FDA approves a CRISPR-based medicine for treatment of sickle cell disease

Post by lotsofpulp » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 9:06 PM UTC

ajross wrote: post #117

lotsofpulp wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the collective probability of rare, but expensive health issues is basically 100%, I would describe it less as insurance and more as wealth redistribution. Hence the (typical) requirement to purchase insurance and lack of ability to price it based on risk. Of course, insurance and taxation can be viewed as similar things anyway, but it is different from things like term life insurance or motor vehicle insurance…

> the collective probability of rare, but expensive health issues is basically 100% Not really, no. Most people will die of something expensive, but not $2M expensive. A quick google says that per-capita lifetime health care expediture is ~$300k.

Post by eszed » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 9:11 PM UTC

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #119

lostlogin wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which is why this gene has not been bred out of the population over time. Is that why? Or is it just the people with it aren’t sick enough to die before procreating?

It's a recessive/heterozygous thing. If you get the gene from neither parent, you're vulnerable to malaria. If you get the gene from either parent, you're immune to malaria and don't get sickle cell. If you get the gene from both parents, you get sickle cell. A hypothetical future person who's going to be born in an area with a lot of malaria would really want exactly one parent with sickle cell and one parent lackin…

Post by interroboink » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 9:14 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #95

lostlogin wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which is why this gene has not been bred out of the population over time. Is that why? Or is it just the people with it aren’t sick enough to die before procreating?

Without access to modern hospital treatments it is fairly normal to die very young from sickle cell disease - it causes 100k+ deaths a year. An in-law of an ex has it, and regularly spends days in hospital during crises. Without access to a high quality hospital he'd have been dead a long time ago. The average life expectancy for someone with sickle-cell disease in developed countries is 40-60 years, and serious cris…

      R  | r
    +----+----+
  R | RR | Rr |
  --+---------+
  r | Rr | rr |
    +---------+

Post by ponector » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 9:21 PM UTC

monero-xmr wrote: post #75

ponector wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree that it is nothing. 2 millions, if applied properly, could do good for many people. Take ten children from poverty, give ten children chance to get a good education, etc. There is always a some kind of moral dilemma: should you spent millions to try to extend extremely I'll person or help with that money to some healthy poor children?

This is the effective altruism / utilitarianism insanity. If we only thought about "what the best use of $2 million is" we would still be living in huts.

Post by ericmay » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 9:24 PM UTC

ponector wrote: post #37

ericmay wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is Day 1 so the price and how well it works today is almost certainly the worst it will ever be. Insurance will likely cover the cost. It's a very bad, painful, and outright deadly genetic mutation and $2.2 million is practically nothing compared to doubling someone's lifespan or giving them an extra 10 years. More info I found relevant regarding cost for typical treatment and out of pocket estimated costs: http…

I don't agree that it is nothing. 2 millions, if applied properly, could do good for many people. Take ten children from poverty, give ten children chance to get a good education, etc. There is always a some kind of moral dilemma: should you spent millions to try to extend extremely I'll person or help with that money to some healthy poor children?