Researchers from Pritzker Molecular Engineering, under the guidance of Prof. Jeffrey Hubbell, demonstrated that their compound can eliminate the autoimmune response linked to multiple sclerosis. Researchers at the University of Chicago's Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering (PME) have developed

Researchers from Pritzker Molecular Engineering, under the guidance of Prof. Jeffrey Hubbell, demonstrated that their compound can eliminate the autoimmune response linked to multiple sclerosis. Researchers at the University of Chicago’s Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering (PME) have developed

    • stopthatgirl7OP
      21•1 year ago

      More work is needed to study Hubbell’s pGal compounds in humans, but initial phase I safety trials have already been carried out in people with celiac disease, an autoimmune disease that is associated with eating wheat, barley, and rye, and phase I safety trials are underway in multiple sclerosis.

    • @adj16English
      18•1 year ago

      Honestly, this is a fair response to an outrageously sensationalist headline. There is promise in this particular style of vaccine, and it deserves further research, but to claim it’s going to cure all these disorders is something so far from the current truth that it really verges on an outright lie.

        • @[email protected]English
          3•1 year ago

          They added subtlety and made a point, you just reacted skeptically to a headline

          If you’re surprised by this, you should really put more thought into why your post went negative

            • @[email protected]English
              2•1 year ago

              Ok? But like… I don’t know how to say this without sounding harsh, but why would I care that you scoffed when you read the headline?

              You were expressing your feelings, but that’s all your first post did. Hell, it’s not immediately clear exactly what you disagreed with. Is the science bad? Is the site untrustworthy? Is the article bad? Or is the only problem that the headline is clickbait?

              At least if you said “this headline is bullshit”, someone could have either agreed and moved the conversation towards what the headline should have said, or they’d say “no, it sounds crazy but this is actually legit”

        • @adj16English
          2•1 year ago

          Yours being in the negative is the whole reason I responded to it, actually. I was hoping my context could make people see that yours was the appropriate stance for those who aren’t hopelessly naive. Sorry it didn’t work!

        • stopthatgirl7OP
          1•1 year ago

          Because there’s a difference between “dismissive” and “skeptical.” Your comment was dismissive whereas adj16’s was skeptical.

    • @TenderfootGungiEnglish
      7•1 year ago

      It is certainly early, they have not even tested it on animals. Many promising drugs either do not work as believed or have nasty side effects that make them unusable. But we humans have invented many other amazing things. While caution is warranted, just writing it off as impossible is also premature.