• naturalgasbad@lemmy.caOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 month ago

    First human trial for a treatment strategy passed (notably, we know that placebo treatments for diabetes fail). This more than passes the bar to justify further large-scale human trials and, clinically, is a very strong indicator of success.

    What, is it not a cure until it’s available to the public?

    • MontyGommo@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I mean, the guy is correct… there are plenty of cases where someone has recovered from something that doesn’t have widespread impact.

      That doesn’t make this any less, but a good dose of scepticism is pretty healthy when it comes to broad statements like ‘cures diabetes’

      Edit: too many versions of ‘healthy’ haha

    • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 month ago

      It justifies, in fact begs for human trials, but a single unregulated data point from a single moment is hardly a cure.

      It becomes a cure after the treatment is isolated from mitigating factors and acutely applied to the same disorder in many patients in controlled conditions with peer-reviewed and independently confirmed repeatable results over time.

    • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Well, the phrase is, “the plural of anecdote is not statistic.” In this case, we only have a single case, so it doesn’t even escape “anecdote.” I think at that point, there isn’t yet a scientific basis to call it a “cure.”