[HN Gopher] Dr. Katalin Kariko (2021)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Dr. Katalin Kariko (2021)
        
       Author : fsndz
       Score  : 76 points
       Date   : 2024-03-31 13:55 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.glamour.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.glamour.com)
        
       | harsh183 wrote:
       | mRNA vaccines feel like they're going to be absolutely game
       | changing in the next few decades, and maybe one day we'll see
       | HIV, Malaria and many cancers as forgotten memories the same way
       | we look at Polio today. Even with covid-19, traditional vaccines
       | didn't have the same level of effectiveness and a lot more of the
       | world would have been severely impacted without them.
        
       | gumby wrote:
       | > The focus, he said, would be on how he'd missed it...
       | 
       | I'm glad they included this. It casts the former lab director in
       | a good light. Of course I have no idea how he previously treated
       | her.
       | 
       | I find the opposite is more typical: not acknowledging one's own
       | failures.
       | 
       | Also (related to a story a couple of days ago) don't normally
       | like these kids of bio stories but I liked this one.
        
         | sukruh wrote:
         | This reminded me of the story of the VC who tried to avoid
         | meeting Larry & Sergey when they were looking for investment:
         | 
         | > David Cowan's college friend rented her garage to Sergey and
         | Larry for their first year. In 1999 and 2000 she tried to
         | introduce Cowan to "these two really smart Stanford students
         | writing a search engine." Students? A new search engine? In the
         | most important moment ever for Bessemer's anti-portfolio, Cowan
         | asked her, "How can I get out of this house without going
         | anywhere near your garage?"
         | 
         | https://www.bvp.com/anti-portfolio
        
       | hinkley wrote:
       | Article is 2021
       | 
       | I was confused by the immediacy in some of the commentary in the
       | story. But the article was (almost) three years ago.
        
       | wslh wrote:
       | It is always great to remember the giants on whose shoulders we
       | stand [1].
       | 
       | Specially, Cesar Milstein (Argentinian Nobel Prize) was against
       | patenting the discovery [2] for a trillion size industry.
       | 
       | [1] https://translational-
       | medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10...
       | 
       | [2]
       | https://www.whatisbiotechnology.org/index.php/exhibitions/mi...
        
         | nine_k wrote:
         | I sometimes think that it's better to take a patent when you
         | undeniably can, and then release the patented tech under a
         | permissive license. At least, this way an unrelated but shrewd
         | party won't have a chance to acquire a patent, and milk / troll
         | everyone.
        
           | wslh wrote:
           | I agree with your argument but take into account that this is
           | what we are discovering just now because of the software and
           | hardware industries and Milstein was a pioneer in "open
           | sourcing" his work with an "open license".
        
       | dahart wrote:
       | > Except the research was published and almost no one paid
       | attention. No fanfare. Stop me if this sounds familiar: No
       | funding.
       | 
       | It's interesting to me that for-profit startups are taking
       | chances on research that academics aren't. Academics is supposed
       | to be the place for charting unknown territory and taking
       | unprofitable risks. Yet it seems like such stories are becoming
       | more common, and this might be closely related to the
       | reproducibility crisis in science too; the notion that we need to
       | gatekeep funding for positive results may be slowing down
       | progress. The tenacity of Kariko sounds amazing and beyond what
       | most people are capable of, but it just makes me wonder how many
       | would-be researchers and breakthrough ideas are being discarded
       | because academics has become so self-protective and risk averse.
       | Or is the system working well and as intended, and we just need
       | to expect a few brilliant thinkers to be left behind every now
       | and then?
        
         | epistasis wrote:
         | I'm not surprised at all. First, the failure rate of new bio
         | ideas is extremely high. Second, even when they work the
         | development time is extremely long. As methods advance, there
         | are chances to make time-to-derisk shorter and cheaper, but
         | right now you need extremely patient capital with very long
         | risk timelines. And the high failure rate means you need to
         | place a massive number of bets, and each of those failed bets
         | doesn't have the capital recovery mode of being an aquihire.
         | 
         | The norm throughout history is for brilliant thinkers to be
         | left behind and ignored and for their ideas to go nowhere. I
         | would say we are living in a time when a greater number of
         | great thinkers have a chance of impacting the world than ever
         | before. Though I wouldn't know how to asses the fraction of
         | great thinkers that get a chance to execute.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-03-31 23:01 UTC)