Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

this year's nobel prize for medicine: irony!

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by Brad Barker, Oct 4, 2005.


  1. Brad Barker

    Brad Barker Supporting Member

    Apr 13, 2001
    berkeley, ca
  2. Brad Barker

    Brad Barker Supporting Member

    Apr 13, 2001
    berkeley, ca
    i'm just glad he wasn't doing research on flesh-eating bacteria. :D
     
  3. Philbiker

    Philbiker Pat's the best!

    Dec 28, 2000
    Northern Virginia, USA
    The whole thing is indicative of how stuck on convention and stubborn the medical and scientific fields have gotten in the world. These guys had The Right Answer and it took a zany stunt like that to get anybody in the mainstream to even listen to them.
     
  4. Brad Barker

    Brad Barker Supporting Member

    Apr 13, 2001
    berkeley, ca
    i'm going to let a physicist (a member of www.physicsforums.com) do my talkin' for me.

    this quote appears verbatim in zapper z's journal on the website:

     
  5. Knavery

    Knavery

    Feb 24, 2004
    Denver, CO
    Not as bad as religious groups who interpret scientific discoveries as a trick played by God to cause some kind of divine skepticism.
     
  6. Brad Johnson

    Brad Johnson Commercial User

    Mar 8, 2000
    Gaithersburg, Md
    Boom Bass Cabinets, DR strings
    Feh... maybe he got the ulcer from stress related to knowing he drank Cooties.
     
  7. Nick man

    Nick man

    Apr 7, 2002
    Tampa Bay
    Thats what Im thinking.

    Cant the two be related?

    We're all full of bacteria, but stress could possibly trigger a set of bodily reactions that let the bacteria do their dirty work.

    Just a thought.
     
  8. Brad Barker

    Brad Barker Supporting Member

    Apr 13, 2001
    berkeley, ca

    :D

    i laughed so hard my chest (stomach?) began to hurt. (ulcers?)
     
  9. Brad Barker

    Brad Barker Supporting Member

    Apr 13, 2001
    berkeley, ca

    i don't think you're giving the medical community enough credit.

    unfortunately, with science, the general public is kind of kept out of the discourse, simply because not everyone can spend at least four years learning every single branch of science and medicine.

    so... everytime we have an idea, we can't just go read the necessary papers in the published journals and figure out if we were right or not. :D


    but the scientists ARE the experts and can participate in the debates. they're the ones that have the background and training to positively contribute in the debates.


    so i'm sure that your hypothesis was considered but was shown to be incorrect.

    after all, the scientists who showed otherwise got nobel prizes--other scientists would be chomping on the friggin' bit to show that they had been wrong, so long ago.


    ...but they weren't. their hypothesis stood the test of time and actually led to successful treatment (and apparently near-eradication, at least in australia) of the disease.
     
  10. Brad Barker

    Brad Barker Supporting Member

    Apr 13, 2001
    berkeley, ca
  11. bassmonkeee

    bassmonkeee Supporting Member

    Sep 13, 2000
    Decatur, GA
    You're right. I'm sure the Nobel Committee and the scientists who did thousands of hours of research over the course of decades who actually received the award probably didn't think of anything that popped into your head after reading an online Reuters story about it.... :rolleyes: :p



    :D
     
  12. Its the difference between getting the Nobel Prize and the Spanish Inquisition. That's how unconventional thinkers end up in science vs religion.

    Randy
     
  13. Nick man

    Nick man

    Apr 7, 2002
    Tampa Bay
    Im sure they considered it, but it just seems to me thats it would be too hard to seperate the stress and the bacteria.

    Everyones got nasty bugs in them, and everyone is under stress. I dont see how they could isolate either variable in their test environmet (a human stomach).
     
  14. That's a good point. But, you can test someones level of stress. High blood pressure is one typical example of stress having a measurable impact on the body. They could get a population sample of people with varying levels of blood pressure, and other stress related variables (ie people who have medically high and stress levels, and people who have medically low stress levels) and then give them all the bacteria. Perhaps cause and effect is the only way they could prove it. If the bacteria was ingested and the ulcer showed up in all cases, then you could safely say that bacteria was the cause of the ulcer, not the level of stress.

    ...just a thought...
     
  15. Philbiker

    Philbiker Pat's the best!

    Dec 28, 2000
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Really? Until very recently the consensus was that ulcers were a "typical example of stress having a measurable impact on the body".... :)
    I'm sure they considered this, they did win the Nobel prize for medicine after all..... Speculation on an off-topic internet forum notwithstanding.... :)
     
  16. Nick man

    Nick man

    Apr 7, 2002
    Tampa Bay
    Im not perfect, because Im human.

    The commitee that awards the Nobel Prize isnt perfect either for the same reason.

    On top of the fact that it would be extreemely dificult (if not impossible) to isolate the two main variables, it sounds to me like they only performed this experiment in one person. An experiment should be repeatable for it to be valid and Im not sure it is practical to repeat this experiment. A result of the experiment should be observed several times for it to be considered valid.

    Im not even a scientist and this looks screwy to me.
     
  17. They're only discussing the odd part of this particular case, that the main researcher gave himself the disease he was studying. There have been thousands, now maybe millions of cases where ulcers were cured with antibiotics where they were only controlled before with antacids. They didn't give him the Nobel prize just because he gave himself ulcers then cured himself with antibiotics, and they didn't accept that as proof of his concept. It was proved through clinical studies, the whole double blind thing I imagine, before they switched gears and accepted his idea. THere was a lot of resistance to it originally.

    Randy
     
  18. Ericman197

    Ericman197

    Feb 23, 2004
    Iowa
    The previous users who criticized the experiment were correct insofar as a hypothesis cannot be proven by one uncontrolled experiment. However, I would not consider this the actual experiment: it was simply a publicity stunt. I'm sure he proved his point with numerous controlled experiments in the lab, people just didn't believe him. We would need more information to determine the validity of his experiment(s), ie: his actual lab report. That said, given the fact that he won the Nobel Prize, his street cred is in all likelyhood legit.

    (The purpose of an experiment is to falsify a potential hypothesis, not prove it, but let's not get too crazy)
     
  19. Thor

    Thor Moderator Staff Member Gold Supporting Member


    Well, Galileo did get a partial pass by the Vatican, on Oct 31, 1992, but Pope JP II never admitted 'that the Church was
    wrong to convict Galileo on a charge of heresy because of his
    belief that the Earth rotates round the sun.' Only took 350
    years to figure that out. Duh! Then they wonder why people
    don't take them seriously.


    source:
    http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Galileo.html
     
  20. That's true, but that does prove they get a bum rap for inflexibility.

    Randy