/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5613077]

How come we can't cure ordinary illnesses and diseases, in the age of giant data accumulation on genetics, proteomics, and other information on biological systems which we still don't understand and control?

I see all these faggots who come here herping and derping about

>MAH exoskelettan
>MAH homortality
>MAH A I
>MAH brain-implanted infinite intelligennce

...But no one complaining how we can't cure the same old shit that plagues people, like the common cold, non-alcoholic fat liver disease, cancer and so on.

Really, this board should be about debating realistic and common scientific problems, not this BS daydreaming on how to "enhance" the human species, when we're not even close to curing its most common ailments.

Pic related

[Anonymous No.5613098]

>>5613077

currently you are experiencing a trollstorm

not that it's better any other time

usually active endeavours get killed by shitposters and mods who ban the guys who maintain the threads.

sci is dead bro. sci is dead. physicsphorums might be a better option, but I don't like usernames. fahk man, this is shit.

[None !3BananaXFw No.5613099]

>>5613098
physicsforum is way too slow :^(

[Anonymous No.5613103]

>>5613098

Yeah.. I remember the goodle days, when /sci/ was a paradise. We use to talk about why some guy's semen smelt funny. It was awesome.

[Anonymous No.5613136]

>>5613103
>guy's
>not guys'

[Anonymous No.5613151]

>>5613103
Sounds like /jp/ now

What if we put /sci/ and /jp/ together? Science Culture? Guys?

[Anonymous No.5613167]

gene therapy is going far to cure a lot of genetic diseases, it's all about the delivery vectors though, the viruses etc they actually use to deliver a therapeutic gene(s) etc. How to avoid the immune response, target the correct tissue, express it efficiently etc. Once you know the molecular mechanism of a disease it's simple enough to figure out how you could correct it, the deficiencies of the delivery vehicles is the main issue in most cases as I say. On an unrelated note, some guy said he had a cure for the common cold, look up DRACO antivirals, not heard anyting recently about it though. Also, peoples lifestyle choices in the west contributes the vast majority of deaths, that would be the sensible first target to cut the majority of deaths.

[None !3BananaXFw No.5613169]

>>5613098
NEVERMIND AHAHAH, JANITOR/MOD CLEANED EVERYTHING, PRAISE THE LORD :^D

[Anonymous No.5613220]

>>5613151

time to save /jp/

>>>10616483

[Anonymous No.5613224]

>>5613151

time to save /jp/

>>>/jp/10616483

[Anonymous No.5613234]

http://www.vice.com/read/chinas-taking-over-the-world-with-a-massive-genetic-engineering-program?utm_source=vicefbus

This is relevant

[Anonymous No.5613284]

>>5613234
China doesn't need a large military or a big economy to take over the world; They're a single nation yet they're larger than every other subcontinent, ethnic group, or race.

If they relax their one-child policy as the plan, they won't need to 'take over the world' when you ARE the world.

[Anonymous No.5613311]

because it's not in the market-interest of big pharma to fund research into potential cures as much as better long-term treatments.

if they come out with a way of permanently 'removing' a problem, then to make a sustainable profit compared to current treatments they offer for chronic conditions, they'd have to charge an exorbitant amount, and that would generate popular resentment; people would demand access to expensive cures for conditions, on the grounds that they have the right to a healthy lifestyle.

So, instead of that, the alternatives to simply pour all funding into improving "long-term" treatments.
Plus, it's more reliable to expect results from something you've had for a long time and are familiar with, such as methods of treatment, then to chance investment into something entirely new.

Getting drugs on the market is expensive and time-consuming, and the reason they have so much to invest in the first place is that they are market-conscious, so it's hard to make the argument to them that they have to change their priorities for the sake of humanitarianism. If they invest in cures for one illness, that's less money to invest in other treatments/cures.

I'm personally for the creation of large, government-funded non-profits to compete with private industry; to research alternatives to what's popular in private industry. The problem is, if it's taxpayer funded, then that's unfair to private industry competition. There's probably some relatively creative way to resolve this, though.

[sage No.5613314]

>>5613167
Thx for the reply, but dude, this week a chick from my country died of cirrhosis lol. She wasn't either obese, nor alcoholic and she was actually very smart (got one PhD from Oxford, spoke 6 languages etc).
So she didnt die from some crap lifestyle choice like eating too much or drinking too much alcohol, she probably developed fatty liver disease, she neglected it and got in a late stage of cyrrhosis. Sometimes fatty liver disease is of unknown cause. This is really a shame for medical research that for quite simple, localised disease not only there is no cure yet, but no clear cause in some cases. That's what I meant about common illnesses which are quite far from being tackled even though their area of action is very localised (the liver). Really, what is stopping science from understanding what causes non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in people who otherwise live normal lives (no obesity, no alcohol intake etc). We could have saved one valuable life if we knew at least such a basic thing.

[Anonymous No.5613319]

our computing power is increasing at an exponential rate, as well as the potential for new technologies to help find novel approaches to old problems.
I think we will just need time to realize the potential applications of all our technology in all these areas.
Still, the human body is exceptionally complex, and there's still a lot we don't understand / haven't fully researched about it.

[sage No.5613320]

>>5613311
Non-alcoholic fat liver disease doesn't really have a drug treatment, so it doesn't quite serve Bigpharma not to find a cure and provide more drugs to alleviate symptoms.