Precision Medicine will need to get out of the pharma silo that is based on symptoms

Welcome to the digital era of biology (and to this modest blog I started in early 2005).

To cure many diseases, like cancer or cystic fibrosis, we will need to target genes (mutations, for ex.), not organs! I am convinced that the future of replacement medicine (organ transplant) is genomics (the science of the human genome). In 10 years we will be replacing (modifying) genes; not organs!

Anticipating the $100 genome era and the P4™ medicine revolution. P4 Medicine (Predictive, Personalized, Preventive, & Participatory): Catalyzing a Revolution from Reactive to Proactive Medicine.

After low-cost airlines (Ryanair, Easyjet ...) comes "low-cost" participatory medicine. Some of my readers have recently christened this long-lasting, clumsy attempt at e-writing of mine "THE LOW-COSTE INNOVATION BLOG". I am an
early adopter of scientific MOOCs. My name's Catherine Coste. I've earned myself four MIT digital diplomas: 7.00x, 7.28x1, 7.28.x2 and 7QBWx. Instructor of 7.00x: Eric Lander PhD.

Upcoming books: Airpocalypse, a medical thriller (action taking place in Beijing) 2017; Jesus CRISPR Superstar, a sci-fi -- French title: La Passion du CRISPR (2018).

I love Genomics. Would you rather donate your data, or... your vital organs?

Audio files on this blog are Windows files ; if you have a Mac, you might want to use VLC ( to read them.

Concernant les fichiers son ou audio (audio files) sur ce blog : ce sont des fichiers Windows ; pour les lire sur Mac, il faut les ouvrir avec VLC (

"Cardiac Arrest Is Not True Death"


"Cardiac death, also called clinical death, is not true death. Here's why":


[Audio files on this blog are Windows files ; if you have a Mac, you might want to use VLC ( to read them.]

Or go here:

Set the progress bar (of the podcast's audio file) to 38:20... and start listenting!
"The Lazarus Effect: The Science That is Rewriting the Boundaries Between Life and Death", by Sam Parnia, MD.

==> Buy that book on Amazon.

Book review on Amazon: "I bought the book after reading an article in a journal on Dr Parnia's work. I therefore had a fair idea of what to expect. The science of resuscitation seems to have made significant advances in the last decade, but what I found disturbing is that those advances are not uniformly available even within the same hospital emergency unit because of significant variances between the training and motivation of the staff on duty at any particular time.

I also find it disturbing that the blurring of the divide between life and death has not been accompanied by a recognition that harvesting organs from a body just because the heart has ceased to beat and the pupils are dilated might well amount to causing unlawful death in some instances. Doctors motivated by the health of a transplant patient may be circumspect about disclosing the full potential of recent advances in the science of resuscitation to the loved ones of a prospective donor. These were not matters directly canvassed by Dr Parnia, although he does acknowledge the variances of health care within the same hospital.

I was a bit disappointed at his work on near death experiences. While he outlines efforts to explore the phenomenon, those efforts appear to have been inconclusive to date. Perhaps this is fertile ground for a sequel, but any research that definitively addresses this question will no doubt become public knowledge well in advance of any book as that kind of research will be of interest to all.

A good book should prompt thought on the part of the reader. Dr Parnia has most certainly done that. But he has also provided an interesting and illuminating read about a topic that we will all need to address at some time in our lives, if only at the very end -whenever and whatever that is."(Source).

1 commentaire:

Low-Coste Innovation Blog a dit…

Très intéressant topo, à mon avis. Quelques questions qui restent à voir néanmoins. Le Dr Parnia dit qu'il peut supprimer les conséquences de l’arrêt cardiaque mais ça ne dit pas concrètement (étude de cas):
1) comment il répare la cause de l’arrêt cardiaque (ben ça risque de recommencer sinon)
2) comment ils peuvent savoir que le cerveau n'a pas été endommagé (dommages réversibles : cette notion doit être bien expliquée et documentée, car elle va à l'inverse de ce qui est rabâché depuis les années 70 !)

Je suppose que c'est parce que le toubib en question est spécialiste en réa et que donc il ne parle que pour sa partie technique... son tronçon ... Mais cela manque de transversal ou de vue d'ensemble et ressemble donc (pour peu que je me fasse l'avocat du diable) à une petite querelle de spécialistes qui ne casse pas 3 pattes a un canard...