Researchers from Pritzker Molecular Engineering, under the guidance of Prof. Jeffrey Hubbell, demonstrated that their compound can eliminate the autoimmune response linked to multiple sclerosis. Researchers at the University of Chicago’s Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering (PME) have developed
This article is garbage but I’m a molecular biologist and the publication they’re talking about is really neat.
The “ELI5 to the point of maybe reducing out the truth” way to explain it is that the researchers can add “flags” to proteins associated with immune responses that make cells pick them up and examine them. This is shown to work for allergins (so say, add a flag to peanut protein and the cells can look at it more closely, go “oh nvm this is fine” and stop freaking out about peanuts) as well as autoimmune diseases (where cells mistake other cells from the same body as potential threats).
It’s not nearly to a treatment stage, but tbh this is one of the more exciting approaches I’ve seen, and I do similar research and thus read a lot of papers like this.
There’s a lot of evidence that we are entering a biological “golden age” and we will discover a ton of amazing things very soon. It’s worrysome that we still have to deal with instability in other parts of life (climate change, wealth inequality, political polarization) that might slow down the process of turning these discoveries into actual treatments we can use to make lives better…
Still, don’t doubt everything you read! A lot of cool stuff is coming, the trick is getting it past the red tape
Unpopular opinion: Anyone who refused the COVID vaccine should be banned from getting this.
Honestly asking, why even bring this up? What does this have to do with the topic of the post?
All you do is start an argument and divert away from the topic that was supposed to be discussed.
You don’t want to get a vaccine to help others + yourself, you shouldn’t be allowed to “believe in science” when it benefits you and only you.
You don’t want to get a vaccine to help others + yourself, you shouldn’t be allowed to “believe in science” when it benefits you and only you.
Such a non-sequitur answer. And for the record, I’m fully vaccinated.
Go somewhere else to talk about your favorite vaccine. Don’t DERAIL this conversation about a completely different vaccine.
Don’t DERAIL this conversation about a completely different vaccine.
I was replying to a question. Please follow the context thread, or go away.
Don’t DERAIL this conversation about a completely different vaccine.
I was replying to a question. Please follow the context thread, or go away.
Here’s what you said, context wise …
Unpopular opinion: Anyone who refused the COVID vaccine should be banned from getting this.
You weren’t responding to a question, you were just offering your own opinion, an opinion that was different from the topic and the context of the conversation being discussed, and hence my reply to you, calling you out for it.
You’re being intellectually dishonest.
Ya, I am allowed to post my opinion. I don’t think people who refuse a vaccine that can help save others should be allowed to receive a vaccine that benefits only them.
If you’re upset, you’re part of the problem. Not my fault. If you don’t want to see my comments, which I am free to post, block me.
In fact, don’t worry about it. I will block you, because your reply is insane. Literally complaining to me because I posted my opinion, and then calling me intellectually dishonest. Nutters.
Ya, I am allowed to post my opinion.
No one says you’re not. The only point I was making is you’re posting your opinion in the wrong place and you’re ‘muddying the waters’ of the conversation.
That point was said straightforward to you, but you chose to ignore it and try to move the goal posts onto something else.
If you’re upset, you’re part of the problem. Not my fault.
I’m not upset at all, I was just asking a question, why are you expressing an opinion that doesn’t match the conversation being had and that you know would be inflammatory and pollute the conversation.
You keep trying to warp the meaning of my initial critique of your initial opinion into something else to win an Internet argument.
You continue to be intellectually dishonest.
Just spiteful. And ironic if you really want to claim to care about public health
Just spiteful.
Wanting to have two seperate conversations about two seperate vaccines is “spiteful”? Really?
And ironic if you really want to claim to care about public health
And I do care about public health, allot. For the record, I’m fully vaccinated.
I’ve been following cures like this for years. There are three candidates in phase 2 trials right now that appear to work, they’re mostly figuring out the doses needed and there’s a big question on how long they last. Hopefully permanent but we don’t know for sure.
Diabetics have just been so beaten down by this whole thing. I was told the cure was 10 years away 40 years ago. Even if the technology described here works we could be another 15 years before we see it. Researchers said it could be here as soon as 5 years, which is true if unrealistically optimistic. I believe the cure is coming but I’m not holding my breath until I’m actually in front of a doctor about to receive the cure whatever it happens to be.
It’s a clash between scientists needing to be optimistic about their findings to maintain funding and real people needing it asap. We need to fund more medical research outside of for-profit corporations and increasingly expensive academia
Imagine if the research and development of treatments and vaccines for endemic pathogens and genetic disorders were… you know… socialized
