Welcome to ScienceForums.Net!
|
After you've registered, come in and introduce yourself, or visit the forum index. If you need any help registering, posting, or if you just have some questions about our site, please feel free to contact us at staff at scienceforums dot net.
|
|
| Guest Message © 2012 DevFuse | |
The medical progress is coming to brick wall.
#1 31 May 2011 - 08:34 PM
The medical progress is slowing down and yes medical breakthroughs is slowing down .Yes the public does expects medical breakthroughs to occur all the time and medical progress but it is slowing down very fast.One can just look at cancer,autoimmune diseases and organ failure.
The problem with medicine is there is two approaches to problem drugs or surgery.And for the past 100 years drugs ware flying out like flies but are slowing down now and there is nothing surgery can do for cancer,autoimmune diseases and organ failure.
When it comes to electronics that stop working or going bad we pop out the bad part and pop in the good part.This cannot be done with human body we cannot pop out the bad part and pop in the good part or take soldering iron .This means drugs are the only option.
But drugs work well for chemicals or going after living things not cancer,autoimmune diseases and organ failure.The drugs do not have intelligent to tell cells what to do or to heal.
And surgery cannot heal or tell cells what to do.So the two approaches to problem of drugs or surgery is coming to brick wall of what it can do.
And dotors do not heal they use the two approaches to problem of drugs or surgery and this is coming to brick wall of what it can do..
Well some dotors hope in 50 or 100 years from now we will tell genes when to turn off or when to turn on and there will be a three approaches to problem of drugs or surgery or telling of when to turn on or off the genes.
But yes other than that medical progress is slowing down and yes medical breakthroughs is slowing down very fat .
Look at cancer,autoimmune diseases and organ failure what a joke it is no breakthroughs here.
- Posts: 352 | Joined: 29-December 08
Reply
#2 31 May 2011 - 11:41 PM
Unfortunately this kind of basic research is much harder to get funded. Innovations need good foundation. Unfortunately, the work on the foundations takes time, tend to be uneventful, get ignored by most of the public and gets much less funding.
- Posts: 3,501 | Joined: 20-October 04
Reply
#3 1 June 2011 - 06:19 PM
"Well some dotors hope in 50 or 100 years from now we will tell genes when to turn off or when to turn on and there will be a three approaches to problem of drugs or surgery or telling of when to turn on or off the genes"
While we are working towards the latter, the former cannot be true.
"other than that, medical progress is slowing down and yes medical breakthroughs is slowing down very fat ."
So, because we are working towards revolutionising the whole of medicine, you think we have hit a brick wall.
BTW, have you noticed that the medical journals are getting fatter, and more numerous because they have so much progress to report?
Did you notice that survival rates for most cancers are getting better?
Have you spotted the fact that, apart from overweight Americans, the lifespans of people are getting longer?
In fact, is there any real evidence for your assertions at all?
- Posts: 4,893 | Joined: 24-February 06
Reply
#4 1 June 2011 - 08:02 PM
Some evidence supporting the theory that medicine is stagnating is:
1) The FDA put out a panic bulletin in 2008 complaining that for about a decade it had not been receiving signficiant new drug approval applications, but that these were generally just minor modifications of existing drugs to circumvent patent protection.
2) The last major disease overcome in the West was polio, almost 60 years ago.
3) Most drug treatments today just suppress the symptoms of disease but are not curative.
4) Despite huge increases in the basic science knowledge of disease, this accumulated knowledge is not being translated into clinically significant progress.
5) Major diseases are expanding as public health problems rather than coming under control. Thus the number of type 1 and type 2 diabetics is burgeoning, autoimmune illnesses of all kinds are becoming more prevalent death rates for many cancers are not improved (apart from apparently longer survival because of earlier diagnosis), lung cancer deaths are increasing now that the world has largely given up smoking, and new cases of endstage renal failure are skyrocketing -- yet medicine seems powerless to do anything about these problems.
6) Life expectancy in the United States is now ceasing to make gains, and in some population groups in the U.S. it is even declining -- for the first time since statistics on this topic were kept. The 'true' life expectancy, in the sense of the useful lifespan, is probably declining in all population groups with the rise of Alzheimer's Disease. Should people really be counted as alive if they are essentially just brainless zombies wandering about? If this happens to someone at 75 and they live to be 85, I think we should more honestly say that people are now dying younger.
7) I once wrote a history of the development of medical thinking on a given topic and consulted journals from 1980 to 2000. I was always worried that something new would come up that I would not include, but I realized that nothing seemed to have changed between the articles of 1980 and those of 2000, so what was I worried about?
8) To take an example from one field, as a student I was assigned to do a study of renal medicine in 1984, and then again later I dealt with the same subject from 1996 to the present. There is nothing different in dialysis centers, and very little of any significant difference at renal transplant centers, between 1984 and now, and when you listen to talks given by the manufacturers of dialysis machines and the makers of immunosuppressive drugs, they don't plan on there being much different over the coming 20 years. But dialysis technology was developed in 1942, and the first successful renal transplant occurred in 1954. The worst part is that almost no one working in the field seems to notice the stagnation! It is becoming a ritualized trade rather than an expanding science.
- Posts: 1,700 | Joined: 01-July 10
Reply
#5 2 June 2011 - 02:25 AM
Quote
I cannot find the thread 'Medical Stagnation' in your post history list or in Medical Science> section of the group
I cannot find it.The admin must of move it or delete the thread.
none a search using the search box key words Medical Stagnation and still cannot find it.
This post has been edited by nec209: 2 June 2011 - 02:29 AM
- Posts: 352 | Joined: 29-December 08
Reply
#6 17 June 2011 - 01:07 AM
Biomechanical interfaces are also expanding well with lots of novel research which is a new front.
The pharmaceutical problem has a lot to do with economic, social, and political reasons rather than simply being unable. My big fear is lack of antibiotic research. We're losing more and more antibiotics to resistance than we are gaining in novel mechanisms. It sure would suck if after 100 years of steady biomedical advancements we end up dying of consumption in sanitoriums again...
- Posts: 5 | Joined: 16-June 11
Reply
#7 17 June 2011 - 11:00 AM
nec209, on 2 June 2011 - 02:25 AM, said:
I cannot find it.The admin must of move it or delete the thread.
none a search using the search box key words Medical Stagnation and still cannot find it.
It is discussed in this thread
http://www.sciencefo...ies-be-slashed/
Stop failing the Turing test!
My SFN blog: Swans on Tea
To release the hounds, click the [+] sign ->
- Posts: 19,633 | Joined: 04-October 03
Reply
#9 7 July 2011 - 03:59 AM
- Posts: 1,639 | Joined: 12-April 07
Reply
#10 7 July 2011 - 07:44 PM
The other day further evidence of the catastrophe emerged with the National Institute of Health announcing its 'Advancing Translational Science' (NCATS) program to provide federal subsidies to address the problem that now for the first time in the history of modern medicine there are absolutely NO new blockbuster drugs in the developmental pipeline. This is something my patent-attorney friend has been complaining to me about for years. According to him, the intellectual property laws are a mess since they were designed to respond to rapidly-appearing blockbuster drugs and now there are none.
Stem cell therapies hold great promise, but you won't see anything significant in clinical practise for another half century in that field. Keep in mind that the slow pace of drug development, if the cure for cancer were found tomorrow it would be another 15 years before you could get it with a prescription.
Preventative medicine is a favorite mantra of our age, but it utterly unrealistic. The major diseases producing patient suffering, morbidity, mortality, and huge financial costs simply cannot be prevented by any know means. Lupus, type 1 diabetes, 50% of renal failure cases, 50% of heart disease cases, many cases of spina bifida, cystic fibrosis, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, Alzheimer's diesease -- all these and more are simply unpreventable. Medicine tries to pretend the situation is less dismal and to shift the blame for its failures onto the general public by exaggerating the percentage of diseases which are preventable. To do this, it tries to label as preventable all diseases whose onset might be delayed or slightly influenced by medical or lifestyle interventions, even though these conditions ultimately cannot be prevented, but only feebly influenced. Typical among these is type 2 diabetes, which is powerfully genetically determined, though the onset of the disease can be influenced by diet and exercise.
- Posts: 1,700 | Joined: 01-July 10
Reply
#11 7 July 2011 - 08:00 PM
Sort of true, but only because "We are finding cures for cancer every day," is an assertion not evidence.
On the other hand this
http://info.cancerre...okers-?view=rss
is actually evidence of a drug that reduces deaths from lung cancer.
"but a healthy population dies not of cancer but of pneumonia,"
Just for a start
http://xkcd.com/285/
Not since the development of antibiotics they don't, or at least not nearly so much.
That is part of the reason why they now die of cancer.
Also, since lung cancer has a long latency the people who took up smoking in the 60s are still dying from it.
Here's the evidence
http://info.cancerre...s/lung/smoking/
It shows that the rates of smoking ion the UK only really started to drop in about 1990 so the people who were still smoking 20 years ago are still dying from it.
"Stem cell therapies hold great promise, but you won't see anything significant in clinical practise for another half century in that field"
Can you tell me next weeks lottery numbers or are you not really able to predict the future?
- Posts: 4,893 | Joined: 24-February 06
Reply
#12 23 July 2011 - 02:26 AM
You can survive cancer but never be cured. You can live 3 years as "cured' or in remission but still die from complications or the cancer comes back.
This post has been edited by nec209: 23 July 2011 - 02:27 AM
- Posts: 352 | Joined: 29-December 08
Reply
#13 6 August 2011 - 03:32 PM
http:civilization-overview.com
- Posts: 126 | Joined: 04-August 11
Reply
#14 13 August 2011 - 11:52 PM
charles brough, on 6 August 2011 - 03:32 PM, said:
What does medical cost have to with medical progress is coming to brick wall?
- Posts: 352 | Joined: 29-December 08
Reply
#15 12 September 2011 - 06:08 AM
How can doctors make up for an unhealthy lifestyle with a pill or an operation when people just return to their unhealthy ways?
I think the problem of advances in health at the population level will come in preventive medicine. However, how to achieve improvements in diet / exercise on a large scale is unknown.
So far, it is proving very difficult to even change behavior among doctors. It takes on average 17 years for evidence based practice to become fully adopted by doctors once the practice is accepted in medical journals.
It may be that once the problem of changing behavior among doctors is solved, enough insight will be gained to advance changing behavior among patients.
- Posts: 2 | Joined: 12-September 11
Reply
#16 6 October 2011 - 05:37 PM
I know 5 friends this year that died with cancer !! Also when the big NDP leader Jack Layton in Canada dies with cancer and rich man like Steve Jobs and man like Patrick Swayze that leaves you in shock how primitive the health care is.
What is the scopes on cancer treatment and cure now ? Is there a medical progress slowing down ?
- Posts: 352 | Joined: 29-December 08
Reply
#17 7 October 2011 - 12:02 PM
John Cuthber, on 1 June 2011 - 06:19 PM, said:
"Well some dotors hope in 50 or 100 years from now we will tell genes when to turn off or when to turn on and there will be a three approaches to problem of drugs or surgery or telling of when to turn on or off the genes"
While we are working towards the latter, the former cannot be true.
"other than that, medical progress is slowing down and yes medical breakthroughs is slowing down very fat ."
So, because we are working towards revolutionising the whole of medicine, you think we have hit a brick wall.
BTW, have you noticed that the medical journals are getting fatter, and more numerous because they have so much progress to report?
Did you notice that survival rates for most cancers are getting better?
Have you spotted the fact that, apart from overweight Americans, the lifespans of people are getting longer?
In fact, is there any real evidence for your assertions at all?
While there have been improvements in cancer treatment we are at great peril of returning to the pre-antobiotic era due to our wide misuse of antibiotics resulting in the rise of antibiotic resistance bacterial strains.
So yes there is some evidence that we may have hit a brick wall in at least some areas of medicine.
- Posts: 574 | Joined: 17-July 11
Reply
#18 7 October 2011 - 05:07 PM
http://xkcd.com/285/
The evidence is that we are learning to use antibiotics more sensibly (which is progress, not a brick wall) and that we are inventing new antibiotics (which, again, isn't a brick wall.)
This post has been edited by John Cuthber: 7 October 2011 - 05:08 PM
- Posts: 4,893 | Joined: 24-February 06
Reply
#19 12 October 2011 - 06:33 PM
This post has been edited by CharonY: 12 October 2011 - 06:33 PM
- Posts: 3,501 | Joined: 20-October 04
Reply
#20 18 October 2011 - 07:16 AM
This post has been edited by nec209: 18 October 2011 - 07:17 AM
- Posts: 352 | Joined: 29-December 08
Reply

Help
Sign In »
Register Now!














