Yes but we have to start somewhere.

Which is stronger evidence for humans than "in nowhere".

This is the stupidest glib reply format on par with “citation needed” and “tell me you’re [thing] without telling me you’re [thing]”

Animal models are used in research. Is this news to you? Do you think people don’t know that?

"In mice" is one of those shorthand sayings that scientists/professors themselves coined, it's not as dismissive as you're making it out.

In this context of social media it's very useful as a reminder.

Indeed. My postdoc advisor who was prominent in the AD field used to remind us that "Alzheimer's has been solved in mice hundreds of times".

This headline would potentially be Nobel worthy if in humans.

And not just any mice; specially bred mice.

So it's not even generalizable to all mice, much less humans.

More studies are needed.

Ib my younger days I used to get all excitef about new scientific breakthroughs. After decades I know better and apply the heuristic of disregard whenever I come across the hidden punch-line "In mice".

It really is a very good metric for preventing you to get sucked into hype that will 99.99 percent of the time result in exactly zero real world impact 10 years later.

Except the 0.01% of breakthroughs had tons of real world impact to humans also worked in mice, so what does the metric tell you?