[ExI] New Hope for Alzheimer's Disease Vaccine
Bryan Bishop
kanzure at gmail.com
Tue Apr 8 22:56:47 UTC 2008
On Tuesday 08 April 2008, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> Most of the basic science breakthroughs which have ultimately given
> us the medical care we enjoy has been publicly funded, and elaborate
> bureaucratic hoops have had to be jumped through to obtain that
> funding. Moreover, although they need money for equipment, most of
> the scientists doing this research have not been pursuing personal
> profit (it's crazy to go into research if that's what you want), but
> the approval of their peers. The free market only has a role to play
> when someone catches wind of a marketable product.
Stathis, you sparked a few neurons, so I'm going to run with my own
direction here. First, how much can we do on our own? What do I mean by
on our own? It mostly means by our own responsibility for our own
health, i.e., individually, what can we do to make sure that we can
prevent diseases and if we do get diseases, then how can we
collectively leverage our time and energy into fighting those diseases
without having to rely on all of these socioeconomic factors? There are
many people that are not able to get health care as it is, and I don't
wish to comment on the silly money-based system where we get to
disregard people simply because they do not have enough 'money'. Those
situations bare a striking resemblance to the common state of not being
in medical control in the first place. So what can we do?
This question has been asked by the venture capitalists and the
scientists that fund startups, and as far as I can tell, they get
insights and run with them. But this is not a systematic approach to
solving specific diseases. It works, yes, but then we have the FDA and
tons of testing that does not necessarily apply to all cases of
individuals who might find those molecules or modifications useful.
There's just no way that the FDA can do as many tests as they would
like to, and the number of individuals signing up for FDA testing, or
the animal testing (I don't have any numbers on this) -- in general,
it's just a big giant mess from what I can imagine. How could it be
otherwise? We have no standardized human testing module nor ways to
leverage our individual differences in the medical system. There's
simply no way that we can do giant medical combinatorial libraries,
unless we're working on the molecular level like with aptamers, but
even then that does not really work for the diseases that must be
fought on a cellular or tissue level instead of molecular. The
cellular/tissue level seems just beyond our ability to simulate without
Markram's funding (heh), and definitely beyond our physical means to
experiment with in any combinatorial manner. So what hope would the
individual have at the moment of doing anything about a medical
condition? It takes massive experiments to narrow down possibilities if
you don't have any clue. My first reaction is to offer self-replicating
computation or self-replicating experiments as the solution, however I
dislike relying too much on any one single idea, so what are the
alternatives?
Perhaps a method of preparation, not for worst case scenarios, but for
just-in-case, so that you can cope with anything that comes up. How,
though? Wouldn't you have to traverse the disciplines that the problems
show up in? That's just-in-time learning. The alternative is learning
it all upfront, which is tons of overhead to managing the human body.
Perhaps specialization [of individuals] isn't too bad ... as long as
it's in small groups, rather than some large, institutional plan. But
this is only in the mean time, until we get those other (more
productive) alternatives up and running. Which takes me back to
a 'knowledge database' that I have been planning (not ai, no grounding
problems since it's linked back to people and contacts) and setting up
in the background, so that in the situation that you do come across
some new term, there's a way to get information and relevant software
to the situation or engineering project and so on. It may sound
intense, but it happens to conveniently coincide with the goals of
brute forcing a self-replicating machine. So. :)
- Bryan
________________________________________
http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Roadmap
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list