# 5031
Over the past 72 hours news organizations around the world have been heralding a `breakthrough’ in viral research that they claim could finally provide a cure for the common cold.
A few samples include:
Cure for common cold on cards after medical breakthrough - Telegraph UK
A cure for the common cold may finally be achieved as a result of a remarkable discovery in a Cambridge laboratory - By Steve Connor, Science Editor Independent
Cure for the Common Cold? – Fox / SkyNews
Cambridge laboratory discovers cure for the common cold – Helium
All of this fanfare sprang forth from a press release earlier this week from the UK’s Medical Research Council with a considerably less presuming headline:
MRC scientists redefine how our immune system responds to viruses
Monday 1 November, 2010
Landmark research from the Medical Research Council (MRC) has discovered that antibodies can fight viruses from within infected cells. This finding transforms the previous scientific understanding of our immunity to viral diseases like the common cold, 'winter vomiting' and gastroenteritis. It also gives scientists a different set of rules that pave the way to the next generation of antiviral drugs.
The actual research paper appears in PNAS, with the even more formidable title:
Antibodies mediate intracellular immunity through tripartite motif-containing 21 (TRIM21)
Donna L. Mallery, William A. McEwan, Susanna R. Bidgood, Greg J. Towers, Chris M. Johnson, and Leo C. James
Taking absolutely nothing away from this text-book rewriting research from Cambridge, the trumpeting by the mainstream press of having a cure for the common cold (or any other viral illness) anytime soon is egregiously premature.
What researchers at the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology in Cambridge actually did was to preincubate a common respiratory virus (adenovirus) with various antibodies and then added them to HeLa (Henrietta Lacks) cultured cells in vitro.
And to their surprise, they discovered that when these adenoviruses entered the HeLa cells, they carried antibodies on their surface that attracted a protein (TRIM21) that invoked a built-in cellular waste disposal system called proteosomes proteasomes that proceeded to shred the virus.
We’ve this nifty 49 second animation of the process available from the BBC, illustrating this new discovery.
Medical Research Council Animation (via BBC) – 49 secs.
From this fascinating piece of research we get the leap to breathless headlines and `forward looking’ speculation proclaiming a `cure for the common cold.
Admittedly, most of these news reports concede near the bottom of the article that it could be years before this research yields a viable treatment. But readers often have to wade through 10 or more paragraphs to get to that revelation.
I suppose it’s a good `hook’ to get people - who might not otherwise be inclined - to read a science article.And in that regard, perhaps it isn’t all bad.
But I find myself cringing inwardly nonetheless over this kind of simplistic (and breathless) science reporting.
While this is certainly new (and for scientists, exciting) research . . . it remains to be seen whether this knowledge will ever lead to a safe and effective antiviral therapy in humans.
And if it does, that day is probably a long way off.
Fortunately, there is a cure for the common science story.
In a far saner analysis, Fergus Walsh at the BBC puts all of this into a reasonable perspective with his blog:
As does Nature’s The Great Beyond blog in :
The immunology paper that won't cure the common cold - November 02, 2010
Comforting that, if you look hard enough, you can find good reporting and analysis.
The bad news is, few will bother.
The good news, I suppose, is that in a week or two we’ll get another press release on some obscure bit of scientific research - followed by another hyperbole filled news cycle – that will supplant this latest `scientific breakthrough’ with a new one.
And while that may not do a lot to educate the general public about the real science involved, it will sell a lot of newspapers.
