- cross-posted to:
- world@quokk.au
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- world@quokk.au
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
First author Dr. Olivia Bracken (UCL Department of Ageing, Rheumatology and Regenerative Medicine) said: "Our findings reveal a natural pathway that limits harmful immune cell expansion and helps calm inflammation more quickly.
“Targeting this mechanism could lead to safer treatments that restore immune balance without suppressing overall immunity. With chronic inflammation ranked as a major global health threat, this discovery opens a promising avenue for new therapies.”
You must log in or register to comment.
Title: Scientists discover hidden switch that shuts down inflammation.
In the article: “The treatment did not, however, significantly change outward signs such as redness or swelling.”
Uhh…
Blocking sEH increased epoxy-oxylipin levels, helped pain resolve more quickly, and sharply reduced the number of intermediate monocytes found in both the blood and tissue. These immune cells have been linked to persistent inflammation and the progression of inflammatory disease.
redness/swelling aren’t the only markers of inflammation in this context, as the cells that kick off the response do more harm than good when they wear out their welcome.
monocytes are white blood cells that develop in bone marrow. i’m curious/interested in whether the same treatment affects mast cells that develop in connective tissue
They spent several paragraphs talking about how the test was setup but then said, well, we didn’t see anything, so it must be reacting at a deeper level.
Other than an apparent reduction in pain and a reduction in the number of monocytes, there was no mechanism to make the claim that they could switch off inflammation.
I was hoping for a little more than that.
The best claim the article should have made was they found a way to reduce monocytes, which have been shown to be associated with the body’s inflammation response
They still don’t even understand how the monocyte side of the equation really works either.
I don’t disagree that this should lead to more testing, and I also hope that it might lead to better treatments but that title sits firmly in the “clickbait” arena for me.
Yeah, uh… can I get some of that?
First you’ll need insurance so they can start laundering the funny money. Oh look! Here it goes! All clean! Right into big pharma’s pockets. Healthcare is a business after all. We couldn’t run something like that to…cough…benefit humanity. That would be stupid.
I’ve been using a phosphdiesterase inhibitor for the past year and it’s a game changer. Expensive though, unless your insurance covers it.
This is a step further up the chain, which should mean fewer side effects and a more general effect on the entire system. And it’s with an already approved drug.
Yes please. ASAP. I will even be a test subject.
I’m willing to bet my life that there is some rich motherfucker salivating to monetize this like they did with insulin.
“Could you patent the sun?”
Where are the Salks of today?
https://www.ipeg.com/jonas-salk-inventor-of-the-polio-vaccine-could-you-patent-the-sun/
There was a woman i think 15 ish years ago that made herself the owner of the sun because of a loophole and i think it was that no country can take ownership of a celestial body (not yet anyway) but the rules didn’t state that a person cannot take ownership, it didn’t last long but it was an interesting exploit.
Nevermind, apparently it’s still an ongoing battle,
And there is nothing wrong with that, since it requires money to do drug trials and drug approvals
Money that is frequently government funded/subsidised.
Also you know that the patent for insulin was sold for a couple bucks because the guy believed the greedy fucks?
Government didn’t invent drugs like semaglutide. The research into GLP-1 may have been government funded, but semaglutide research was done at novo nordisk
So, you’re saying it’s okay to socialize the funding and privatize the profits?
Fuck you.
If anything had government funding, then the public should get ownership or at the very least, part ownership- proportional to the funding it required.
The actual drug was developed by the company, out wouldn’t exist without it
</golfclap>
-
you don’t actually know that.
-
by the same logic, it wouldn’t have existed without public funds.
-
that’s still not an argument for public funding of private profits, you jackass.
What do you mean you don’t know that? It would eventually be found sometime in the future, but the obesity rate falling this year is because of Novo Nordisk funding the research when they did. Millions of people got their diabetes and weight under control because a for profit firm did this research.
Yes, the research in the 1970s was public. Still took decades to bring a real substance to market. We live in a society. You didn’t build that and everything
-
This week’s UC London miracle cure.
What’s the opposite of inflammation? Can it go too far in the other direction?
Bro joined the anti-deflamation league
Yes. Studies show that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs like Advil and Tylenol can actually supress gains in the gym if taken in excess because the natural muscle breakdown, inflammation, and response mechanism is blunted. Same is true for ice baths. So, sometimes swelling and inflammation can be a good thing that we want to occur.
Also staying on prednisone and other steroids too long to supress inflammation leads to all kinds of issues.
Tylenol is not an NSAID. It doesn’t work on inflammation.
Also, there was a study a year or so ago that found evidence that Ibuprofen after working out helped speed recovery times.
