The World's Fair

This groundbreaking report--"Marion duPont Scott Equine Medical Center offers new treatment for lameness"-- just out, is riveting. And I think this says it all:

"Lameness is a condition that affects many [people] and this therapy is a very promising alternative to traditional treatments."

I can't believe this work hasn't already spun through the blogosphere. Briefly put, scientists have been working on treatments for lameness. "Lameness, which is recognized as an abnormality in the way [we] move or stand," the researchers note, "is typically associated with a painful musculosekeletal condition or a mechanical abnormality that hinders locomotion." I'll say! It's also accompanied by poor facility with humor, awkward social gestures, ill-timed and ill-placed comments about how clever the writing on Joey was, and the like.

The report continues: "The new treatment, known as Interleukin-1 Receptor Antagonist Protein therapy or IRAPâ„¢ therapy, consists of the injection of an autologous serum sample into the [patient's] affected joint. The serum contains anti-inflammatory proteins that block the harmful effects of Interleukin-1, an inflammatory cytokine that has been shown to facilitate osteoarthritis by accelerating the destruction of cartilage."

Which is funny too, right? Because, and you'll love this, Dave and I were just talking about putting up some posts on Interleukin-1, and Dave says to me, he says, "Hey Ben, do you think it would be funny if we riffed on Cytokine and autologous serum?"

And I says to him back, "I don't know Dave. On the one hand, with Scrubs in syndication on Comedy Central, maybe the kids *are* itching for more anti-inflammatory protein-based jokes. But, on the other hand, did you see Grey's Anatomy last week? I'm not sure I get it."

Well, you can see that this went on for a while.

But the point for us, eventually, was: where is the research on the "loser" problem more broadly speaking, not just the lameness one? It's possible researchers have channelled their efforts too narrowly. Are we missing key insights from loser research? What is to be done? What about all those grand ideas about progress? Are we making any headway against the losers?

(It's also possible I may have misinterpreted the findings. But either way, I thank Janey Lou for the link.)