Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015)

site.macleans.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 145 posts

Re: Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015)

#131

Post by lightbyte »

Ntrails wrote: post #126
jopsen wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The slippery slope argument is nonsense. By that logic taxes is a slippery slope to communism. Employment a slippery slope to prostitution :) We should encourage people with rare generic deceases to use fertility treatments that filters out particularly bad genes; or adopt children instead.

> We should encourage people with rare generic deceases to use fertility treatments that filters out particularly bad genes; or adopt children instead. Where does it end? My Aunt had cancer. My father high blood pressure. I think one uncle on my estranged mothers family was quite mad. Am I allowed to procreate? Who draws the line on what is an acceptable level of hereditary risk factors ?

>We should encourage people with rare genetic diseases

That is the line. It ends there.

Re: Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015)

#132

Post by NoGravitas »

anonymous2057 wrote: post #103
mattigames wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah the only end of it is gonna be when people with such diseases stop having children, but just pointing out such an obvious solution generates all kinds of scorn from the people you are talking to, they seem to immediately think of "eugenics" and every other bad word and imagine you running a concentration camp... and not just people voluntarily using birth control to avoid the suffering of their own offspring tha…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woody_Guthrie > Guthrie was married three times and fathered eight children However, Huntington's also robs you of your impulse control, so simply resolving to never have children if you carry (or suspect you carry) the Huntingtin allele may not be enough: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28339399

And it would be very hard to argue that it would be better for Woody Guthrie -- or his children, or grandchildren -- not to have existed. Besides being one of the most influential musicians of the 20th century, two of his children and four of his grandchildren (and so far one of his great-grandchildren) are notable musicians in their own right.

Re: Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015)

#133

Post by coldtea »

sjapkee wrote: post #128
coldtea wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah the only end of it is gonna be when people with such diseases stop having children, but just pointing out such an obvious solution generates all kinds of scorn from the people you are talking to Perhaps because not having existed can be equally as tragic as having existing but having a disease? Lots of people are living today who were born blind, or with this or that genetic tendency. And they live their lives…

>Is the argument that these people better they weren't born at all? This statement is true for all people.

According to whom? Not to the persons themselves if you ask them.

Some will agree to that, most wont. So hardly "true to all people" except if qualified ("according to my philosophy of life and not their actual sentiments on the matter").

Re: Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015)

#134

Post by yowzadave »

mattigames wrote: post #49
entropy_ wrote: post #38

My wife's family has a different disease running through it, though one with very similar outcomes. Huntington's. It's genetic and dominant (so a parent having it means 50/50 for the children). Average age of onset is 38. Symptoms are a mixture of Alzheimer's and Parkinson's (both dementia and motor control issues). Her uncle was diagnosed at 38, her mother at 50. I wasn't around for the first one, but have been ther…

Yeah the only end of it is gonna be when people with such diseases stop having children, but just pointing out such an obvious solution generates all kinds of scorn from the people you are talking to, they seem to immediately think of "eugenics" and every other bad word and imagine you running a concentration camp... and not just people voluntarily using birth control to avoid the suffering of their own offspring tha…

Two thoughts: 1. It's likely that IVF will soon allow people to screen for conditions like Huntington's prior to implantation. 2. Your suggestion makes it sound like a life lived with Huntington's isn't worth living. If you had the choice, would you choose never having been born over 40 healthy years? Only 100 years ago, this was longer than the average lifespan.

Re: Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015)

#135

Post by michaelmrose »

JohnBooty wrote: post #88
michaelmrose wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ill do you one better mandatory genetic testing as a kid illegal to pass on the disease. Penalty is a permanent tax of up to 10% of your income for life. No more disease in one generation.

There are a lot of obvious upsides to this, but the downsides are pretty dire. There are very few human beings (if any) that don't have something lurking in their genetic history. An elevated risk factor for this or that. It's potentially a great way to suppress particular groups of people since there are a lot of heritable diseases that are typically only carried by certain ethnic groups i.e. African Americans and s…

If you have no money to tax or so little you can barely survive you would be immune if you have so much its not painful enough let it scale up and allow no deductions.

Limit the ruling to conditions which can effectively be prevented with genetic testing which substantially burden society, and which society is willing to gratis help you prevent.

If its a 1% chance of transmission you have a 1% chance of a burdensome tax if its a 100% chance you have a 100% chance no need for us to worry personally about the chance of transmission.

Its not really a slippery slope as nobody is being denied the right to procreate it's just that if they know they have a genetic burden and choose to pass it on anyway they will have to help shoulder some of the financial load they put upon society.

It makes perfect sense to help people for free figure out what skeletons they have in their genetic closet. We all have some but some have a 1 in 100,000 chance of being born blind and some have a 50 50 chance of a painful ugly expensive death and should probably adopt.

Re: Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015)

#136

Post by ddingus »

Jaruzel wrote: post #115
ddingus wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will. Have not. Thanks. That gathering would be epic, very high value. I was touched by this. Made me think of things I had set aside. A little dismayed I got negative votes. Was just sharing. Maybe unwise, but like I said, Jo and what he is experiencing... Yeah, a gathering to just chat, share, good, bad, would have high value.

I have also just put a (used) copy in my Amazon basket. @ddingus - ignore the haters. I also shared elsewhere on this thread and fully expect to take a vote hit. Sharing shouldn't be about other people, it's about you . If there's anything this whole thread and linked article should tell us, it's that we are all individual people with our own histories and personalities, and each one of us is just as precious as ever…

Indeed we are. And oh so fragile!

:D

Re: Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015)

#137

Post by AtlasBarfed »

mattigames wrote: post #49
entropy_ wrote: post #38

My wife's family has a different disease running through it, though one with very similar outcomes. Huntington's. It's genetic and dominant (so a parent having it means 50/50 for the children). Average age of onset is 38. Symptoms are a mixture of Alzheimer's and Parkinson's (both dementia and motor control issues). Her uncle was diagnosed at 38, her mother at 50. I wasn't around for the first one, but have been ther…

Yeah the only end of it is gonna be when people with such diseases stop having children, but just pointing out such an obvious solution generates all kinds of scorn from the people you are talking to, they seem to immediately think of "eugenics" and every other bad word and imagine you running a concentration camp... and not just people voluntarily using birth control to avoid the suffering of their own offspring tha…

embryo gene editing or sperm/egg screening could work too.

Re: Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015)

#139

Post by anon104 »

will_brown wrote: post #36
mkrecny wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're only now just waking up to the reality that type-2 diabetes can be reversed w/ carbohydrate restriction, even though the data to support that has been around for decades. I don't think a decade is an unusual latency for the medical institution to lay idle on.

>We're only now just waking up to the reality that type-2 diabetes can be reversed w/ carbohydrate restriction I don’t think this is a new/recent revelation at all (and in fairness, I cut the next part of your quote that acknowledges decades old research). And while not all cases of type 2 can be reversed (most can) but maybe more importantly 100% of cases can be prevented through diet/exercise.

This is 100% wrong. There are cases of monogenic type 2 diabetes (e.g MODY) which has a similar inheritance as the Alzheimer's case in the story. Though rare, it certainly refutes the 100% assertion.

Re: Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015)

#140

Post by ddingus »

Jaruzel wrote: post #115
ddingus wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will. Have not. Thanks. That gathering would be epic, very high value. I was touched by this. Made me think of things I had set aside. A little dismayed I got negative votes. Was just sharing. Maybe unwise, but like I said, Jo and what he is experiencing... Yeah, a gathering to just chat, share, good, bad, would have high value.

I have also just put a (used) copy in my Amazon basket. @ddingus - ignore the haters. I also shared elsewhere on this thread and fully expect to take a vote hit. Sharing shouldn't be about other people, it's about you . If there's anything this whole thread and linked article should tell us, it's that we are all individual people with our own histories and personalities, and each one of us is just as precious as ever…

Really, it's a signal. A simple query: am I alone in this? Have you experienced this?

And it is sent, not requiring a response. More like just that signal, Others May hear, get something from.

Post reply on HN