This kind of thing has been discussed here since the very first forum postings almost a decade ago. We have seen tons of animal model ideas that never panned out into the real world in that period of time after an interesting start. People in this thread have said it clearly - we are not mice. Animal models most of the time do not translate to humans 100%.
New posters to the board who haven't been here for the YEARS that Charm, Gary, Mark or I have been posting about these things should read some of the thousands of posts on an idea before they jump on others. Three of us have some scientific background, and we have no reason to squash good ideas or the "spirit" of posters looking for (and needing) medical help now. Believe me since 2000 I have known too many oral cancer patients that are no longer with us. I REALLY wish there was a magic bullet or something on the horizon that would change all this.
The problem is that most of the posters that come here do not understand the ethics of how drugs come to market to PROTECT the American public from drugs, devices, treatments, ideas, etc., that might hurt them. We are not lab rats. The FDA has protocols that are designed to prevent harm for a reason. If trials in animals, or early phase trials in humans do not pan out, the research dies for lack of funding and results. Simple as that. No one is letting the "cure" languish on the sidelines so that the status quo can stay the same. There just is no "news story value" in talking about promising things that didn't work out; so the press releases which are usually put out by researchers looking for additional funding, drug companies pumping their stock through their upcoming product pipeline etc. and created all the hype in the beginning, die, from both a lack of general interest perspective, and a company/researcher benefit. None of these things warrant someone doing a story on why the idea died. Particularly the company or researcher that wrote the first press release. They have nothing to gain to come out with yet another press release telling the public that their idea did not pan out. The scientific community knows because the failure of the idea THAT WAS ORIGINALLY FUNDED BY YOUR TAX DOLLARS, has to be published, not abandoned. But these are not picked up by the general media because that does not serve their purpose.
Invariably someone digs up one of these left over research things from the web (which spiders and catalogs everything ever put up, and goes back forever and a day), and posts about it without looking for, finding, researching, or referencing all other articles explaining why "that something" was necessarily abandoned, and for the reasons stated above, can't find a story about why it died as an idea in the general media. That is usually the case. There was no INITAL problems in the idea, but eventually it did exhibit some, or it had side effects that negated the positive. The idea goes dead.
Now left out in cyber space with no closing comments, it is found by someone who thinks it is a conspiracy to keep everyone paying doctors, hospitals, pharma co's, or whatever, or they just don't have all the information, who puts it on a blog where it gets a new breath of life to start circulating again, even though it is a dead idea.
New issue, particularly for new posters. I'm not excited about the tone that some have taken on this board, particularly new posters that haven't taken the time to read all the many many old posts, where these kinds of abandoned research ideas were gone over ad nauseum. But these same people are quick to point out an issue they have with the attitude of someone who has hundreds of helpful posts to help others. Shooting quick from the hip seldom does anyone justice. We have a enough tension on these boards with death, pain, fear, hopelessness, and more and don't need to add this kind of BS to the mix. That does not belong here. We're all in the same boat. And it's a damn leaking thing to boot. Flaming people on this board is not welcome, statements like someone should get sued for false advertising about their name, are not helpful, and do not move positive ideas forward. If you don't like someone here, don't post to their threads. Put something out there that has holes in it from a research standpoint, and you can count on people to point it out. If that bothers you, that is not the problem of the person that offers the ideas of why something is incorrect, it is in the mind of the reader. This tone stops here. This thread is closed.
