Couple pay >$800k for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died.
51–60 of 248 posts
Re: Couple pay >$800k for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died.
#52> When Mei was 4, one of her kindergarten teachers pulled Linda aside: Mei didn’t draw or write as well as the other kids and her language skills weren’t developing normally. Her mother might want to get her evaluated, the teacher said. In March 2023, Mei was diagnosed with global developmental delay, a broad label with many causes. Specialists explained that some of Mei’s behaviors—the funny sounds she liked to make…
It says so much about how our society treats the neurodivergent that it's considered a non-extreme opinion that a dead child is preferable to an autistic one.
Re: Couple pay >$800k for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died.
#53An article about the complicated issue that is a child with a non-lethal developmental disorder getting a treatment that ends with the tragedy of the headline. The article might be sensationalizing the situation, but it makes the doctor out like a monster and as the facts read I can't say I disagree. That the treatment was inconclusive in the animal studies isn't particularly shocking. The brain is one of the more co…
Re: Couple pay >$800k for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died.
#54> When Mei was 4, one of her kindergarten teachers pulled Linda aside: Mei didn’t draw or write as well as the other kids and her language skills weren’t developing normally. Her mother might want to get her evaluated, the teacher said. In March 2023, Mei was diagnosed with global developmental delay, a broad label with many causes. Specialists explained that some of Mei’s behaviors—the funny sounds she liked to make…
It says so much about how our society treats the neurodivergent that it's considered a non-extreme opinion that a dead child is preferable to an autistic one.
Re: Couple pay >$800k for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died.
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not what happened here. The team was too ambitious and not careful enough but they were not trying to kill the child. I just don't think there is any reason to put that additional context into what happened here.
I think what OP was trying to ask was why would a parent be willing to put their child at lethal risk, using an experimental treatment, for a condition that itself is not lethal? I don't have a kid with autism or a learning disability so I don't know how I'd handle it, but if I did, I'd probably choose to live with it and help the child make the best of it. I would not be reaching for someone's research project.
Wisdom teeth removal under general anesthesia is around 1 in 100,000.
It doesn’t sound so crazy if the risks were presented as “only 10x as risky as wisdom teeth extraction”.
Re: Couple pay >$800k for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died.
#56An article about the complicated issue that is a child with a non-lethal developmental disorder getting a treatment that ends with the tragedy of the headline. The article might be sensationalizing the situation, but it makes the doctor out like a monster and as the facts read I can't say I disagree. That the treatment was inconclusive in the animal studies isn't particularly shocking. The brain is one of the more co…
I didn't read it as making the doctor a monster. What I saw in the story is an example of how the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
* Took hundreds of thousands of dollars under the table to develop the treatment
* Neglected to take steps that would determine whether the treatment was safe to use on humans
* Didn't inform the family that the treatment could possibly kill their daughter
* After the treatment did kill their daughter, he published the study anyway except stripped of any mention of the failed human trial and of any negative side effects caused by the immune system reacting to the virus
The most generous interpretation of this is that Qiu and his team were racing to be the first to cure a mental disorder using gene editing and neglected to take the necessary safety precautions, but that still makes him a horrible person because it resulted in the unnecessary death of a child just because he was hoping to be first. I'm glad the parents decided to go public about this (especially since they must feel devastated about their daughter's death) if it means he won't get to try the same risky procedure on other children.
Re: Couple pay >$800k for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died.
#57questions of a layman - couldn't they initially do a small infusion of the [may be even weakened version of that] viruses to check for the immune reaction? May be such infusion would really serve as a vaccine prepping the immune system for the main infusion later? - though immune system killing the viruses may be nullifying the treatment - then may be when doing such therapy the patient needs to be [somewhat] immunosuppressed similar to transplant situations?
Re: Couple pay >$800k for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died.
#58Re: Couple pay >$800k for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died.
#59> When Mei was 4, one of her kindergarten teachers pulled Linda aside: Mei didn’t draw or write as well as the other kids and her language skills weren’t developing normally. Her mother might want to get her evaluated, the teacher said. In March 2023, Mei was diagnosed with global developmental delay, a broad label with many causes. Specialists explained that some of Mei’s behaviors—the funny sounds she liked to make…
It says so much about how our society treats the neurodivergent that it's considered a non-extreme opinion that a dead child is preferable to an autistic one.