
Woman who has never felt pain experiences it for the first time - kawera
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28623-woman-who-has-never-felt-pain-experiences-it-for-the-first-time
======
danieltillett
This is the real paper [1]. It is open access.

1\.
[http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/151204/ncomms9967/full/nco...](http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/151204/ncomms9967/full/ncomms9967.html)

~~~
metasean
The sections of this paper are, in order: Abstract, Introduction, Results,
Methods, Additional information, Accession codes, References,
Acknowledgements, Author information, Supplementary information

Is it typical to present the methods _after_ the results in medical research
papers? And to have the author info and acknowledgements _after_ the main
write-up?

In my field we were consistently taught to present the intro/lit review (i.e.
set-up the problem space), then methods (i.e. how we're trying to solve the
problem that we just laid out for you), then the results (i.e. using the
methods that the reader now knows, here's the data), and finally any
interpretations of the results.

In addition, I was always taught that author info and acknowledgements go
before the main write-up. This is to help illuminate potential biases (e.g.
research into gun-related violence will read very differently if either the
National Rifle Association or the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence funded the
research).

~~~
Mwatson10
More so than the field, the order will depend on the editors and journal in my
experience. Anecdotally, in the field I work in (Material Science/Condensed
Matter Physics) I have written and read papers in all different orders but the
order seen in this paper is pretty normal to me. You want people to get
through your work (abstract, intro, results) and then the nitty gritty details
come later for the people that want to use your work for something more than
an interesting read.

------
thomasahle
The article doesn't explain what her reaction was? That seems like the most
interesting perspective to me.

~~~
werid
"She was burned with a laser, and quite liked the experience."

~~~
teekert
So she didn't actually experience pain as defined in a dictionary.

~~~
amyjess
Eh, I know a number of masochists who "quite like the experience" of pain.

~~~
teekert
They like to have skin cut, salt pored in? Scraping their eyeballs over a
blackboard until they bleed?

I think your are talking about different pain than laser burning.

Most definitions of pain of pain contain terms like torment, distress,
suffering. Not what someone would like. If someone never felt pain before and
they say upon feeling something that they like it, you think they really feel
pain? It sounds more likely to me that she felt something different. She
wouldn't know of course, if what she felt was pain.

------
sargun
The upside of this is that we may have found a new way to cure different types
of pain. A Nav1.7 blocker + low grade opioids seems to result in the same
painlessness felt by people with this disease.

Nav1.7 blockers are off the shelf:
[http://www.tocris.com/dispprod.php?ItemId=272948#.VmW57eMrJE...](http://www.tocris.com/dispprod.php?ItemId=272948#.VmW57eMrJE4)

Opiods too!

~~~
tantalor
> He has taken out a patent on the use of the two drugs for pain relief.

Are you trying to get sued?

