In a new study in mice, a team of researchers from UCLA, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, and Harvard University have uncovered a crucial component for restoring functional activity after spinal cord injury. The neuroscientists have shown that re-growing specific neurons back to their natural target regions led to recovery, while random regrowth was not effective.

Scientists regenerate neurons that restore walking in mice after paralysis from spinal cord injury::In a new study in mice, a team of researchers from UCLA, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, and Harvard University have uncovered a crucial component for restoring functional activity after spinal cord injury. The neuroscientists have shown that re-growing specific neurons back to their natural target regions led to recovery, while random regrowth was not effective.

  • cooopsspace@infosec.pubEnglish
    441·
    1 year ago

    Insurance: Nah we aren’t gonna cover it. And for some reason our economical opinion trumps your own doctors medical opinion.

    • ikapoz@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      30·
      1 year ago

      This is actually one case insurance companies would be ALL OVER a real fix. People with spinal injuries have tons of medical complications that cost throughout their entire life. An insurance company would definitely be interested in unloading persistent fiscal drains like that.

      Don’t get me wrong, the medical insurance industry is a fucking terror, especially in the US with the degree of regulatory capture involved. In this one case though, a real cure would serve their interests at anything less than a massive cost on their part.

      • Jax@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        11·
        1 year ago

        If that’s the case, wouldn’t the same logic be applied to novel cancer treatments? Last time I checked those have a tendency to evaporate mysteriously, and insurance companies weren’t exactly stopping it.

        Idk, just seams a little idealistic.

        • ikapoz@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          5·
          1 year ago

          The only ideal that type of company has at its heart is the pursuit of profit. If they see a real cure that costs less than the long term “maintenance” care they would be all over it. If not, then not.

          Novel cancer treatments aren’t a terribly good comparison in my opinion. Rarely does a single one in isolation offer a clear and permanent cure - though with any categorization that broad there are of course exceptions.

          Hell, when scientists identify care that is likely enough to prevent the need of reactive treatment insurance companies often make it free to lower their overall costs - teeth cleaning and flu shots for example. That’s not altruism on their part, it’s economics.

    • SARGEx117@lemmy.world
      English
      113·
      1 year ago

      "Yeahhhhhh here’s the thing, a wheelchair costs fifty dollars, while the revolutionary treatment that will give you full use back is fifty ONE dollars…

      So you see, there really is only one sensible option…" -every insurance company everywhere even if the prices were literal

      • cooopsspace@infosec.pubEnglish
        6·
        1 year ago

        But but… If I can get back to work I can make the $1 whilst also getting back into the workforce and by extention the tax base providing a lifetime of benefit to the public and keep my family out of poverty…

        Denied.