Page 17 of 19 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141516171819 LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 184

Thread: Why Don't We Have a Cure for Spinal Cord Injury? 2016

  1. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by Fly_Pelican_Fly View Post
    re Dennis - he?s been injured as long as I have and has never taken an interest in the science or the commercial side of delivering technologies. He?s only interested in finding someone or something to agitate in order drive traffic to his blog. I don?t have the desire to enable him.
    For someone who doesnt want to engage with me, you're sure good at saying my name. I'll take the public insult as you wanting to engage again.
    How would I benefit from driving people to my blog? I don't make any money off it. It would be like me saying that the only reason you talk with scientists is to build your rehab business in the uk. It would be based on no fact whatsoever. So let's stick to facts and not muddy the water with innuendo.
    But if my goal were driving people to my blog, I should take more mainstream positions or try to get in the cdrf blog team. Or I would just try to raise money by keeping my head underwater or running a race. Not bad ventures and sure to get a lot more attention at the moment.
    I get enough public attention with my trade union work in Japan to please my ego. I don't need my blog for that.

    I've always taken interest in the the science, but as I've said over and over, I don't find myself highly competent so I rely on what I learn from others, including scientists, and community members. It's the same way as why I use a lawyer for things at work. I stick with my area of ability while cooperating with others.
    I make sure that when I write I supply people with links to the science instead of me trying to explain it myself. I find that those who wrote about science regularly are much better at explaining than me. It's called cooperating as a community (but more about that below)

    Commercialization? You're right. Reason: I don't see that it's brought us anywhere quickly. I think most scientists, just like other academics, would like to be left alone to research so they can make their contribution to the world. I think that commercialization is something scientists/we are forced to get involved with because of the way public funds are distributed. So, I find it much easier to try to set in motion away to get public funds delivered better. I haven't accomplished this yet but neither have you cured sci your way. I think I can help effect change in this area so that's what I concentrate on. Maybe I'll fail my way or you'll fail your way. But if one of us gets a cure either way, we'll both benefit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fly_Pelican_Fly View Post
    PS this thread is titled "Why don't we have a Cure for Spinal Cord Injury". We do not have a cure as the research field doesn't know how to regenerate the adult human chronic spinal cord.
    Wow! That's the reason? It's a simple scientific issue? You're smarter than that.
    That's like saying that WWII didn't effect the making of the atom bomb. Or the cold war played no role in the moon landing. Even closer to our times, like the women's movement played no role on the development and proliferation of the pill and the aids movement had no place in hastening the discovery of life saving drugs. Even a lot of the research with cells is commercialized for profit; research that would t even happen if someone didn't have a reason to make it happen.
    You must have spoken to different people and scientists as I have. Whenever I've asked for what is stopping a cure, no one has ever said to me that it's only science. This is the first time I've ever heard that from anyone including yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fly_Pelican_Fly View Post
    1) nobody is accountable for Cure as you cannot attach accountability to something that is undiscovered
    2) there is no SCI community and therefore cannot have a value attached to it.
    And finally we get your answer to your own question.
    1. Was this a trick question? Yes, you're right. There is no cure yet. The point is about the accountability for FINDING a cure. Whose is this?
    Id say it's the whole community of those researching a cure, those supporting a cure, and for those who would benefit from a cure.
    Which leads to point 2.
    2. You dont think there is an sci community? Then why are you on the site. Is it to "be educatin us simple folk"?
    Why be involved in u2fp as you have or even attend w2w?
    Those around you trying to achieve the same goal is what a community is, unless you believe that we're just individuals that use each other from time to time in order to meet our own individual goals?
    The whole history of scientific and human progress is about community. From the first people who hunted in groups and devised better weapons together, and the industrial revolution whose two communities of both capitalists and workers lead to great advancement in science. To the current world where even the choices we make at the Ballot Box affects science.

    If you think the only thing standing in the way of us standing is the lack of a scientific discovery in regeneration, then brother, you ain't half as clever as I've given you credit for.
    Last edited by StemCells&AtomBombs; 11-26-2017 at 09:26 AM.

  2. #162
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    4,993
    Blog Entries
    1
    “ Egotism is the anethsetic that dulls the pain of stupidity”
    Frank Leahy

  3. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by nrf View Post
    “ Egotism is the anethsetic that dulls the pain of stupidity”
    Frank Leahy
    As you stated a few pages ago; what does that have to do with Cure? 😀
    Quote Originally Posted by nrf View Post
    m
    Natto,
    what does your post have to do with Cure?

  4. #164
    Quote Originally Posted by StemCells&AtomBombs View Post
    For someone who doesnt want to engage with me, you're sure good at saying my name. I'll take the public insult as you wanting to engage again.
    How would I benefit from driving people to my blog? I don't make any money off it. It would be like me saying that the only reason you talk with scientists is to build your rehab business in the uk. It would be based on no fact whatsoever. So let's stick to facts and not muddy the water with innuendo.
    But if my goal were driving people to my blog, I should take more mainstream positions or try to get in the cdrf blog team. Or I would just try to raise money by keeping my head underwater or running a race. Not bad ventures and sure to get a lot more attention at the moment.
    I get enough public attention with my trade union work in Japan to please my ego. I don't need my blog for that.

    I've always taken interest in the the science, but as I've said over and over, I don't find myself highly competent so I rely on what I learn from others, including scientists, and community members. It's the same way as why I use a lawyer for things at work. I stick with my area of ability while cooperating with others.
    I make sure that when I write I supply people with links to the science instead of me trying to explain it myself. I find that those who wrote about science regularly are much better at explaining than me. It's called cooperating as a community (but more about that below)

    Commercialization? You're right. Reason: I don't see that it's brought us anywhere quickly. I think most scientists, just like other academics, would like to be left alone to research so they can make their contribution to the world. I think that commercialization is something scientists/we are forced to get involved with because of the way public funds are distributed. So, I find it much easier to try to set in motion away to get public funds delivered better. I haven't accomplished this yet but neither have you cured sci your way. I think I can help effect change in this area so that's what I concentrate on. Maybe I'll fail my way or you'll fail your way. But if one of us gets a cure either way, we'll both benefit.



    Wow! That's the reason? It's a simple scientific issue? You're smarter than that.
    That's like saying that WWII didn't effect the making of the atom bomb. Or the cold war played no role in the moon landing. Even closer to our times, like the women's movement played no role on the development and proliferation of the pill and the aids movement had no place in hastening the discovery of life saving drugs. Even a lot of the research with cells is commercialized for profit; research that would t even happen if someone didn't have a reason to make it happen.
    You must have spoken to different people and scientists as I have. Whenever I've asked for what is stopping a cure, no one has ever said to me that it's only science. This is the first time I've ever heard that from anyone including yourself.



    And finally we get your answer to your own question.
    1. Was this a trick question? Yes, you're right. There is no cure yet. The point is about the accountability for FINDING a cure. Whose is this?
    Id say it's the whole community of those researching a cure, those supporting a cure, and for those who would benefit from a cure.
    Which leads to point 2.
    2. You dont think there is an sci community? Then why are you on the site. Is it to "be educatin us simple folk"?
    Why be involved in u2fp as you have or even attend w2w?
    Those around you trying to achieve the same goal is what a community is, unless you believe that we're just individuals that use each other from time to time in order to meet our own individual goals?
    The whole history of scientific and human progress is about community. From the first people who hunted in groups and devised better weapons together, and the industrial revolution whose two communities of both capitalists and workers lead to great advancement in science. To the current world where even the choices we make at the Ballot Box affects science.

    If you think the only thing standing in the way of us standing is the lack of a scientific discovery in regeneration, then brother, you ain't half as clever as I've given you credit for.
    I am glad you have cleared that up. At least everyone now knows you admit to know little about the science and care even less about the role of capital markets to not only cure spinal cord injury but to move the dial on future medicines.

    Every single researcher is going to say money is the #1 blocker to Cure. Of course they are. They are not going to admit that they can't figure it out are they?

    If you can find me one bit of evidence to suggest a scientist anywhere in the world knows how to regenerate the adult human CNS/spinal cord I will gladly concede that science is not the problem! There is no solution to throw money at.

    Yes there discoveries that have been made that will lead to incremental repair - sprouting, re-organisation, neuromodulation, increased plasticity etc. Some of these may make it to market if the right commercial people are involved and some will fall by the wayside due to various factors that are nothing to do with public monies.

    Increased public monies will mean more money for the existing academic institutions involved in SCI research today. That could be a good thing if it was spent on merit and ability but the likelihood is that it will be a case of funding the same old crusty researchers in the field that have failed so far. Who will sweep away the crust?

    We are in a global recession, one that sees the richest countries in the world struggle to deliver basic health needs. Without market making, lean business models and streamlined production methods spinal cord injury will never see a cure move from the bench to the bedside. Venture capital needs products to invest in. We have a dearth of good products that deserve that investment.

    If anything Government money will likely follow the markets for health in the future. Incubators and commercial accelerators will grease the wheels in product development and commercialisation. But we're not there yet! Nowhere near.

    The likes of Google, Facebook, Paypal and Amazon get a lot of criticism (quite rightly in some cases) but they know that the health market needs capitalism more than ever now. Billionnaires hate the thought of getting old and dying and despair at the thought of their future health being in the hands of the existing health and research systems. That is why they are now spending more money than any government could ever imagine on longevity, age-related disease and life extension health technologies free of the constraints of governments and academia.

    No I am not here to educate people. I am not a teacher nor am I an expert. I post here to correct some of inaccuracies that are posted now and again.

    Your definition of a community is basically a consumer. I agree we have a consumer base and demand. And one that is desperate need of a product to buy. But there is no product yet and nor is there a manufacturing pipeline for that product. I wouldn’t say it is a Community but rather a disparate group with different backgrounds, personalities, priorities and nervous system damage/characteristics. We know there isn't a silver bullet and therefore we're talking about a whole suite of products that need to be developed and brought to market. We cant look back at historical stories which have been solved by silver bullets - SCI is as multi-faceted as it's consumer base.
    Last edited by Fly_Pelican_Fly; 11-26-2017 at 12:57 PM.

  5. #165
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    4,993
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by StemCells&AtomBombs View Post
    As you stated a few pages ago; what does that have to do with Cure? 
    It has more to do with the lack of a cure. But I guess you don’t understand.

  6. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by Fly_Pelican_Fly View Post
    I am glad you have cleared that up. At least everyone now knows you admit to know little about the science and care even less about the role of capital markets to not only cure spinal cord injury but to move the dial on future medicines.

    Every single researcher is going to say money is the #1 blocker to Cure. Of course they are. They are not going to admit that they can't figure it out are they?

    If you can find me one bit of evidence to suggest a scientist anywhere in the world knows how to regenerate the adult human CNS/spinal cord I will gladly concede that science is not the problem! There is no solution to throw money at.

    Yes there discoveries that have been made that will lead to incremental repair - sprouting, re-organisation, neuromodulation, increased plasticity etc. Some of these may make it to market if the right commercial people are involved and some will fall by the wayside due to various factors that are nothing to do with public monies.

    Increased public monies will mean more money for the existing academic institutions involved in SCI research today. That could be a good thing if it was spent on merit and ability but the likelihood is that it will be a case of funding the same old crusty researchers in the field that have failed so far. Who will sweep away the crust?

    We are in a global recession, one that sees the richest countries in the world struggle to deliver basic health needs. Without market making, lean business models and streamlined production methods spinal cord injury will never see a cure move from the bench to the bedside. Venture capital needs products to invest in. We have a dearth of good products that deserve that investment.

    If anything Government money will likely follow the markets for health in the future. Incubators and commercial accelerators will grease the wheels in product development and commercialisation. But we're not there yet! Nowhere Konear.

    The likes of Google, Facebook, Paypal and Amazon get a lot of criticism (quite rightly in some cases) but they know that the health market needs capitalism more than ever now. Billionnaires hate the thought of getting old and dying and despair at the thought of their future health being in the hands of the existing health and research systems. That is why they are now spending more money than any government could ever imagine on longevity, age-related disease and life extension health technologies free of the constraints of governments and academia.

    No I am not here to educate people. I am not a teacher nor am I an expert. I post here to correct some of inaccuracies that are posted now and again.

    Your definition of a community is basically a consumer. I agree we have a consumer base and demand. And one is desperate need of a product to buy. But there is no product yet and nor is there a manufacturing pipeline for that product.
    I didn't say that I know little about science, I said "I'm not highly competent". There are a few kilometres apart from one another, but nice try at a spin. Please remember: if you got to spin it, it probably ain’t the truth. Like most people on this board, I strive to learn about the science. Sometimes I'm successful and sometimes I'm not. I always try to learn things from those who are more competent than me and go to others to get explanations for when I don't think I get it. I find no shame in admitting that. We can't ALL know everything. Did you get born with this in your head? I didn't and am happy to admit that others have taught me and are still teaching me a lot.

    You say, “We are in a global recession, one that sees the richest countries in the world struggle to deliver basic health needs. “, but your NHS, and public medicine in both Canada and Japan do a better job of providing good healthcare to the whole of the population than private markets do in America, and do so spending less money. This is not a very good example of the lean market model. In fact, it’s one of the hardest thing for the free marketeers to explain when pushing “market miracles in medicine”.

    You're 100% correct that there is no scientist who has figured out regeneration. I've never once said that science wasn't PART of the problem. Unlike you, I believe the problem to multi faceted, with science being but one part.

    Public funds need to be used much more wisely for research and there needs to be a lot more emphasis on outcomes when it comes to clinical and preclinical work. I think the only way for this to happen is for those who will most benefit need to be at that table. The cure is also political. You're right, leave it up to scientists alone to ask for money and you'll not get a good division or best use of the money. There is some information about research being more “consumer” driven in one of the links below. I think one thing we need to do is to figure out how that can best be accomplished.

    Leaving it up to markets and capital to cure and care for illness sounds nice especially since the myth that there is not enough money to care and cure for people seems to be something that is often pushed. But a massive expenditure in medicine (especially in America) is what the public purse pays for private cures and cares, therefore leaving the public purse even further looted and unable to care and cure citizens.
    Another danger of leaving it to markets is that even though pharmaceutical companies do spend a lot of money in pre/clinical research, most basic science is still funded by taxpayers. And maybe that yet undiscovered area that will get us out of our chairs lies undiscovered. That area will not be chased by private money until public money has shown part of the way. A tax on the public property that led to scientific "cures" by pharmaceutical companies would actually make more money available for future basic research (not only sci).
    Based on this, I don't think that pushing for commercialization will get us anywhere quickly. I've provided some links here for people to read for themselves why you're trumpeting of the market isn't as good as it sounds and leads to excess waste which often costs the taxpayer. (sorry for the links. I could regurgitate it to show off my knowledge, but it's not my research).

    Financial Times https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/amp.f...7-2359a58ac7a5 (mainly focused on pre/clinical research and the waste of research and science from the private sector (not only). Their fourth areas are most interesting. A lot of the information comes from the Lancet (http://www.thelancet.com/series/research)


    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22926/ about the undue influence that money may have on medical research. of course there are ways to try to limit this, not very often done.

    An article from 2005, but still relevant in talking about imbalance especially in the area of basic versus applied research. http://discovermagazine.com/2007/oct...rivate-funding
    Norman Augustine, the panel’s chairman and a former CEO at Lockheed Martin, noted that market pressures have compelled industry to put nearly all its investment into applied research, not the riskier basic science that drives innovation 10 to 15 years out.

    At this time, I don't see any evidence that markets and private capital will get us to a cure for sci. It’s specifically because I am not naive about how financial capital and markets see our cure; they see it in dollar signs. Of course they do; their job is to make money, not get us out of chairs.

    We both see the world and the economy different.
    But maybe there is room to use our heads together. I'll accept to a certain level that we are ALSO a community of consumers. What do you think we as consumers can do to speed up the process? I'm happy to hear that argument.

    I would like to hear from others who think that the community CAN have an important impact on cure and and what can be done
    Last edited by StemCells&AtomBombs; 11-26-2017 at 01:01 PM.
    Dennis Tesolat
    www.StemCellsandAtomBombs.blogspot.com

    "Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom."
    Martin Luther King

  7. #167
    I don't plan to indulge you in much more as its literally like talking to Corbyn or Sanders....but I will leave you with this!

    - you know nothing of the state of the UK National Health Service and its SCI services - it's facing oblivion.

    - you know nothing of capital markets apart from a skewed opinion influenced by Geron/Acorda/Stem Cells Inc failures. Traditional Pharma and Biotech is not the only model out there in the 2017 markets. There are startups funded by venture philanthropy, social enterprises funded by social impact invetors and there are entrepreneurial folk making things happen out there in smart ways.

    - you dont seem to realise that most academic institutions financially survive through the licensing of intellectual property to capital market driven companies. Try taking that away and see how many researchers will be without jobs.
    Last edited by Fly_Pelican_Fly; 11-26-2017 at 06:49 PM.

  8. #168
    Senior Member lynnifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Windsor ON Canada
    Posts
    19,320
    Facing oblivion?! How? Canada is always 10yrs behind the UK.
    Roses are red. Tacos are enjoyable. Don't blame immigrants, because you're unemployable.

    T-11 Flaccid Paraplegic due to TM July 1985 @ age 12

  9. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by GRAMMY View Post
    The Fehlings lab would be a very obvious choice for the necessary animal replication work since the New World Laboratory is also located in Canada. I spoke with Dr. Fehlings over lunch at ISNR in California when they first consented to begin the rat studies (Dec 2015).

    The killer surgeon, Shamji, murdered his wife and her body was found the following year on Dec 1st, 2016. Horrible thing...

    Canada joined as a recruiting site for the StemCells Inc. trial extremely late in the game. They had 2 locations of the 14 sites. In fact, I think they were the last designated sites to join. Fehlings did not shut down the StemCells Inc. trial, rather the company wound itself down. Fehlings was just a PI at the Toronto site.



    What witchcraft is this you speak of?
    Remember when they presented some video footage of the patients from the trial in Russia at W2W they didn?t want UTFP To spread the footage am I not mistaken? They certainly don?t want to give out how they managed to reprogram cells from our own body into neural stem cells. I?m just saying when I talked with someone that was closely involved with the trial happening in Russia a few years ago, every email had a confidentiality disclaimer on it.

  10. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by Fly_Pelican_Fly View Post
    Haha! Putting your thesaurus to good use there chap.

    I?m pleased that you have now discovered Fortuna Fix has announced the trial in the West. How did you miss what was happening in your own back yard?

    Travis Roy who spoke at W2W a few years ago is indeed a fierce advocate and is working very hard over there in Boston to accelerate the translation and commercialisation of discoveries.

    I don?t mind what you think of me or how it makes you feel. I mostly only post here to call out misinformation, of which there is so much, so that newbies are not duped. I can stop doing that if you like.

    re Dennis - he?s been injured as long as I have and has never taken an interest in the science or the commercial side of delivering technologies. He?s only interested in finding someone or something to agitate in order drive traffic to his blog. I don?t have the desire to enable him.

    re Anthony - I have known Anthony and Paolo a long time. Neither will be offended or upset with me. So don?t worry.

    You seem like a guy that wants to get involved and one with a thesaurus to boot. Maybe extract it from your ass and stop touting 3 year old partial information garnered from a couple of CEO phonecalls as current fact and get involved in a project local to you.

    As for answering my two questions -

    1) nobody is accountable for Cure as you cannot attach accountability to something that is undiscovered
    2) there is no SCI community and therefore cannot have a value attached to it.
    I have been off the game for a long time, I believe the paralysis rot has taken it?s toll on my body and I am looking to contribute to the cause in my own way which makes me focus on pressuring my legal team. I haven?t been as scrupulous with my ?cure? research (I believe The field is in a phase of stagnation anyways [after the exciting 2014], so unless I have large sums of money nothing to offer, fundraisers are futile), but out of curiosity I just reached out to Fortuna. Geez my vocabulary Annoys you, within my Isolation I have been studying all kinds of things including the English language, Today it paid off.

    What I learned in those exchanges is still relevant ( it’s only been a little over two years, and other than a new company and a phase of investment clearly they haven’t changed that much, in terms of the research they are working on) and interesting information.

    p.s I think nothing of you, you are but words presented in a fourm on the Internet; All I can judge is your writing pertaining to a specific topic. Were we to meet in person and actually acknowledge each other who knows. But that is real life that is how you formulate an opinion of someone.
    Last edited by JamesMcM; 11-27-2017 at 06:59 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 24
    Last Post: 05-21-2016, 08:15 PM
  2. Let's cure spinal cord injury now
    By manouli in forum Cure
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-09-2012, 06:43 AM
  3. There is No Cure for Spinal Cord Injury
    By Julie250 in forum Life
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-16-2010, 04:54 PM
  4. A cure for spinal cord injury?
    By manouli in forum Cure
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-31-2005, 04:55 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-18-2002, 06:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •