Remix.run Logo
PaulKeeble 13 hours ago

Just 7% of studies that do a preliminary study on humans actually get through phase 3 and get approved for use. This is before even the preliminary point, its a tooth (or even a tooth analogue) in a petri dish. No idea if the material will be safe in a human mouth yet.

There is a lot of hyping of results in medicine papers in general but its not really their fault. The entire academic world is being forced to publish or die as governments look to measure results from the science they instead get what is measured and everyone has to embellish the importance of what they found and always find positive results.

spacephysics 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Despite how obtuse the current administration views are, this has been true for decades. The churn of new papers and hype around medicine/biotech is nothing new.

Says nothing about endemic reproducibility crisis of the social sciences.

Since student loans have been basically guaranteed (bankruptcies can’t erase student loan obligations, in an attempt to push rates lower) and tuition steeply rose, academic institutions’ ratio of administrators to students has skyrocketed to a bureaucratic mess, leading to a flywheel of higher education costs and incentivizing research for money’s sake over impact to the field.

Real impact would be reproducing notoriously iffy studies, but that doesn’t bring in the dollars.

palmotea 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The entire academic world is being forced to publish or die as governments look to measure results from the science they instead get what is measured and everyone has to embellish the importance of what they found and always find positive results.

It sounds like they're running it like a business.

dlcarrier 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Over time, any large business trends to increase in bloat and inefficiency, and focusing on inappropriate metrics is a big part of that.

This eventually leads to competitors taking over and those business failing, which usually results in people losing their jobs.

When governments get equally incapable, and competitors take over, it tends to be a lot more violent.

throwway120385 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

A lot of this is the direct result of trying to run a government like a business. If we instead left some things that are unprofitable but important to government then we'd probably get better results than having businesses do those things expecting a profit. This was the model in the 30's, 40's and 50's that led to the "golden age" that people are now trying to recapture.

rapatel0 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You're describe an age where the government was a wash with surplus dollars. Secondly, most of these research institutions run as non-profits that effectively just cover costs (but run a large hedge fund as a side business)

The escalation in costs have come from: - Incentives around US News College rankings (and the amenities that drive the rankings) - Administrative (non-teaching, non-research) bloat

Research is definitely in need of reform though, but not sure these outcomes are actually causal or even corrilated.

entropicdrifter 4 hours ago | parent [-]

>You're describe an age where the government was a wash with surplus dollars.

Hey, good point. We should really bring back that 90% top tax bracket rate to get the government back to being financially solvent again.

vlovich123 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The golden age people are trying to recapture is the aftermath of a world war that decimated almost every major power except the US and then the US happily rebuilt everyone’s economies in exchange for riches and power. The 21st century looks very different and only really MAGA folks are looking to rewind the clock as a way to move forward.

rapatel0 6 hours ago | parent [-]

The economic theory of MAGA, is that the united states yes rebuilt the world but also exported the US consumer economy through asymmetric nonreciprocal tariffs. Rebuilding countries made money by selling to the US consumer, not the other way around.

You can argue that it's overall bad for the economy, but I think you're missing the arguement.

NoMoreNicksLeft 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The 1940s you get for free, what with the war and all nothing was ever going to be very tolerable. But what about the 1930s is a "golden age" in your opinion? What exactly is it from that era that you wish we had more of?

autoexec 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> This eventually leads to competitors taking over and those business failing

If only that fairytale were true. In the real world bloated inefficient companies bribe government, install themselves into government agencies directly (regulatory capture), and hire lobbyists to write laws which protect them from pesky upstarts through unchecked anti-competitive practices and anti-consumer regulation allowing them to stay wealthy and in power forever while killing off innovation and progress.

CWuestefeld 9 hours ago | parent [-]

...which I suppose is why IBM is still the industry leader in computing, while Ford, GM, and Chrysler can't be competed with. Photographers always use Kodak film, and we all talk on our Nokia cell phones. We all shop at Sears, and fly on Pan Am.

autoexec 8 hours ago | parent [-]

I never claimed that companies can't fail or change, only that bloat and inefficiencies aren't a death sentence. Even several of your examples are still alive and well and it's telling that their major declines took place in the 1980s and 1990s. Companies have gotten a lot better at abusing government and law to protect their profits over the last 40 years.

palmotea 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> This eventually leads to competitors taking over and those business failing

It's important to note that "eventually" usually takes so long that it might as well be forever.

zamalek 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That was my conclusion when I attended... 15 years ago. You're not a student, you're a product.

knuxus 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Is there a way I can search for the studies that recently got approved? Somehow setup an alert for it?

PaulKeeble 8 hours ago | parent [-]

You could follow the NIH news feed that contains some of what gets funded but its actually quite difficult given the various institutions all over the world that all fund studies including charities and the universities themselves. On an individual topic with time you could learn who most of the major players are and follow their news but its unique to every topic.

The potentially easier way at least to get a lay of the land is to follow pubmed (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) for the topic you are interested in, if you then look into those papers you will find funding statements as well as the place the research was conducted and use both to build up a picture of the origins of research in a field.

Afraid I don't know of an easier way not a generic one anyway. Sometimes you just have to follow the right person on twitter who announces trials or studies or be at the right conference. Start with pubmed and the output papers and that will get you started. Then also have a search on the NIH and that might lead you to some links to groups and institutions they fund.

appreciatorBus 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Publish or perish is more about status & careerism within academia than any sort of govt forcing function. If you don't publish, you are invisible to your peers and your career stagnates, regardless of the govt funding environment.

rhubarbtree 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It is entirely their fault. If no one agrees to do performative research, the problem will be solved.

The problem is some people prefer an academic lifestyle in exchange for doing performative research.

Yes there are other actors eg politicians demanding performative productivity, but mostly it’s the inmates running the asylum.

Academia is one failed western institution amongst many, and those failures are ultimately directed by the actions of the individuals that comprise those institutions.

saghm 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> It is entirely their fault. If no one agrees to do performative research, the problem will be solved.

Right, and the prisoner's "dilemma" isn't a real thing; everyone knows it's their own fault for not just all picking the decision that gives them all the best outcome. Every individual within a network effect is obviously responsible for the outcomes the entire system produces.

shawnz 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not necessarily performative research just because a pop science author wrote a catchy, exaggerated headline about it

throwaway2037 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is a fallacy: "If no one agrees to do performative research, the problem will be solved."

It is like saying, if everyone stops subscribing to OnlyFans or liking spicy pics on Instagram, it will go away.

There will always be sycophants willing to do "performative research" or ... other things.

rhubarbtree an hour ago | parent | next [-]

If everyone stops subscribing to OnlyFans, why will OnlyFans exist?

hansvm 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"Performative research" sounds far more NSFW than it has any right to in the context you've placed it.

wkat4242 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Why would I want to stop liking spicy pictures though :P

HPsquared 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

So long as funding is granted to do performative research, it will continue to exist.

lobochrome 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

KPIism is the death knell of modern society. In the 90s and 2000s this mantra of "measure and improve" took hold like a virus. It is in all instances I observe a rats race where everybody just starts to look for the cheat-codes instead of "doing-the-right-thing".

Arguably America is the pinnacle of this right now, where (many) politicians and (many) business leaders now feel justified do whatever's legal just to score points. I would argue this type of thinking was birthed in the UK though under Thatcher who as a first step removed the general trust in (civil servants in her case) your fellow human beings. Blair then came up to replace that trust with KPIs.

We need to get back to a world where we trust people to do the right thing - without measuring their success in short-term KPIs.

anarticle 6 hours ago | parent [-]

MBAs are the source of KPIism. We have spent many decades minting them at scale in the USA and now the chickens are roosting. Anything can be ruined by pursuit of KPIs at all costs. The model is to optimize a particular KPI, get your bonus, use this story to get your next job at +$X, leave, repeat. The longer story of the company does not matter, you shipped and got paid, even if the village burned down after you left.