Insulin Who Invented

Share on facebook

The Discovery Of Insulin

For many years scientists believed that some kind of internal secretion of the pancreas was the key to preventing diabetes and controlling normal metabolism. No one could find it, until in the summer of 1921 a team at the University of Toronto began trying a new experimental approach suggested by Dr. Frederick Banting. By the spring of 1922, the Toronto researchers — Banting, Charles Best, J.B. Collip and their supervisor, J.J.R. Macleod, were able to announce the discovery of insulin. In 1923, Banting and Macleod received the Nobel Prize for one of the most important, and most controversial, breakthroughs in modern medical history. Early Research For many centuries people knew about diabetes mellitus (commonly referred to as diabetes), but it was only dimly understood until the end of the 19th century. Initially, the body’s inability to process carbohydrates and other nutrients, signified most obviously by the presence of sugar in the urine, was thought to be a liver or a stomach disorder. In 1889 German researchers Oskar Minkowski and Josef von Mehring discovered that dogs that had their pancreas removed immediately became severely and fatally diabetic. Something in the pancr Continue reading >>

Share on facebook

Popular Questions

  1. Robert Frost

    No. If Quora doesn't value short answers, Quora should discourage users from asking questions that solicit short answers. That isn't a non sequitur. It has been my observation that short answers often result from questions that, as written, solicit short answers.
    Quora's policy of using an algorithm to collapse short answers is a perfect case of the idiom das Kind mit dem Bade ausschütten (don't throw the baby out with the bath water). It is true there are many, many, many terribly unhelpful one sentence answers on Quora. But, there are also many correct short answers that fully, clearly, and helpfully answer the question that was actually asked.
    I believe a Quora answer should include any explanation required for the answer to make sense to the audience. Not all answers need explanation in order to be understood. Let's look at a few examples:
    Which actors have played the same role twice in two completely unrelated films?
    An appropriately correct and helpful answer might be:
    Peter O'Toole played Henry II in Becket (1964) and The Lion in Winter (1968).
    Michael Keaton played Ray Nicolette in Jackie Brown (1997) and Out of Sight (1998).
    That's two lines. It would probably be quashed by the QCR algorithm. But it provides two helpful answers for the question. What more could the author add that would make the answers more helpful in answering the question that was asked?
    What are we saying by collapsing this answer? Are we saying that anecdotes from each example are required? Are we saying that only an answer with five or more names is worth adding? What then happens when the answer page has twenty answers and someone notices that one great example is missing?
    Twenty people might provide similarly formatted answers with other names. All of those answers can be combined into an answer wiki for the question and then there would be a great comprehensive list of items that answer the question that was actually asked.
    How about this one?
    When did Elvis pass away?
    The correct answer to that question is:
    Elvis Presley died due to cardiac arrest on Tuesday, 16 August, 1977 at his home, Graceland.
    There's actually more information than was asked for, in that answer. Yet, it is a single sentence - ripe for quashing by the QCR algorithm.
    Here's one that doesn't actually show up in Quora search, but I want to use it as an example of where this discussion often leads.
    When was D-Day?
    The correct answer to that question is:
    D-Day marks the Allied invasion of German occupied Normandy on 6 June, 1944.
    Again, one sentence - ripe for quashing - and yet it fully answers the question that was asked and even provides additional context.
    Conversations about these questions usually revolve to the position that answerers should provide more information than is actually relevant to the question - that is, that the answerer should assume a more complicated question. The argument is that an answerer to "When was D-Day?" should also, in their single answer, answer "What happened on D-Day?", "Why is it called D-Day?", "Why was D-Day then?", and "Why do we commemorate D-Day?"
    That simply doesn't make sense, to me. I'll repeat a point I made above, because I know someone will comment on its absence, otherwise:
    I believe a Quora answer should include any explanation required for the answer to make sense to the audience. Not all answers need explanation in order to be understood.
    I teach a class on questions. In that class we talk about interpreting questions. We tell instructors that when evaluating the answers of a student, they should never expect more than the question actually asks. Holding a student responsible for content that was not clearly requested in the question is a bad practice. We expect instructors to write questions that clearly define what is expected. Students also learn (often the hard way) that they should never assume a question is looking for more than it asks, because volunteering more information increases their chance of saying something wrong.
    I think that there are a lot of instructors and a lot of students using Quora. It is their natural expectation that a question is looking for what it says it is looking for. Creating a different expectation on Quora creates confusion.
    From a Quora specific viewpoint, how do users find information that they seek on Quora? They, hopefully, first try the search bar. They will type what they are looking for and the Quora search algorithm will present them with a list of items that it judged closely matched the search string.
    If I wanted to know how Elvis died, would I search for "When did Elvis die?" or would I search for "How did Elvis die?" If I wanted to know what the "D" in D-Day means, would I search for "When was D-Day?" or would I search for "What was D-Day?" These are very simple examples, one would hope the search response would show them all, but I wouldn't count on it. Just two days ago I wanted to reference an answer I wrote about two years ago. I typed the following into the search field:
    Robert Frost astronaut radiation exposure
    My answer did not show up, anywhere in the search results. I abandoned the Quora search field and went over to Google and typed the same five words. My answer came up. The words astronaut, radiation, and exposure, all were in the actual question and appeared in my actual answer, and yet Quora didn't find it. Search is not Quora's strength.
    The point I've been meandering about is that good short answers result from questions that are written in a way that they solicit short answers. If Quora doesn't want short answers, rather than attacking users that are providing valid answers, they should focus on improving questions to be more comprehensive. Attacking short answers punishes concise writing and rewards overly verbose writing.
    In Quora's defense, I think they do realize that there are good short answers. It is my understanding (although not verified) that the algorithm does factor in the other contributions of the author. An author with a history of providing quality content is less likely to have a short answer collapsed than an author would a history of providing lesser quality content. I think that is a good practice. But, then how does one treat the answer of a user with little to no history?
    It's a difficult problem to solve. Ideally it could be very easily handled by the upvote/downvote mechanism. If users consistently upvoted the answers that were helpful and downvoted the answers that were unhelpful, this wouldn't even be a discussion. The bad content would quickly disappear and the good content would quickly rise to the top of the page. The problem is that users don't consistently do this. Users often upvote one-line joke answers. I had to unfollow a Top Writer whose content I enjoyed reading, because that Top Writer seemed to spend their day upvoting one-line joke answer after one-line joke answer. That Top Writer was polluting the feeds of their followers with content that did not support Quora's mission.
    Users need to downvote poor content. Don't just scroll past it and roll your eyes. Kill it dead. Dead. Dead. The quality of the content in the feed is a direct result of the curating of the users. If users won't do their part, Quora has to step in with aggressive algorithms.

  2. Peter Baskerville

    I believe that generally a full and thorough answer should be the preferred option and benchmark standard on Quora.
    For example would readers leave satisfied with the response "Yes, I believe people should provide full and thorough answers on Quora and no I don't think a short answer would work better"?
    A couple of points to consider:
    Quora's mission:I don't think a short Wikipedia summary plus link is the primary intention or value-add of the Quora platform.
    Lead with the answer: I try to lead with a summary answer and then provide the details i.e. summarize the answer at the top which appears in the feed and then provide the full and thorough answer for those that want more
    Summary option: As Quora matures, I suspect that the answer summary option will become the short answer to the question anyway
    Comprehensive explanation: Longer answers are usually a demonstration of the respondent's ability and desire to share information. They may have started writing the answer with an intention of a 'brief' response but extended it, out of a desire to provide a comprehensive explanation.This should be encouraged. i.e. I thought I could cover this answer in a few short bullet points, but eventually extended it to 10.
    Quora's point of difference: Full and thorough answers tend to be Quora's point of difference with other Q&A sites that tend to provide answers without any background, context or explanation.
    Opinions require explanations: Opinions require more explanation than just answering factual questions. The real value of Quora is that it is more about the opinions offered by knowledgeable and experienced people than it is about encyclopedic facts. Also there is nothing better for promoting understanding than having an answer statement followed by a example. This benefit naturally creates longer answers.
    Guard against spammers: You can bet that the 'internet gamers' when they discover Quora are going to drop in with short answers and a myriad of back-links. Let's set the bar high from the start with full and thorough answers as the benchmark, so that they find Quora just to hard to get traction and go elsewhere.
    Answer contextualisation: Most questions on Quora are contextualized or multi-dimensional and so additional information needs to be given to fully meet the questioner's queries and cover the question's nuances.
    Well-researched answers: There is a strong sense of community on Quora that creates a desire to provide thoughtful, well-researched and qualitative answers that are difficult to present in just a few sentences. Many Quora respondents will return to their answer a few times to edit and add the additional points that they discovered after the initial post. Quorans understand that answers provide insight into both the question and respondent and want to present both in the best possible light.

    Quora etiquette: Answers with the highest value on Quora generally utilize all the tools and follow community etiquette like Mentioning other respondents, linking to similar answers on Quora, linking to external articles that add further insight, provide photos where appropriate and layout the answer in an easy to read format with spaces, highlights and bullet points. These benefits for the user mean longer, more thoroughly researched answers which in my mind, should remain the answer benchmark on Quora.
    George Kellerman defends the full and thorough answer on Quora in his response to the question Why are long winded answers voted up more on Quora? Does length equal authority?

  3. Marcus Geduld

    Quora's aims require good answers. A good answer to "When was Margaret Thatcher born?" would probably be short. A good answer to "What is the Theory of Relativity?" would probably be long.
    Many questions can be answered well both in brief or at length, depending on the complexity of the views of the person answering.

  4. -> Continue reading
read more close

Related Articles

Popular Articles

More in insulin