979
Stanford scientists regrow lost cartilage and reverse arthritis in major breakthrough
(www.sciencedaily.com)
this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2026
979 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
85420 readers
3879 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Probably worth adding "in mice" to the title
Now we only need a drug to turn humans into mice and back.
Cindarellazine.
Mice are really living in a golden age. They have never been so healthy.
Did they test sildenafil on mice
The only downside is the never ending genocide at the hands of scientists
The mice need a floatilla and a few celebrities to turn on the red carpet and go "Yeah but what about the genocide of mice? -- Chekmate, deuces."
Uhhh you do know what happens to them at the end of the experiment right?
They turn into a soup-like homogenate. As is natural in the life cycle of a lab mouse.
And if they weren't euthanized they would almost certainly die of horrible horrible cancerous tumors. Not because of anything the labs do, but because it's a crime against nature for a mouse to live past maybe 2 years.
And simultaneously unhealthy (otherwise how are we"curing" them)
And human tissues, and it's been shown to be safe in phase I trials.
So saying "in mice" undersells where they are at.
Yeah looks like poster either didn't read the article or just didn't read it sufficiently but decided to be reactionary anyways.
https://xkcd.com/1217/
This is not the xkcd I thought you were going to use
Which one did you have in mind?
This one
So "xkcd" is now a genericised noun for any comic? Also, is this xerox a Canon?
"four letter science comic"
Are you really that offended I linked to a relevant comic that wasn't xkcd?
I take it you didn't read the conversation to get the markers about the topic before posting that.
Lots of reading comprehension problems in these science posts
Protip, being abrasive makes people not want to talk to you.
Just to clear up any confusion: I'm not posting for your approval. Between you and the reactionary posters in these threads: I couldn't imagine anyone I'd be more repellent to have a rapport with.
You asked a question, i simply answered it.
Maybe don't ask questions you don't like the answers to. It doesn't make any difference to me.
Still abrasive.
They started with mice. As does all experiments.
Did you only read half way through before reaction posting?
Weird.
it's weird to comment "weird" on everything
Yes it would be. Good thing that's not happening. How's the spread of the misinformation? I see I'm hitting a few nerves.
GOOD.