Scientists regenerate neurons that restore walking in mice after paralysis from spinal cord injury::In a new study in mice, a team of researchers from UCLA, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, and Harvard University have uncovered a crucial component for restoring functional activity after spinal cord injury. The neuroscientists have shown that re-growing specific neurons back to their natural target regions led to recovery, while random regrowth was not effective.

  • @cooopsspace@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    492 years ago

    Insurance: Nah we aren’t gonna cover it. And for some reason our economical opinion trumps your own doctors medical opinion.

    • @ikapoz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      382 years ago

      This is actually one case insurance companies would be ALL OVER a real fix. People with spinal injuries have tons of medical complications that cost throughout their entire life. An insurance company would definitely be interested in unloading persistent fiscal drains like that.

      Don’t get me wrong, the medical insurance industry is a fucking terror, especially in the US with the degree of regulatory capture involved. In this one case though, a real cure would serve their interests at anything less than a massive cost on their part.

      • @Jax@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 year ago

        If that’s the case, wouldn’t the same logic be applied to novel cancer treatments? Last time I checked those have a tendency to evaporate mysteriously, and insurance companies weren’t exactly stopping it.

        Idk, just seams a little idealistic.

        • @ikapoz@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          The only ideal that type of company has at its heart is the pursuit of profit. If they see a real cure that costs less than the long term “maintenance” care they would be all over it. If not, then not.

          Novel cancer treatments aren’t a terribly good comparison in my opinion. Rarely does a single one in isolation offer a clear and permanent cure - though with any categorization that broad there are of course exceptions.

          Hell, when scientists identify care that is likely enough to prevent the need of reactive treatment insurance companies often make it free to lower their overall costs - teeth cleaning and flu shots for example. That’s not altruism on their part, it’s economics.

      • @Ryantific_theory@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        The difference though is that this treatment would require hundreds of hours of ongoing work from medical professionals for each treatment. What they did was use single cell RNA sequencing to determine which subpopulations of cells are supposed to connect and where, before stimulating cell growth and guiding each RNA mapped subpopulation to where it’s roughly supposed to go. That’s one thing for anatomically complete sub-millimeter spinal cord injuries in mice, but a massive endeavor for human spinal cords.

        If you’ve seen the bioengineered cancer treatments where researchers grow immune cells to target a single individual’s tumor, the amount of specialized work that goes into that pales to what current technology would require for this sort of spinal regeneration, and that’s for relatively simple small scale lesions. Multiple lesions or large scale cell death could result in attempting to selectively guide millions of microscopic axons in neat clusters for over a foot.

        I wouldn’t be surprised if insurance companies refused to pay for cell regrowth, and instead went for implants that are comparatively much simpler to install and modify in brain-computer interfaces that skip over the damage. This is a great advancement and does open the door for recovering from spinal cord damage, but this is one of those treatments that people are going to get because they need to fill FDA trials and won’t charge, or because the patient is filthy rich.

    • @SARGEx117@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      112 years ago

      "Yeahhhhhh here’s the thing, a wheelchair costs fifty dollars, while the revolutionary treatment that will give you full use back is fifty ONE dollars…

      So you see, there really is only one sensible option…" -every insurance company everywhere even if the prices were literal

      • @cooopsspace@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        7
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        But but… If I can get back to work I can make the $1 whilst also getting back into the workforce and by extention the tax base providing a lifetime of benefit to the public and keep my family out of poverty…

        Denied.

  • @figaro@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    281 year ago

    What I’ve learned this means in practical terms is, “Wow! We are really good at healing mice!”

  • Spliffman1
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -25
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    How many mice were killed before they got one “fixed”? And did they damage their spinal cords in the first place so they could have subjects to work on? Where do you find a supply of mice paralyzed by spinal cord injury to experiment on? Just saying

    • @Vlixz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 year ago

      I genuinely don’t want to be hateful, but how do you expect stuff like this to be tested without hurting “some” animals. I’m not saying I agree with animal testing and if possible I’d rather them test it another way, but I do understand the importance of it. Without this lot’s of medications and treatments wouldn’t exist.

    • @volodymyr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      It does make you wonder what caused spinal injury in these mice. I do not suppose there is a sufficient natural supply of these kinds of injured mice.

      But, if not animal testing, how do you propose to develop the treatment?

      • @Ryantific_theory@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        It’s a little grim, but there’s a standard SCI (spinal cord injury) guillotine that drops a weight with an angled wedge to cause a near perfectly replicable SCI. The mouse is sedated, but it’s not exactly a good time for the mouse.

        But yeah, the alternative is testing on humans, which, I really don’t think we need a reminder on why that’s super illegal.

    • @Rooty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      People who value the lives of small rodents over the lives of fellow human beings should have their heads checked, because their moral compass is seriously out of whack.

    • lazyraccoon
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Animal experimentation should always be the last option, but an option nonetheless.

      Unless you’re talking cosmetics or some other meaningless bullshit.