Tests of Some Deadly Diseases on Mice Mislead, Report Says - NYTimes.com
Rohit Khare stashed this in Singularity
“They were so used to doing mouse studies that they thought that was how you validate things,” he said. “They are so ingrained in trying to cure mice that they forget we are trying to cure humans.”
“That started us thinking,” he continued. “Is it the same in the mouse or not?”
The group decided to look, expecting to find some similarities. But when the data were analyzed, there were none at all.
“We were kind of blown away,” Dr. Davis said.
The drug failures became clear. For example, often in mice, a gene would be used, while in humans, the comparable gene would be suppressed. A drug that works in mice by disabling that gene could make the response even more deadly in humans.
Even more surprising, Dr. Warren said, was that different conditions in mice — burns, trauma, sepsis — did not fit the same pattern. Each condition used different groups of genes. In humans, though, similar genes were used in all three conditions. That means, Dr. Warren said, that if researchers can find a drug that works for one of those conditions in people, the same drug might work for all three.
The study’s investigators tried for over a year to publish their paper showing that there was no relationship between the genetic responses of mice and those of humans. They submitted it to the publications Science and Nature, hoping to reach a wide audience. It was rejected from both.
The good thing about science is that we have other scientists to verify to results, and if a result doesn't hold up, we reject it.
The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it. ~@neiltyson http://pandawhale.com/post/7031/the-good-thing-about-science-is-that-its-true-whether-or-not-you-believe-in-it-neiltyson
I love that line.
The good thing about science is that it favors replicable, repeatable results and has a framework for replacing theories with better theories so it can keep improving.