Originally Posted by nmdehaan
I disagree, I think structural biology has much more "potential" then stem cells. Stem cells are dependent on the structure of proteins to function. Can't get one without the other. The focus of F@H has always been basic science, they just choose the models carefully for maximum benefit. If (maybe I should say when) we can accurately predict structure from amino acid sequence, it shouldn't be hard to reprogram a few cells with all of our engineered nano machines (proteins). Current methodology in the field of stem cell research is very experimental. Survival rates are low, and actually developing a FDA approved treatment is still years away. The breakthroughs in folding will allow us to use stem cells, but we can't pretend to understand stem cells if we don't know what the proteins inside them are doing!!!
Okay I see you point about understanding the protein structures, but embryonic stem cells have already had great success in other countries. Just because treatments won't be FDA approved for a long time, there has been great success in other countries that are already offering a variety of treatments.
Looking at the success around the world from embryonic stem cell research, compared with the tangible success from F@H, although clearly F@H helps further our understanding, it doesn't seem to be having an effect in anywhere near an immediate or significant way as current stem cell treatments