178
submitted 3 days ago by some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org to c/news@lemmy.world

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 are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago

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

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

That something did happen a certain way, doesn’t mean it had to happen that way or couldn’t have happened any other way.

Stop being an obtuse loser. I’m running out of insults to express just how much of a prick I think you are for thinking it’s entirely appropriate that our tax dollars make billionaires richer by funding their R and D without appropriate recompense.

Novo Nordisk would happily watch you die while holding a cure you couldn’t afford, they’re not worthy of your glazing.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago

You don't want to credit the people who did the work and you're running out of not just insults, but arguments

[-] Verqix@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

The people who did the work? Like the researchers at Novo that mainly just get salary? Let them have their salary, patents and scientific recognition. That is their credit.

Indeed Novo has built upon a lot of research and most of that is publicly funded. The price of the drug of course should recompense the organization for costs in research, trials and approval.

Still it is strange that costs to the consumer are 9 times higher on the US market than in Europe.

Also, it's strange that capitalisation is so free in making money that high prices are required to attract capital for helping and healing people. Human lives are worth less than profits. Gross amounts of money are making their way to sociopaths. You are downplaying a very real and sad state of affairs with "but money must be made". Sadly that is the state of things, but you put it as if this is as it should be.

Insulin was named as an example which you gloss over, where research wasn't needed and production could be optimized for larger profits, but prices were raised to the point of people cutting back on their intake. This has caused bodily damage, loss of eyesight, loss of life. This wasn't to the benefit of the working people, and to the deficit of patients.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago

Yes, but the investors that invested their money to pay those salaries expect a return on their investments. If they couldn't make the profits, people wouldn't buy the stock. Other pharmas wouldn't be able to IPO or be acquired since there would be no money in pharma

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You understand that when the government helps fund things like research thst is an investment?

Right? Are you just trolling everyone? Or do you really believe that our job is to solely suck off billionaire dick as they price us out of healthcare and let us die.

Get your head out of Novo’s ass. They’re probably not paying you enough.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Yes, the government does this for the good of humanity. Are you saying they should demand money from Novo Nordisk?

[-] Verqix@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

As I said above: You are downplaying a very real and sad state of affairs with "but money must be made". Sadly that is the state of things, but you put it as if this is as it should be.

You are excusing predatory business practices and growing income divide. You are apparently okay with businesses having so much political power they can dictate laws. Regulations and actual sanctions, anti monopoly laws and corruption, unions and raised minimum wages would severely lower the amount of money for investers across the board and the world would be a better place for it.

You present as something without any empathy. Someone laments the state of things and you say: good way to make a profit and draw investors! Tone deaf.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

It's such a sad state of affairs the obesity rate in America is down for the first time in decades. It's due to semaglutide

this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2026
178 points (97.8% liked)

News

39243 readers
2763 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS