Genetic editing proof of concept conducted

[benjt]

Some Harvard researchers have edited the DNA of live adult mammals in-vivo.

Link: http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/11/toward-genetic-editing/

Though he warned that no system, including this one, will be a one-size-fits-all delivery solution, Liu believes that delivering genome-editing proteins into cells could offer hope to patients suffering from a host of conditions, including some diseases of the eye, ear, liver, muscles, and blood.
[...]
"We hope this approach to protein delivery will help connect where genome editing is now to where the field needs to be in order to realize the therapeutic potential of these proteins to address genetic diseases," Liu said.

They already have a treatment approach for hearing deficits which is based - guess what - on restoring damaged hairs. Not ones like the ones on our head, but still.

Thought this is interesting even if any potential treatment arising from this will be many, many years away. But maybe it's something that could work some day far away.

 

[hellouser]

Some Harvard researchers have edited the DNA of live adult mammals in-vivo.

Link: http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/11/toward-genetic-editing/



They already have a treatment approach for hearing deficits which is based - guess what - on restoring damaged hairs. Not ones like the ones on our head, but still.

Thought this is interesting even if any potential treatment arising from this will be many, many years away. But maybe it's something that could work some day far away.

Don't expect them to do anything with actual hairs... there's no sympathy for regular bald men, so we are not a priority for them to dabble with generating follicles that grow terminal hair. I wonder what they'd say if they heard me say this?

 

[Tharock12344]

Don't expect them to do anything with actual hairs... there's no sympathy for regular bald men, so we are not a priority for them to dabble with generating follicles that grow terminal hair. I wonder what they'd say if they heard me say this?

As knowledgeable as you might be about all this stuff Hellouser, you sure have a way of bringing negative energy to posts at times - talking about bald men not being a priority, about society excluding us, and women "despising" us. A personality outweighs so heavily the physical appearance of an individual. I'm on my way to becoming bald, but I absolutely refuse to let that stand in the way of my personal relationships with females, my career, and how I interact within society. Understand your self-worth, and if you have nothing valuable to say, then stay off these forums. Imagine a young norwood II-III looking at your comments -- you set them up to believe their life is going to be worthless based on their hair (or lack thereof).

 

[corvidae]

Don't expect them to do anything with actual hairs... there's no sympathy for regular bald men, so we are not a priority for them to dabble with generating follicles that grow terminal hair. I wonder what they'd say if they heard me say this?

Bald men are a priority because so many people go bald

 

[hellouser]

As knowledgeable as you might be about all this stuff Hellouser, you sure have a way of bringing negative energy to posts at times - talking about bald men not being a priority, about society excluding us, and women "despising" us. A personality outweighs so heavily the physical appearance of an individual. I'm on my way to becoming bald, but I absolutely refuse to let that stand in the way of my personal relationships with females, my career, and how I interact within society. Understand your self-worth, and if you have nothing valuable to say, then stay off these forums. Imagine a young norwood II-III looking at your comments -- you set them up to believe their life is going to be worthless based on their hair (or lack thereof).

That's the problem. All of us have self-worth... but those that are privileged with hair believe otherwise about us. It's not us with the problem, it's everyone else. You're not that bald now, but you'll be singing a different tune when you are.

 

[Mach]

As knowledgeable as you might be about all this stuff Hellouser, you sure have a way of bringing negative energy to posts at times - talking about bald men not being a priority, about society excluding us, and women "despising" us. A personality outweighs so heavily the physical appearance of an individual. I'm on my way to becoming bald, but I absolutely refuse to let that stand in the way of my personal relationships with females, my career, and how I interact within society. Understand your self-worth, and if you have nothing valuable to say, then stay off these forums. Imagine a young norwood II-III looking at your comments -- you set them up to believe their life is going to be worthless based on their hair (or lack thereof).

I agree. We all know what hair loss does to us in society and we don't need someone reminding us on a hair loss forum. People are smarter than me and better looking but I promise you I've achieved way more in life than those losers...... all while balding! I do appreciate Hellousers motivation. Just needs to constructive it in a better way.

 

[benjt]

5 replies to the opening post, all of them are "mimimi society is evil, everybody just wants to mock us, no sympathy", none actually related to the topic. Good job hellouser at derailing another one! Thank you!

Its always the same:
Poster 1: "Oh society is so bad they will never do anything about it"
Poster 2: "Yeah, I agree, noone understands us or cares about us!"
Poster 3: "Yeah, I agree, noone understands us or cares about us!"
Poster 4: "Yeah, I agree, noone understands us or cares about us!"
...
Poster n: "Yeah, I agree, noone understands us or cares about us!"

Could you please keep that circle jerk to the "Impact of hair loss" section? It adds nothing to the topic itself and it is always the same. Why do you always feel the need to derail every thread?

 

[hellouser]

5 replies to the opening post, all of them are "mimimi society is evil, everybody just wants to mock us, no sympathy", none actually related to the topic. Good job hellouser at derailing another one! Thank you!

Its always the same:
Poster 1: "Oh society is so bad they will never do anything about it"
Poster 2: "Yeah, I agree, noone understands us or cares about us!"
Poster 3: "Yeah, I agree, noone understands us or cares about us!"
Poster 4: "Yeah, I agree, noone understands us or cares about us!"
...
Poster n: "Yeah, I agree, noone understands us or cares about us!"

Could you please keep that circle jerk to the "Impact of hair loss" section? It adds nothing to the topic itself and it is always the same. Why do you always feel the need to derail every thread?

Email the researchers and ask them instead of why they're doing jack sh!t with any kind of follicle engineering. Would get you a lot further than speculating here.

 

[bushbush]

Email the researchers and ask them instead of why they're doing jack sh!t with any kind of follicle engineering. Would get you a lot further than speculating here.

Why don't you email them yourself and ask if they have any job opportunities? Since all you seem to do is complain about how 'incompetent' researchers are, perhaps you could show them what they are doing wrong.

 

[hellouser]

Why don't you email them yourself and ask if they have any job opportunities? Since all you seem to do is complain about how 'incompetent' researchers are, perhaps you could show them what they are doing wrong.

Turn back the clocks about 14 years and I would have pursued biology and got on this **** myself. You gotta wonder though; what do they do on a daily basis with government funding (basically our tax dollars)? You know that there isn't enough being done for our cause, and when there is some progress, its not exactly for us:

Dr. Lauster's work is intended for EU's regulation to end animal testing
Dr. Christiano's work is/was for Alopecia Areata

And then this, these guys trying to focus on deafness. Not saying the other issues are not a priority or don't deserve attention or that even we should have their efforts reduced to focus on us, but it's without question that the amount of attention we've received has basically left us with the short end of the stick. The only thing the article saved itself from was the 'within 5 years' garbage we always hear.

The crowdfunding initiative is still our best bet; give incentive for researchers to get results rather than just screw around for years on end... I really dont think they're taking it seriously enough.

 

[benjt]

You gotta wonder though; what do they do on a daily basis with government funding (basically our tax dollars)?

Your level of ignorance is truly marvelous. I explained to you already that the financing situation in public research is quite bad in this post and that it is one of the worst ways to make money with low effort (because salary is low and effort is high - go ask some researchers in biology about their weekly working hours). Obviously it was no use, either because of insufficient reading capabilities or, what I assume, that you prefer to just ignore it because you just love to go on ranting.
By the way, I'm quitting my research job next year because I got an offer in the industry which pays almost 50% more while being much less stressful. Research is a tough job with a sh1tty salary. Much worse than the salary are the work conditions because you lack funding for equipment and, maybe even more importantly, personnel.

And then this, these guys trying to focus on deafness.

Great, you didn't even read the link. But it was obvious, you only wanted to rant. As always. There is no "focus", it was just one approach they have.

The only thing the article saved itself from was the 'within 5 years' garbage we always hear.

As I had also explained to you at one point no researcher who works on these things ever gave such an estimate. The only people touting it are "journalists" - because they know they get clicks from people with hope - and CEOs or company representatives that want to get financing. But hey, I'm not surprised anymore. You really enjoy ranting so you prefer to ignore this, too.

 

[bushbush]

You gotta wonder though; what do they do on a daily basis with government funding (basically our tax dollars)? You know that there isn't enough being done for our cause [...]
give incentive for researchers to get results rather than just screw around for years on end... I really dont think they're taking it seriously enough.

Would you stand up and say that at World Hair Congress 2015?

 

[Python]

Arguing again huh, what else is new. But I agree, let's keep the arguing is best kept on "the effects of hair loss". That's why I don't like going in that section, I think I have only been there once.

 

[hellouser]

Would you stand up and say that at World Hair Congress 2015?

HAH! I think I'd ask the pertinent question to Dr. Christiano;

Why haven't you done a case study for the use of Tofacitinib on androgenetic alopecia?

- - - Updated - - -

Your level of ignorance is truly marvelous. I explained to you already that the financing situation in public research is quite bad in this post and that it is one of the worst ways to make money with low effort (because salary is low and effort is high - go ask some researchers in biology about their weekly working hours).

That doesn't really help much after 44 years of work on a single organ. Look, I know why you've got your panty's caught up in a bunch over my comments;

It's because I don't sugarcoat anything and you're deeply offended by my blunt nature. I'm not here to be positive or be negative, I'm here to be realistic and yes, I know I am overly critical a lot. With that, I also have a low tolerance for mediocrity and as I've said countless times before, 44 years of it is shameful. I'd understand if it were just a few people working in the field, but to come up this short with so much effort (I have to use that term loosely) in so much time, nearly half a century... I almost wish there was a brutal a**h** like Steve Jobs running the show and whipping the people at work into proper gear.

Obviously it was no use, either because of insufficient reading capabilities or, what I assume, that you prefer to just ignore it because you just love to go on ranting.
By the way, I'm quitting my research job next year because I got an offer in the industry which pays almost 50% more while being much less stressful. Research is a tough job with a sh1tty salary. Much worse than the salary are the work conditions because you lack funding for equipment and, maybe even more importantly, personnel.

Great and every time the proposal to crowdfund has come about it's always been shot down by ACTUAL negative nancys and I've said it before that we're partly to blame as well.

As I had also explained to you at one point no researcher who works on these things ever gave such an estimate.

Both Dr. Lauster and Dr. Cotsarelis have made these estimates with Cotsarelis even doing it on national television.

The only people touting it are "journalists" - because they know they get clicks from people with hope - and CEOs or company representatives that want to get financing. But hey, I'm not surprised anymore. You really enjoy ranting so you prefer to ignore this, too.

You should know that anyone with the slightest bit of cynicism would be aware of this.

 

[mr.patches]

but hellouser is such a gentleman, what are you guys talking about lol

 

[benjt]

It's because I don't sugarcoat anything and you're deeply offended by my blunt nature. I'm not here to be positive or be negative, I'm here to be realistic

Unfortunately that is not the case. You are here for blaming. I guess because it helps you cope. That is fine, but do it somewhere else. You derail every second thread here. Your "realism" is contributing nothing and drives threads off-topic. How did your "realism" help discussing this matter?

and yes, I know I am overly critical a lot

No, you have an opinion of everything but a clue of nothing. And you think that gives you the right to be "critical".

With that, I also have a low tolerance for mediocrity and as I've said countless times before, 44 years of it is shameful.

How can you judge whether their work is mediocre? (This question is not rhethoric. Please answer it.) You are a typical case of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Just because we know about stem cells doesn't mean that we have a sufficient understanding to control them as we like. Otherwise we would be able to regrow any body part at will, including all organs.
How do you explain that we can't grow arbitrary organs - are all researchers in stem cell research, not only in hair loss research, incompetent too? (This question is not rhethoric. Please answer it.)

The same numbers, as I have also explained you, hold for the ITER project. 40 years people know about the basic reactions, still the best nuclear scientists from all developed nations, including almost every EU country, the US, Japan, and Canada have failed so far to get ITER running.
Are they also mediocre? (This question is not rhethoric. Please answer it.)

I'd understand if it were just a few people working in the field, but to come up this short with so much effort (I have to use that term loosely) in so much time, nearly half a century...

Great. This looks like a first step to some deeper understanding on your side.
Two options here:
1) Many people have been working on this topic for 44 years. All of them are incompetent, even though running this kind of work in public research always requires having demonstrated excellence before (otherwise you won't get grants or keep your position or move forward with your PhD).
2) These many people are actually not incompetent, the problem is just hard (like ITER) and you have no way of assessing whether it is actually hard or not because you lack any higher education in science. Meanwhile you insist on claiming they are incompetent because it fits your set of mind.

So, let me ask you one last thing: What is more plausible, 1) or 2)?

 

[Mach]

3) Someone has a cure, but it's not profitable.

 

[hellouser]

Unfortunately that is not the case. You are here for blaming. I guess because it helps you cope. That is fine, but do it somewhere else. You derail every second thread here. Your "realism" is contributing nothing and drives threads off-topic. How did your "realism" help discussing this matter?


No, you have an opinion of everything but a clue of nothing. And you think that gives you the right to be "critical".


How can you judge whether their work is mediocre? (This question is not rhethoric. Please answer it.) You are a typical case of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Just because we know about stem cells doesn't mean that we have a sufficient understanding to control them as we like. Otherwise we would be able to regrow any body part at will, including all organs.
How do you explain that we can't grow arbitrary organs - are all researchers in stem cell research, not only in hair loss research, incompetent too? (This question is not rhethoric. Please answer it.)

The same numbers, as I have also explained you, hold for the ITER project. 40 years people know about the basic reactions, still the best nuclear scientists from all developed nations, including almost every EU country, the US, Japan, and Canada have failed so far to get ITER running.
Are they also mediocre? (This question is not rhethoric. Please answer it.)


Great. This looks like a first step to some deeper understanding on your side.
Two options here:
1) Many people have been working on this topic for 44 years. All of them are incompetent, even though running this kind of work in public research always requires having demonstrated excellence before (otherwise you won't get grants or keep your position or move forward with your PhD).
2) These many people are actually not incompetent, the problem is just hard (like ITER) and you have no way of assessing whether it is actually hard or not because you lack any higher education in science. Meanwhile you insist on claiming they are incompetent because it fits your set of mind.

So, let me ask you one last thing: What is more plausible, 1) or 2)?

44 years.

 

[benjt]

I made it really easy for you to answer the questions, I even marked them with a so called "question mark".

But obviously you don't want to reply to them. You don't want to admit that you have no f*ckin clue but prefer to wallow in misery. Such a miserable being who can't stand his ground and answer four, five simple questions. Because he is afraid of the answers he would need to give. Its so easy not to need to change your behavior, isn't it?

Instead you continue with your whinery:
"mimimi people know about flying for at least 3000 years, why dont I have a flying car, THIS IS PURE MOCKERY"
"mimimi people know about nuclear fusion for 40 years, why dont we have ITER, THEY JUST WANT TO OPPRESS US. THEY ARE SO INCOMPETENT! 40 years."
"mimimi people know about cancer for decades, we still cant cure all cancer. WHY ARE SCIENTISTS SO MEDIOCRE"