this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2026
325 points (88.1% liked)

Late Stage Capitalism

2737 readers
22 users here now

A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.

A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.

RULES:

1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.

2 No Trolling

3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.

4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.

5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.

6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc. This includes instance shaming.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LordWiggle@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's a substack page, where they praise themselves for their "award winning journalism" so I would take this article with a massive grain of salt.

[–] AI_toothbrush@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ahhhhh riiight "communist" china. In the same group as the "anti-nazi russia" and "democratic usa"

[–] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Lmao yeah China is a capitalist dynasty

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 49 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Terrible hype article. This was one person. And, it's not unique, similar trials are taking place worldwide. But the US based development was all killed with the NIH cuts.

[–] xta@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago

Also, china is not comunist.

[–] super_user_do@feddit.it 4 points 1 day ago

Sure thing, but I think that was the whole point of the article. It's not staying that America isn't enough technologically advanced to achieve that, but that nobody wants to do that because it would kill a huge industry 

[–] Drusas@fedia.io 24 points 1 day ago

I agree with most of the points regarding how how China does/would treat a diabetes cure in comparison to China, this post (it's not an article) is garbage. It's got no sources, just vaguely references a single case.

It would be a better post if it didn't mention China at all and instead discussed how diabetes is approached under American capitalism.

[–] borQue@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

Wow, I love this. The whole damn American meds industry is more rotten than Surströmming Thank you, China!

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 88 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I love how you call it Communist China when it's just as run-by-oligarchs as the US is. In fact they made an oligarch president for life.

[–] king_comrade@lemmy.world 42 points 2 days ago (5 children)

It's not communist, it's socialist with Chinese characteristics! (The characteristics are oligarchs)

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 172 points 2 days ago (7 children)

They're getting new beautiful infrastructure and disease cures.

We're bringing back measles, coal mining, and actively stupefying our kids for profit.

USA! USA!

[–] jimmy90@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

you mean from the not communist, capitalist china, that one, the one that ditched communism 40 years ago

ok

[–] athatet@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago

Yeah. The same one that’s getting new beautiful infrastructure and disease cures.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] snausagesinablanket@lemmy.world 115 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (24 children)

How the Therapy Works

The process involves regenerative medicine, utilizing the patient's own body's capabilities to treat the illness.

Cell Extraction: A small sample of cells (e.g., fat cells or blood cells) is taken from the patient. Reprogramming: These cells are chemically treated in a lab to revert them to a pluripotent state, meaning they can develop into any type of cell.

Differentiation and Transplantation: The stem cells are then guided to become functional, insulin-producing islet cells. These new cells are then transplanted back into the patient's abdominal area.

Restored Function: Once implanted, the cells engraft and begin producing insulin naturally in response to blood glucose levels, effectively restoring the body's natural ability to regulate blood sugar.

[–] FoxyFerengi@startrek.website 31 points 2 days ago (5 children)

That doesn't make sense for type 2. This is exactly how they've been trialing treatment of type 1, they just announced it a few months ago I think it was Stanford and Toronto

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

for a long time, different insulin types were only produced by a triopoly in the states, otherwise they would lose to cheaper generics, or competition if they were aggresively using competition, i think it changed now.

NOVO nordisk, ELLY lily, and sanofi were the primary producers.

[–] GreenBeanMachine@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] NewSocialWhoDis@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 day ago

Not entirely obvious, but this is what the substack referenced: https://interestingengineering.com/health/stem-cell-therapy-diabetes-china

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 45 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This "cure" was from 2024, per the South China Morning Post.

In case anyone was thinking this was new.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 33 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Any news on it since then? It wouldn't be the first time a scientific achievement out of China that embarrasses The West just fizzled out when no one was looking.

[–] Honytawk@feddit.nl 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Is it really an achievement if it fizzles out?

A real groundbreaking achievement may travel slow, but it will stay steady since it actively improves lives. People will keep talking about it.

Unlike, lets say, propaganda. That goes fast and fizzles out faster.

We should be able to check if the amount of diabetes in China falls down rapidly.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

It is if the results were falsified. Even it it worked somewhat, they're probably greatly over stating the effectiveness or ability to scale to a mass population.

I remember years back, China solved world hunger by growing mushrooms in caves. I can't find anything on that anymore, but I still have a friend listing that accomplishment.

[–] archonet@lemy.lol 26 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Hell, it calls China "Communist", I started reading it like it was a headline from the 1960s.

[–] cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 15 points 2 days ago (2 children)

wasn't the original inventor of insulin insistent that it remain cheap and readily available?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Banting and Best sold the patent for $1. But they were Canadian.

The cost of insulin has nothing to do with intellectual property.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

The current price of insulin is still directly affected by patents. Yes, they are still getting patents 100 years later with analogs and biosimilars.

We certainly could manufacture the original formula for cheap, but no one wants to do that. Capitalism and intellectual property combined are the culprits.

The government could fix this a number of ways, but it hasn't.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago
[–] nimpnin@sopuli.xyz 51 points 2 days ago (6 children)

Is there a more reliable source than "HR News" ?

[–] Beacon@fedia.io 44 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Seriously, MASSIVE source citation needed. As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 39 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Ohhh nice... where is Communist China again... ?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ZMoney@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

HIV is next, then cancer. China now has the kind of state scientific infrastructure that the US had in the 1950s. For some reason the USA is actively trying to destroy theirs.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

china wouldve been comporable, if they had not just fudge thier numbers, experiments in biological research all the time and make claims that cant be backed up. CCP is quite insular when it comes to research that hasnt been reverse engineered.

[–] ZMoney@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

We've been hearing this for decades. Care to cite some actual data?

[–] Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I do believe that HIV will happen soon, but curing cancer is a lot like curing the common cold. Even if you cure one strain, there are still hundreds more with the same end result. Cancer is just the umbrella term for a particular type of cellular behavior, but there are a lot of different types, causes, etc and treatments will vary for each.

To be clear, this isn’t some nihilistic doomer “why even bother trying” type of post. Modern medicine has already made great strides in curing several different kinds of specific cancers. But a cure for one cancer will not really equate to “curing cancer”, because there will still be countless others.

[–] xep@discuss.online 1 points 1 day ago

I wouldn't be so sure about HIV. Perhaps a functional cure, but complete remission is probably quite a while away yet.

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 23 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

People shouldn’t have to hope that Chinese scientists cure diabetes just so American companies can’t keep price gouging them. But here we are.

here we are indeed

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›