

One Drug to Shrink All Tumors - bane
http://news.sciencemag.org/health/2012/03/one-drug-shrink-all-tumors

======
sreya
This article is 2 years old. This is the latest update on the research:

[http://stemcell.stanford.edu/CD47/](http://stemcell.stanford.edu/CD47/)

~~~
techwatching
You would think that for compounds with such potentially far-reaching effects,
there would be an expedited clinical trials program with informed consent from
terminal patients, or something similar.

~~~
spartango
There is an entire mechanism for this, from consenting individuals in early
stage trials to accelerated approvals. If you're curious, checkout the FDA's
programs
([http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/byaudience/forpatientadvocat...](http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/byaudience/forpatientadvocates/speedingaccesstoimportantnewtherapies/ucm128291.htm)).
This isn't everything, but it represents the interest of most players in
getting these medications to patients as quickly as possible.

------
spikels
Corrected Title: Very Small Chance Drug May Shrink Some Tumors, Might Know in
Two or More Years

Why is reporting on medical research always so awful?

~~~
epistasis
It's bad because most journalism is done by press release, especially in
science where there are almost no reporters that understand the science. In
this particular case, Science Magazine has competent understanding, but Irv
Weissman is one of the greatest scientists of our generation, and either he or
Stanford's press office is really hyping this particular avenue.

I have a ton of respect for Weissman, but I thought the claims at the time
were not merited, given the evidence I saw, but then I didn't have Weissman's
experiences or brilliance. Older well-respected scientists do sometimes fall
into a trap of getting hypotheses wrong, as is typical in science, but having
their hypotheses being accepted as proven before all the work is done

------
omarforgotpwd
Someone has found a cure for cancer or AIDS every week since the web was
invented.

