7 ms·

I'm happy that tech companies are open sourcing basic research all the time, and thinking a lot about what would have happened if large pharmacy companies did t

I'm happy that tech companies are open sourcing basic research all the time, and thinking a lot about what would have happened if large pharmacy companies did the same thing. I'm just hopeful that with new biotech companies the science behind curing people will get faster as well.

ejstronge 9y ago
Unlike the case in tech, pharma basic research is far less important in advancing our knowledge when compared to academia. A good example comes from the last few blockbuster cancer therapies - CAR-T cells and checkpoint blockade all arose in academic labs. Also, for drugs that do make it to market, efficacy and side effect information is published as a condition of drug approval, at least for new drugs. Whether basic science research papers should be behind a paywall is a wholly separate issue, but the life science community largely shares its finished products. Indeed, there’s even a push to share early stage data, too.
- xiphias 9y ago
  Thanks, this is the kind of answer I was looking for. It's just a bit sad that the companies rely so heavily on academia. About the papers on efficacy: I remember that I wanted to slice the efficacy data to customize it more to compute confidence intervals for my ex girlfriend's case who has breast cancer (BRCA2), but she didn't want to have hemotherapy and wanted to see if the drug can help in that case as well, but the raw data in the testing wasn't published.
fjsolwmv 9y ago
Code is cheap. Training data is expensive
- shitals 9y ago
  Not if you have simulator :) https://github.com/microsoft/airsim https://github.com/microsoft/airsim
fulafel 9y ago
Very sorry to nitpick, but this and pharma research are applied research - basic research is things like string theory and abstract math. See eg http://www.sjsu.edu/people/fred.prochaska/courses/ScWk170/s0/Basic-vs.-Applied-Research.pdf http://www.sjsu.edu/people/fred.prochaska/courses/ScWk170/s0... Companies rarely do basic research, and that's why it's very important to keep up public funding for it.
visarga 9y ago
> thinking a lot about what would have happened if large pharmacy companies did the same thing There is a company creating a 3d-printed chemical reactor. By downloading a schematic and buying some raw substances, you can create your own lab. It can be used to synthesise drugs in remote areas, such as on Mars, or to make generics for cheap. The exciting part is that the reactor schematic can be downloaded and shared easily. It can also make illegal drugs just as easily as 3d-printers can print guns. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/you-could-soon-be-manufacturing-your-own-drugs-thanks-3d-printing http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/you-could-soon-be-man...
geephroh 9y ago
Sounds like you might enjoy Annalee Newitz's _Autonomous_ (https://www.techsploitation.com/#/sciencefiction/ https://www.techsploitation.com/#/sciencefiction/)

ejstronge 9y ago

Unlike the case in tech, pharma basic research is far less important in advancing our knowledge when compared to academia. A good example comes from the last few blockbuster cancer therapies - CAR-T cells and checkpoint blockade all arose in academic labs. Also, for drugs that do make it to market, efficacy and side effect information is published as a condition of drug approval, at least for new drugs. Whether basic science research papers should be behind a paywall is a wholly separate issue, but the life science community largely shares its finished products. Indeed, there’s even a push to share early stage data, too.

xiphias 9y ago
Thanks, this is the kind of answer I was looking for. It's just a bit sad that the companies rely so heavily on academia. About the papers on efficacy: I remember that I wanted to slice the efficacy data to customize it more to compute confidence intervals for my ex girlfriend's case who has breast cancer (BRCA2), but she didn't want to have hemotherapy and wanted to see if the drug can help in that case as well, but the raw data in the testing wasn't published.

fjsolwmv 9y ago

Code is cheap. Training data is expensive

shitals 9y ago
Not if you have simulator :) https://github.com/microsoft/airsim https://github.com/microsoft/airsim

fulafel 9y ago

Very sorry to nitpick, but this and pharma research are applied research - basic research is things like string theory and abstract math. See eg http://www.sjsu.edu/people/fred.prochaska/courses/ScWk170/s0/Basic-vs.-Applied-Research.pdf http://www.sjsu.edu/people/fred.prochaska/courses/ScWk170/s0... Companies rarely do basic research, and that's why it's very important to keep up public funding for it.

visarga 9y ago

> thinking a lot about what would have happened if large pharmacy companies did the same thing There is a company creating a 3d-printed chemical reactor. By downloading a schematic and buying some raw substances, you can create your own lab. It can be used to synthesise drugs in remote areas, such as on Mars, or to make generics for cheap. The exciting part is that the reactor schematic can be downloaded and shared easily. It can also make illegal drugs just as easily as 3d-printers can print guns. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/you-could-soon-be-manufacturing-your-own-drugs-thanks-3d-printing http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/you-could-soon-be-man...

geephroh 9y ago

Sounds like you might enjoy Annalee Newitz's _Autonomous_ (https://www.techsploitation.com/#/sciencefiction/ https://www.techsploitation.com/#/sciencefiction/)