Miriam Shor Quotes

We'll be investing in basic science research with the goal of curing disease.

Scientists have established huge numbers of links between particular diseases and snippets of DNA, but in the great majority of cases, this has not yet been translated into treatments that can help cure patients. These treatments will come - tomorrow, or the day after.

Science is you! It's your head, it's your dog, it's your iPhone - it's the world. How do you see that as boring? If it's boring, it's because you're learning it from a textbook.

Stem cell research holds out the promise of finding cures and treatments for a wide range of diseases.

We have a responsibility to promote stem cell research which could lead to treatments and cures for diseases affecting millions of Americans.

I'm involved in Project ALS which is trying to get money for stem cell research. That's one I've been pretty involved with because if you can cure that, you can cure so many other diseases.

In an ideal world, the amount of money we spend on medical research to prevent or cure a disease would be proportional to its seriousness and the number of people who suffer from it.

The people who work in the scientific field, they need help to convey what it's about.

New drugs and surgical techniques offer promise in the fight against cancer, Alzheimer's, tuberculosis, AIDS, and a host of other life-threatening diseases. Animal research has been, and continues to be, fundamental to advancements in medicine.

Almost everybody is enthusiastic about the promise of biotechnology to cure disease and to relieve suffering.

I suggest that the introductory courses in science, at all levels from grade school through college, be radically revised. Leave the fundamentals, the so-called basics, aside for a while, and concentrate the attention of all students on the things that are not known.

We need new medical approaches to preventing and/or curing disease. We need new scientific approaches to generating, storing, and being more efficient with energy. Maybe we need more space exploration. Maybe we need more undersea exploration.

We now have the ability to explore many new treatments for many diseases. However we do not have enough money to explore them all…. I measure time by the number of patients who die each day as the result of diseases that we do not have enough money to develop cures for. We have the tools. We need the money.

But perhaps the rest of us could have separate classes in science appreciation, the wonder of science, scientific ways of thinking, and the history of scientific ideas, rather than laboratory experience.

At school, I was fanatical about being a scientist.

The difference is that with Ebola, it is such a devastating disease, and there is still no cure. They're still working on vaccines. The fact of the matter with polio, there is a cure; there is a vaccine.

I was a terrible science student, and for a long time, I thought I just didn't understand science. It turned out that I didn't understand post-Newtonian science. I could actually understand how people thought scientifically about the world in the past.

If the question were, "What ought to be the next objective in science?" my answer would be the teaching of science to the young, so that when the whole population grew up there would be a far more general background of common sense, based on a knowledge of the real meaning of the scientific method of discovering truth.

The tremendous acquisition of basic knowledge will allow a much more rational treatment of cancer, viral infections, degenerative diseases and, most importantly, mental diseases.

Dedicated researchers seek better treatments and cures for diabetes, kidney disease, Alzheimer's and every form of cancer. But these scientists face an array of disincentives. We can do better.

To my disappointment, not many young people seem to be interested in science, especially chemistry.

The doctor has been taught to be interested not in health but in disease. What the public is taught is that health is the cure for disease.

I can cure AIDS, and I will.

It is my hope that the number of stem cell lines available for federally-funded research will be expanded so that the government can continue to participate in this vital research and provide hope to the millions of Americans with diseases that might be cured.

What sense would it make or what would it benfit a physician if he discovered the origin of the diseases but could not cure or alleviate them?