> The drug is based on a molecule he discovered while working at Pfizer, and can be delivered via a once-a-month EpiPen-style injection, where it restores protective processes to diseased joints and enables the regeneration of affected tissues. It works by blocking a compound that supports the nerve cells involved in transmitting pain signals to the brain.
So, it restores lost tissue by numbing nerves? This makes no sense.
Wonder if it's just poor reporting or if there is something to this?
It's actually way more complicated than I think the article can explain to the audience it's targeting. Nerve Growth Factors turn a bunch of different "dials" in the body. The main ones of course are the growth, maintenance, and survival of neurons in different parts of the body however some other "dials" they adjust are inflammation and immune response.
So it affects the nerves in a much more complex way than simple numbing and on top of that it also plays a part in regulating inflammation and auto-immune activity that may worsen arthritis and prevent the body from healing what it can.
And this is a gross oversimplification but it gets the function across a bit better than the article.
The drug blocks NT-3, which is involved in nerve signaling and regeneration, but also is thought to play a role in causing the excess inflammation that leads to joint degeneration in osteoarthritis. By blocking it, it seems they believe it may allow the joints time to heal from the excess inflammation that had been causing degeneration.
The headline is misleading then, it should say "... beat the pain of osteoarthritis".
Isn't it weird how you can work on an inherently benevolent endeavour and then present the whole thing on a way that looks like you're trying to con people (and looks unscientific to boot). Marketing really is a scourge.
So, it restores lost tissue by numbing nerves? This makes no sense.
Wonder if it's just poor reporting or if there is something to this?