During the last few years hardly a day has passed in which a university lab or a company hasn't announced the discovery of a new disease-associated gene or of the genetic manipulation of one organism or another. Those announcements almost always end with statements like this: "This discovery is very important because it indicates that a possible cure for this or that disease is in sight." Thus, whenever you read that news you think that the problem, whatever it is, is either solved or about to be solved. When the news is about a company's breakthrough, what you usually don't read is the following statement that always comes with the original press release: "Certain statements in this press release that are not strictly historical may be 'forward-looking' statements, which involve risks and uncertainties. Such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, those relating to safety and efficacy of drug product candidates and the impact of the study results discussed herein. There can be no assurance that we will be able to commercially develop gene-based drugs, that necessary regulatory approvals will be obtained or that any clinical trials or studies undertaken will be successful or that the proposed treatments will prove to be safe and/or effective."
You see? They are not exactly telling you that, say, the cure is around the corner; but when you read the interviews with the scientist in charge, the result is always portrayed as a significant step forward in the fight against said disease. The news usually leads to an increase in the company's stock value or to an increase in the university lab's funding by private investors.
What worries me is that a lot of people rush to make such announcements before they completely understand what they are doing. This could lead to very bad results, such as that which resulted in the death of Mr. Jesse Gelsinger, or of creating hopes and expectations that are never fulfilled. This, in my opinion, creates a lot of confusion and decreases the credibility of the biotech business. It might explain why after a while those discoveries fade into the blue yonder and you never hear about them again. To illustrate my point, let me give you two examples.
A few weeks ago the journal Science published the creation by Dr. Gerry Schatten and coworkers from the Oregon Regional Primate Research Center at the Oregon Health Sciences University
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Juan C. Mendible's Molecular Biology/Medicine topic, please visit the Discussions page.