Failure of Alzheimer's research

[kan...@aol.com]

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/355108/alzheimers-disease-drug-approval-research-retraction#:~:text=Even%20as%20science%20made%20exciting,of%2Dthe%2Dbox%20investigations.

This is a good, and disappointing read.

A "seminal" paper on Alz had to retracted because of some cooked up stuff. 

Almost all research is dedicated to eliminating the plaques that are seen in the disease. But no good studies have shown that the plaques CAUSE the disease or are just a byproduct. And those that want to think outside the box tend to get the short stick on research funds. 

I've relied on the tools provided by research to do my work all of my career. It's disturbing to know that the process can be really tainted. Tainted by close mindedness that won't allow "outside the box" research. Tainted by those willing to phony up results. 

So while science works to provide answers in numerous fields, and gets great answers quite often, this kind of stuff fuels the doubters to question most of science. And that's bad fallout. 

I think that early AID's research probably suffered from similar issues. Too much politics injected into a deadly disease. 

Etc. 

[GMoney]

Sucks when this happens but it's all in how you look at it. When bad science gets exposed, who is the one doing the exposing? Other scientists.  When you have an entire community that consists of people versed in the ideas of the scientific method, of discovery by experimentation and in following where the evidence leads.......well....lying to that group is a fool's errand, and eventually you will be exposed.

So yeah....it sucks, but it also means that science continues to "work".  They regulate themselves better than any other discipline on planet earth that I can think of.  

[kan...@aol.com]

Hey, what happened to G the misanthrope? This was a good, and upbeat post. 

I agree that science done in "real time" can look sketchy for sure. Covid showed that to be sure. But at the end of the day, science was exonerated; Marjorie T. Greene and the crazy rightists exposed for what they are. I like your take on this issue. 

Maybe I'm less sanguine because I rely totally on what science provides me in the way of "tools of the trade". My style is to not adopt the "newest and latest" stuff, just for this reason. Too many recalls, etc. I would like the FDA to do its job better. But in the near future, thanks to SCOTUS, they will be defanged even more. Then it'll be caveat emptor for  your next cancer drug.

[GMoney]

On Mon, Jul 1, 2024 at 2:55 PM 'kan...@aol.com' via Kansas City Diversity Coalition <kansas-city-div...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Hey, what happened to G the misanthrope? This was a good, and upbeat post. 

I agree that science done in "real time" can look sketchy for sure. Covid showed that to be sure. But at the end of the day, science was exonerated; Marjorie T. Greene and the crazy rightists exposed for what they are. I like your take on this issue. 

Maybe I'm less sanguine because I rely totally on what science provides me in the way of "tools of the trade". My style is to not adopt the "newest and latest" stuff, just for this reason. Too many recalls, etc. I would like the FDA to do its job better. But in the near future, thanks to SCOTUS, they will be defanged even more. Then it'll be caveat emptor for  your next cancer drug.

My misanthropy is not universal. I love me some science.

But the same is true in my profession when it comes to tools of the trade...I let the other guys upgrade first....find the bugs....then i upgrade when the service packs have patched it into a well rounded, working product.  

[kan...@aol.com]

So you're a facultative misanthrope, rather than an obligate one (that's an arcane reference to bacteria. Sorry). I might be with you on that.  Some days people just suck big time. One reason I decamp to the High Sierras with a guy that barely talks. Solitude, clear air, stunning beauty, stupid fish; what's not to love. Well, there is the hard ground, hard work. But WTF, it's worth it.