The pitfalls of crowdfunding Alzheimer's disease research

M. Garrett
{"title":"The pitfalls of crowdfunding Alzheimer's disease research","authors":"M. Garrett","doi":"10.5455/im.36591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With pharmaceutical companies’ repeated failures at finding effective interventions for Alzheimer’s disease, together with an increasing reliance on the growing federal funding for research, there is an emergent opportunity for financing alternate research through crowdfunding. Crowdfunding—where funding is obtained from small donations from a large group of people—has become a new source of funding for medical research. By understanding how the research community has evolved to study Alzheimer’s disease the pitfalls of this strategy can be highlighted. Alzheimer’s disease research is complex. From its inception in the early 1900s, Alzheimer’s disease has been at the center of movement within psychiatry to define the disease on the basis of its biology. Recent emphasis— through the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), RDC (Research Diagnostic Criteria), RDoC (Research Domain Criteria) as well as the more recent Framework from the U.S. National Institute on Aging—have supported an exclusive emphasis on biology. But by excluding other aspects of the disease, such as its clinical expression, this research approach will be shown to be faulty and contradictory. So far, this approach has resulted in 100% failures. By examining the historical and financial circumstances of the industry centered on Alzheimer’s disease a strong warning is given to the public to mistrust crowdfunding Alzheimer’s disease research. A broader and more inclusive approach is likely to generate a better understanding of the disease and therefore hold better promise for understanding the disease in the long term. Such a nuanced approach competes badly with the more binary search for a cure and is less receptive to public support through crowdfunding.","PeriodicalId":93574,"journal":{"name":"International medicine (Antioch, Turkey)","volume":"85 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International medicine (Antioch, Turkey)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5455/im.36591","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

With pharmaceutical companies’ repeated failures at finding effective interventions for Alzheimer’s disease, together with an increasing reliance on the growing federal funding for research, there is an emergent opportunity for financing alternate research through crowdfunding. Crowdfunding—where funding is obtained from small donations from a large group of people—has become a new source of funding for medical research. By understanding how the research community has evolved to study Alzheimer’s disease the pitfalls of this strategy can be highlighted. Alzheimer’s disease research is complex. From its inception in the early 1900s, Alzheimer’s disease has been at the center of movement within psychiatry to define the disease on the basis of its biology. Recent emphasis— through the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), RDC (Research Diagnostic Criteria), RDoC (Research Domain Criteria) as well as the more recent Framework from the U.S. National Institute on Aging—have supported an exclusive emphasis on biology. But by excluding other aspects of the disease, such as its clinical expression, this research approach will be shown to be faulty and contradictory. So far, this approach has resulted in 100% failures. By examining the historical and financial circumstances of the industry centered on Alzheimer’s disease a strong warning is given to the public to mistrust crowdfunding Alzheimer’s disease research. A broader and more inclusive approach is likely to generate a better understanding of the disease and therefore hold better promise for understanding the disease in the long term. Such a nuanced approach competes badly with the more binary search for a cure and is less receptive to public support through crowdfunding.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
众筹阿尔茨海默病研究的陷阱
由于制药公司在寻找治疗阿尔茨海默病的有效干预措施方面屡屡失败,再加上越来越依赖越来越多的联邦资助进行研究,通过众筹为替代研究提供资金的机会出现了。众筹——从一大批人的小额捐款中获得资金——已经成为医学研究的一种新的资金来源。通过了解研究界是如何发展到研究阿尔茨海默病的,可以突出这一策略的缺陷。阿尔茨海默病的研究是复杂的。从20世纪初开始,阿尔茨海默病就处于精神病学的中心,以其生物学为基础来定义这种疾病。最近的重点——通过DSM(精神疾病诊断与统计手册)、RDC(研究诊断标准)、RDoC(研究领域标准)以及美国国家老龄化研究所最新的框架——支持了对生物学的独家强调。但是,如果排除疾病的其他方面,如临床表现,这种研究方法将被证明是错误和矛盾的。到目前为止,这种方法导致了100%的失败。通过研究以阿尔茨海默病为中心的行业的历史和财务状况,强烈警告公众不要信任阿尔茨海默病研究的众筹。一种更广泛和更具包容性的方法可能会更好地了解这种疾病,因此在长期内更有希望了解这种疾病。这种细致入微的方法与更为二元的治疗方法存在严重的竞争,而且很难通过众筹获得公众的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
5q-Syndrome: A review of a rare myelodysplastic syndrome Needs for remote cardiac rehabilitation and remote music therapy in recent circumstances The effect on screening behaviors of health beliefs related to prostate cancer screening of seasonal agricultural workers individuals Blood urea nitrogen and creatinine ratio is an independent predictor for upper gastro-intestinal bleeding even in high prevalence chronic kidney disease population The morphology and neuronal-glial correlations of the spinal cord posterior horns of human embryos
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1