companies

I'm sure this isn't going to be biased am I rite?

>>5825937
Is it going to be any less biased than a site called "healthcareforamericanow.org?"

Besides, the numbers he's giving all have sources that look plausible.

>>5825901
Holy shit

We really need to fix the broken patent system in the US, the fact that billion-dollar cutting edge pharmaceuticals with 15 year trial periods are governed by exactly the same laws as general concepts in software code is pretty much full retard

>>5825944
But anon, pharmaceutical companies are EVIL!

gaiz, thread is on regenerative medicine, let's not derail thread plz

>>5825947

>>5825951
incoming debate about healthcare in america in ~10 posts

I think it's sad that we can't utilize regeneration though the concept and application isn't too hard to understand with what we know about biology.