 |
ex-Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 110
|
|
|
ex-Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 110
|
The thoughts of a cartoon duck
Quote:
Originally Posted by reverett123
...others who are on here are "real" scientists or doctors. That is, they have credentials recognized by society.
How about the formation of a think tank made up of such pwp as members and the rest of us as associates? The group could function through issuing reports and position papers through the Net and media. Topics like the case for the role of the BBB in PD or the need to accelerate research on green tea or turmeric or choline etc.
Position papers on the need for a new way of crash testing promising things by pwp once toxicity was ruled out. Say 500 pwp taking standardized curcumin for a year and 500 controls. All filling out a monthly report. To hell with the FDA and such.
The associates must have some media veterans. Enlist them. Make it a good story. etc
|
"Issuing reports and position papers through the Net and media" - Scientific databases such as PubMed certainly wouldn't include it due to their submission requirements. Even numerous well established scientific journals can't get on to PubMed and other scientific databases. You would probably end up with some report being published on the Interet jungle along with billions of other web pages that few but those involved would ever read.
"Topics like the case for the role of the BBB in PD or the need to accelerate research on green tea or turmeric or choline etc." - The idea of a defective BBB being the cause of Parkinson's Disease is contradicted by dozens of established scientific facts. Green tea, turmeric and choline do nothing to increase dopamine levels. It's easy for somebody to take green tea, curcumin and choline every day for a year. Somebody who starts off with PD would still have PD a year later. Issues such as these are already being pursued, and due to their weak scientific rationale, have little to show for it. If you want to pursue medical research then its rationale must stand up to scrutiny from the outset. It must be consistent with known facts. None of these are.
"Position papers on the need for a new way of crash testing promising things" - This sounds like you want other people elsewhere to do the testing. Funders and researchers all have their own pet projects that they would no doubt carry on doing instead.
"Say 500 pwp taking standardized curcumin for a year and 500 controls." - Curcumin has already effectively been tested. All their life, the Parsi habitually consume Curcumin as part of their daily diet, yet they have the world's second highest prevalence of Parkinson's Disease.
|