|
|
|
|
|
|
by LoganDark
675 days ago
|
|
|
> It sounds like, even in the best case scenario, the drug doesn't really cure arthritis but just blunts the pain. > I was thinking it would be something that helps the worn ligament grow back. That I would consider a real cure. As far as I can tell, that is what it does: > The drug is based on a molecule he discovered while working at Pfizer, and can be delivered via a once-a-month EpiPen-style injection, where it restores protective processes to diseased joints and enables the regeneration of affected tissues. It works by blocking a compound that supports the nerve cells involved in transmitting pain signals to the brain. This doesn't say it just blocks the pain, it says it directly affects the nerve cells involved in transmitting pain. Those nerve cells could also be responsible for other unpleasant things, like generally complaining and always being inflamed and inhibiting proper healing. |
|
|
It is hoped the drug — which is not a cure but will make the condition much less painful for sufferers — could also be used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and chemotherapy-induced pain in the future.
As a writer myself who has watched journalism dying, crap articles being written by underpaid freelancers, the enshitification of the internet while everyone objects to any means used to monetize content creation, etc ad nauseum, I don't really feel like trying to figure out just how much this "really does" for patients.
The medical industry in the US tends to be about profit and I think people should, in fact, profit for their work but in medicine sometimes profit motive tosses the baby out with the bathwater. And I'm super burned out on trying to have any kind of meaningful discussion of that issue online.