Slashdot Mirror


Doctors Baffled, Intrigued By Girl Who Doesn't Age

phyrebyrd writes "Brooke Greenberg is the size of an infant, with the mental capacity of a toddler. She turned 16 in January. Brooke hasn't aged in the conventional sense. Dr. Richard Walker of the University of South Florida College of Medicine, in Tampa, says Brooke's body is not developing as a coordinated unit, but as independent parts that are out of sync. She has never been diagnosed with any known genetic syndrome or chromosomal abnormality that would help explain why. Brooke's hair and her nails are the only two things that grow, Howard said. 'She has pajamas and outfits that are 10 or 12 years old,' he said."

80 of 599 comments (clear)

  1. I don't have anything really smart to say by cml4524 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It just struck me reading that... it must really, REALLY suck being the first person to ever have a particular disease.

    1. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by BrightSpark · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh, grow up!

    2. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by need4mospd · · Score: 5, Funny

      I bet they match the Star Wars sheets on your bed too.

    3. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by vertinox · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It just struck me reading that... it must really, REALLY suck being the first person to ever have a particular disease.

      What if we have it backwards?

      What if she is the first person not to have the disease we all have and that she is aging but really really slow?

      So in 100 years she will have the body of an 18 year old?!

      I mean if you think about it, old age is a disease.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    4. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Fallingcow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Meh, she'd still accumulate cellular damage and die of cancer eventually. Heart disease would also still be a possibility.

      She'd probably die at 85 of pancreatic cancer or something, but look good doing it.

    5. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by brian0918 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Right, because the body has no means of correcting cellular damage...

    6. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Wouldn't be so sure of it. From the article:

      In her first six years, Brooke went through a series of medical emergencies from which she recovered, often without explanation. She survived surgery for seven perforated stomach ulcers. She suffered a brain seizure followed by what was diagnosed as a stroke that weeks later left no apparent damage.

      At 4, she fell into a lethargy that caused her to sleep for 14 days. Then, doctors diagnosed a brain tumor, and the Greenbergs bought a casket for her.

      "We were preparing for our child to die," Howard Greenberg said. "We were saying goodbye. And, then, we got a call that there was some change; that Brooke had opened her eyes and she was fine. There was no tumor.

    7. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by marcello_dl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Old age is a feature, not a bug. With less turn-over it would be difficult to life as a whole to adapt to changing environment. It has drawbacks as knowledge lost by the dead individual. Advanced life forms overcome that with culture.

      Earlier simpler life forms probably lacked the aging feature, and were superseded by others who had it.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    8. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      What if we have it backwards?

      What if she is the first person not to have the disease we all have and that she is aging but really really slow?

      It's like I've been saying- you kids are going _way_ too fast!

      Now, get off my lawn!

    9. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by sorak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It just struck me reading that... it must really, REALLY suck being the first person to ever have a particular disease.

      What if we have it backwards?

      What if she is the first person not to have the disease we all have and that she is aging but really really slow?

      So in 100 years she will have the body of an 18 year old?!

      If she currently has the intellect of a four year old, then I am not too optimistic about her ever living a normal life.

    10. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by cabjf · · Score: 5, Informative

      That was in the article I read about her. She has had cancer and other issues that seemingly healed themselves.

    11. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by mdm-adph · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Meh, she'd still accumulate cellular damage and die of cancer eventually. Heart disease would also still be a possibility.

      She'd probably die at 85 of pancreatic cancer or something, but look good doing it.

      I'd take that deal.

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    12. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny


      Except that you might get it named after

      Sadly, they named my condition Gigantus Penis Maximus Syndrome and left my name right out of it.

    13. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by crmarvin42 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I went to HS with a girl who's older brother was the first ever case of a genetic disorder.

      I can't remember their family name but it was named after her older brother, and she had it too. AFAIK, she and her brother are the only 2 documented cases of the disorder. They both had severe scoliosis, a lot of pain, some immune system disorders, and their abdomens were very short when compaired to the rest of their bodies (due to the scoliosis of the spine I assume). Having a disease named after their family was definitely not any sort of consolation either. She graduated first in her class, so it probably won't interfere with the rest of her life. She'll probably just have to explain about it to everyone she meets, and have some medical complications as she gets older and decides whether or not to have kids.

      --
      Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
    14. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by sentientbeing · · Score: 5, Funny

      If she wants to look older she should do what every other 16 year old does:

      Learn to smoke.

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    15. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      So she's Wolverine?

    16. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Really? Lou Gehrig was a doctor? wow, the things you learn on /.

    17. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by smellsofbikes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Another way of looking at aging is that the evolutionary race is to have children, as many as possible, as quickly as possible. Animals who sacrifice their long-term prospects in favor of getting to reproductive age more quickly, are likely to be highly competitive. There are a lot of biologists who claim there isn't any reason humans can't live as long as Galapagos Tortoises (who seem to live 200 or 300 years) but our environment doesn't select for old age. Anything you do after you've had some kids is just noise, as far as evolution is concerned. (Until, as you say, you develop culture and/or spend time caring for relatives' children, which tends to propagate your genes in a more diffuse manner.)

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    18. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Many of those "earlier simpler life forms" are still around and doing fine. Bacteria, most notably.

    19. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One wonders (idly, not in a "hey guys! get me my social engineering rifle" kind of way) how quickly one could raise human lifespans to that level by creating an environment that does...

    20. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Egdiroh · · Score: 3, Informative

      All living things don't age. There are lots of organisms that don't have distinct progeny, and that have in effect been alive for a long long time.

    21. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by ginbot462 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Stop arguing with yourself AC

      --
      Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
    22. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Achoi77 · · Score: 3, Informative

      of course there's an explanation - she's 1/2 cylon.

    23. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Jurily · · Score: 5, Funny

      Gigantic PMS?

    24. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by wrf3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'll take age and treachery against youth and strength any day.

    25. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      what? and stunt her growth?

    26. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by QRDeNameland · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe she already has. As I was repeatedly told in my youth, smoking stunts your growth.

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    27. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by afabbro · · Score: 3, Informative

      If the telomeres in fast-dividing cells are staying long, then she really will live for ever.

      As discussed here back in 2005, there are actually seven significant hurdles to stopping aging. Telomeres are only one of them.

      --
      Advice: on VPS providers
    28. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by TheEmpyrean · · Score: 3, Funny

      She can still be a technical or political blogger or head of the Democratic party and no one would be able to tell the difference. But still true, hardly a 'normal' life.

    29. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by pz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Meh, she'd still accumulate cellular damage and die of cancer eventually. Heart disease would also still be a possibility.

      She'd probably die at 85 of pancreatic cancer or something, but look good doing it.

      I think if you look carefully at the photos you can see signs of aging. She is aging, just not developing. The two are very different. Look, in particular, at the lines descending from her nose to around her mouth. As an infant, these lines are not apparent; as we get older they become more pronounced. For Brooke, these lines seem to be developing at about the same rate as her siblings, becoming apparent in the last two photos especially, suggesting that she is aging like them, but has not developed at all. This, in turn, would indicate a hormonal issue, as posited by another reply in this thread.

      My speculation is that when she turns 30, Brooke will look like a 30 year old in the shape of a baby, except her skin will be somewhat less damaged since she spends most of her time inside.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    30. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by smellsofbikes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If I had a social engineering rifle, I'd be going through a lot of ammo...
      But I think we *have* created an environment that does, by building such intricate communities and engaging so heavily in health care and stuff. There are very, very, very few animals that have longer average lifespans than humans. (Sharks, tortoises, and possibly some parrots, are the only ones that come to mind, and I *believe* those are mostly because those are animals that have little predation in their natural environments, so they have less need to reproduce as quickly as possible.)
      One thing about evolution that isn't well-understood by the world at large, is that it has to work with what it currently has. Humans aren't likely to develop the ability to see electric fields any time soon, because there's no existing framework. We have trillions of generations of ancestors focussed on reproducing quickly because they lived in environments where that was favored. It's difficult to find a path that diverges from such a strong existing trend: there's very little to work with.
      Plus, there are a number of different aging mechanisms. It's a weakest-link-of-the-chain sort of situation. The mechanisms tend to all equilibrate at one general area, as a result of neutral genetic drift (if one aging mechanism tends to kill people at 90 and another at 140, the one at 140 has nothing pushing it to stay there so it can drift down to 90 without affecting anything; over time it will probably tend to do this. Repeat with a half-dozen mechanisms that seem to be indicated in aging.)

      Which is all a very long way of saying that I'm guessing we're in an ecological niche that does select for longer lifespans, and we're seeing the results of it, but our genes don't give evolution a lot of material to work with so we might not get much more than we currently have.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    31. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by nasor · · Score: 5, Informative

      The telomeres are normal, and match up with her actual chronological age.

    32. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes. What family and doctors have believed to be just baby talk is in fact a Canadian accent with a liberal sprinkling of 'bub's.

    33. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Rakishi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Cancer is by definition a failure of the body to deal with genetic damage. The reason you're not already dead of cancer is because the body has mechanisms for dealing with such damage (which happens all the time). The reason people die of cancer is because at some point a specific set of genetic damage happens that bypasses those safety mechanisms. It's a question of when rather than if.

    34. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by arodland · · Score: 4, Informative

      Lou Gehrig and the eponymous legionnaires are the rare exception.

      Perhaps you've heard of Alois Alzheimer, Hans Asperger, Thomas Hodgkin, James Parkinson, or Georges Tourette. Then again, probably not. But you've most likely heard of Alzheimer's Disease, Asperger Syndrome, Hodgkin Disease (or at least non-Hodgkin Lymphoma), Parkinson's Disease, and Tourette Syndrome.

    35. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by Egdiroh · · Score: 3, Informative

      I wasn't explicitly talking about colonies, I was talking about things, such as single celled organisms many of which don't for colonies, that divide through division, such that neither of the resulting genetically identical resulting organisms can be distinguished as the parent. (as opposed to things that reproduce with genetically identical off spring, but a clear parent and child relationship) I guess what I am saying is that when an amoeba divides, you don't say that the amoeba died and had two off spring, you say that the amoeba divided, and as such both are still that original amoeba unless maybe one of them also underwent some genetic change. Single celled organisms are the easy example, but there are some more complicated ones.

    36. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by smellsofbikes · · Score: 3, Interesting
      A friend of mine claims that it's because of radiation. Very high elevations mean much more solar radiation. His claim is that radiation levels were hundreds of times higher 50 million years ago when animals were evolving defenses to deal with parasites and infection, and that we're not dealing so well with the reduced levels as we move down the half-lives of various radionuclides. He does have a PhD in nuclear physics, for what that's worth.

      I personally think it's low humidity, lower oxygen pressure (reducing oxidative damage) and in part selection: people who are sickly don't stay in high-altitude areas because they generally have less specialist medical care. I grew up in one of those little mountain towns in Colorado and older people said "it's hard to breathe: I'm moving to Florida" where they died.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    37. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by 200_success · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, she's Maggie Simpson.

    38. Re:I don't have anything really smart to say by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Informative

      What if she is the first person not to have the disease we all have and that she is aging but really really slow?

      That is an interesting thought. There's actually some molecular evidence that aging, on a cellular level, is a result of a specific mechanism, not just a general and inevitable accumulation of damage.

      This paper is... well one I haven't actually read. But I did see a seminar by the author. He suggested that accumulation of a specific protein fragment was causing aging. It was found in one of those premature aging diseases (Hutchinson-Gilford progeria specifically) with increased abundance, but they do find it accumulates as people get older, changing some cell mechanisms. The theory was that the full length protein, which has important normal functions, was cut in a specific way with low frequency, but over time the fragments build up and interfere with different processes, the effects of which seem to mimic aging.

      Of course, it's not definitive that this is how you age, and there are several other mechanisms which might be causing aging in specific ways, but the implications of the theories are interesting: it might be possible to block those pathways to stop aging.

      Unfortunately for this specific girl, I don't see anything to indicate she's not aging, I think it's probably she's just not actually growing. Growing and aging do appear independant, as progeria patients appear to age more rapidly but don't grow rapidly. It is possible that whatever is keeping her from growing will also prevent her from aging, but I don't see any reason to expect that.

  2. The Fountain of Youth. by MrCrassic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    She must've drank from it by mistake. This is why Moms should be attentive of their children!

    Seriously, age is a really interesting field to me, especially cognitive age. I really like how there are stages in raising a child that, if followed honestly, usually lead to children becoming very capable, healthy adults. What's even more interesting is what happens to a child should the development of any of those stages be tampered with.

  3. Surgeon General's warning by Blixinator · · Score: 5, Funny

    GOVERNMENT WARNING: (1) According to the Surgeon general, women should not drink from the fountain of youth during pregnancy because of the risk of birth defects.

    --
    "The Y chromosome is genetic. The odds are very good that if you are male then your father was too." -Internet Commenter
  4. She looks retarded ... by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And it appears that, at 16, she still has the brains and skill set of an infant ... this is going to sound cruel, but without any more details, it sounds like a good argument for post-birth abortion. I mean, what's the point? At least "The Strange Case of Benjamin Button" had SOME growth of character.

    1. Re:She looks retarded ... by stuntpope · · Score: 5, Informative

      Regardless of age, there are laws against sex with people with diminished mental capacity, who cannot give consent.

    2. Re:She looks retarded ... by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I got the sense that she's more like the family pet than a toy ... but yes, it's sad.

      And for all those who downmodded this sort of discussion, it shows more concern with form over function, a lack of understanding about what really makes us human. and/or a knee-jerk reaction to anything that doesn't conform to your initial perception of "don't harm the cute baby." It's not a "cute baby" - it's a grotesque parody of a human, with no potential, no real personality (the brain has not changed since infanthood - she can't talk, and reacts the same as an infant to outside stimuli).

      About the only positive thing to say at this point is that baby diapers are cheaper than Depends.

      Her bones are aging at an almost normal rate, so there's no question of her living to be centuries old, and "just developing slower". Maybe they can transplant the genes into "Chicken Little".

  5. Wow...great stuff by scuba_steve_1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wow...that is absolutely amazing...and she is so fortunate to have a family that sees the situation so positively...and who supports related research by the scientific community to see if there is a potential broader benefit here. Frankly, it must be tough for them at times, but I am sure that my wife would *love* it if our little girl never grew up. Thank goodness her sisters are supportive, because they will most likely need to take care of her in the future after her parents advance in age. Great stuff.

  6. Failure to age or failure to grow? by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 5, Informative

    Reaching adulthood and then preserving the body of a 20-year-old forever is one thing. This is quite something else.

    It is not so much failure to age, as failure to grow/mature. It remains to be seen whether her abnormality will grant longer life span in practice.

  7. Re:She seems to grow by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article says that her brain has hardly changed at all - it's still an infant's brain. If you read the article, you'll see that the parents and those around her who claim to see changes or improvements in her ability to communicate are projecting their wishes, same as people do with their pets - except that pets CAN grow and learn. Brooke can't.

    Imagine if your brain suddenly never changes. You can never learn a new thing, remember anything from even 5 minutes ago, etc. Before the movie "50 First Dates", there was a sci-fi short story that posited this, with horrifying consequences. It would be the worse than having Alzheimers.

  8. Re:Brooke is a deviation by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dude. Lay off the weed.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  9. Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Aging is the result of accumulated bio-chemical damage and degeneration. While failure to grow does have some beneficial effect from on biological aging--e.g. both calorie restriction and growth-hormone deficiency appear to enhance lifespan, at least in mice--it is quite likely that this girl's condition was simply misreported.

  10. Similar story by hansamurai · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Years ago I read about this girl who was 19 and had never entered puberty (she had developed normally otherwise). Turns out there was a tumor blocking her pituitary gland. I'm sure they've done hundreds of tests so it can't be something like that but I was just reminded of that story.

  11. Re:Be Careful what you wish for! by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Mental maturity also has implications in the growth and development of the brain, neural pathways being formed, other changes. If those things never happen, BAM, infant forever.

    Very interesting. I'd wager its a bunch of hormone triggers never triggering, which is usually the root cause of age/size related stuff. I knew a kid when I was younger who lacked certain hormones in the correct proportions, so while he was my age mentally, and in actual years, he was about 5 years behind me in physical development, and had to take hormone shots.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  12. Re:Be Careful what you wish for! by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Informative

    I wonder what the cause of diminished mental capacity might be?

          While I am not aware of the particulars of this case, as a doctor I can state that myelinization of nerve cells inside the brain is what is believed to contribute to increased cognitive ability. Babies are born with roughly the number of neurons (nerve cell) they will have for the rest of their lives, however these neurons are not fully coated in myelin. Myelin increases the efficiency and conductivity of a neuron, and is synthesized by cells surrounding the neuron. However this production takes time - a few years in the case of neurons outside the brain - which explains why babies are also clumsy. Myelinization of the brain itself takes roughly 20 years.

          I suspect that this patient isn't producing myelin, among other things, and therefore will never reach her cognitive potential.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  13. Re:I bet it's lupus.. by darkstar949 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Except for the one time where it was lupus.

  14. High school girls by RobVB · · Score: 3, Funny

    High school girls stay the same age as well. Giggity giggity.

    --
    I'd rather you rationally disagree than irrationally agree.
  15. the answer is in the abc article by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Doctors recommended growth hormone therapy early in Brooke's life, but the treatment produced no results.

    Howard Greenberg recalled the follow-up visit to the endocrinologist. "We took her back in six months, and the doctor looked at us and said, 'Why didn't you give Brooke the growth hormones?' And I said, 'We gave Brooke the growth hormones. We gave her everything you told us to do.' And Brooke didn't put on a pound, an ounce; she didn't grow an inch."

    not that i know a damn thing about endocrinology, but i would speculate that this failed therapy suggest that, as we all have receptors for various hormones, her body has no such receptors for HGH. if someone is born genetically male, but has no male secondary characteristics, then either:
    1. his body produces no testosterone,
    2. his body produces testosterone, but his body doesn't react to it

    i would say that this girl, uh, young woman, has an incredibly rare, unique mutation: insensitivity to human growth hormone. it would explain all of her symptoms

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:the answer is in the abc article by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Funny

      i would say that this girl, uh, young woman, has an incredibly rare, unique mutation: insensitivity to human growth hormone. it would explain all of her symptoms

      Was it Wilson's story about his tennis elbow that jarred you to that conclusion?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    2. Re:the answer is in the abc article by nasor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Insensitivity to HGH isn't consistent with the symptoms this girl displays. For one thing, the brain's development shouldn't be affected by any HGH-related problems. People who are HGH-insensitive or HGH-deficient have normal brains in abnormally small bodies. This girl's brain, however, seems to be that of a 1.5 year old. It appears that there is some sort of "higher level" problem that is causing almost all development to proceed slowly, even though her endocrine system is normal.

  16. Re:Brooke is a deviation by taucross · · Score: 5, Funny

    Man, I've been through so many drugs I've almost become a Christian.

    --
    "In the absence of the ability to establish the attribute of truth they tried to establish the noble attributes."
  17. Re:Be Careful what you wish for! by idontgno · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well, now, there are two aspects to this: brain growth, and learning.

    A human's brain is pretty close to adult size and mass by the age of 5. You can say that this is the scaffold on which the remaining 5% of mass growth is built on. But more importantly, the cells (both in that initial 95% and subsequent 5%) are growing connections to each other, and these connections seem to be based on learning. White matter also is slowly replaced to a small degree with gray matter; white matter is "wiring" between active cells of gray matter "processors".

    This may explain, to some extent, why the (physiologically very) young lady in TFA is functioning intellectually like a toddler: her uneven growth affects the basic brain development you'd expect in early childhood (the 95% mass mentioned earlier), so the brain lacks structural complexity to grow "learning connections". I suppose restricted brain growth is fortunate, in a sense; if her cranium hasn't grown, age-appropriate brain growth would be bad.

    IANADoctor. This is just how the described phenomena match up in my mind with the little childhood development (psychology/anatomy) studies and basic physiology I've learned here and there. YMMV.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  18. Re:Brooke is a deviation by taucross · · Score: 5, Funny

    No, soldiers die because they bleed too much.

    --
    "In the absence of the ability to establish the attribute of truth they tried to establish the noble attributes."
  19. No, she is aging too by aepervius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some of her body part , like bone structure, are 10 years old. Thus it sounds doubtful she will reach the multi-centenarian age you cited. They tried to communicate with her , tried to teach her speaking but it failed. Anyway there is a rearrangement of the pharynx/larynx at the venerable age of 1/2 years old which is needed to be able to physically speak. Without it you can't. Maybe a doctor/biologist can chime in.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  20. Hmm by LizardKing · · Score: 5, Funny

    She has pajamas and outfits that are 10 or 12 years old,' he said.

    That's nothing, I work in an office with some programmers who haven't changed their outfits in over twenty years.

    1. Re:Hmm by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wide lapels and pocket protectors are timeless and durable classics.

  21. Re:Brooke is a deviation by smallfries · · Score: 5, Funny

    Mr. Taucross, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

    --
    Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
  22. HGH Receptors by SpottedKuh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Doctors recommended growth hormone therapy early in Brooke's life, but the treatment produced no results. Howard Greenberg recalled the follow-up visit to the endocrinologist. "We took her back in six months, and the doctor looked at us and said, 'Why didn't you give Brooke the growth hormones?' And I said, 'We gave Brooke the growth hormones. We gave her everything you told us to do.' And Brooke didn't put on a pound, an ounce; she didn't grow an inch."

    So clearly an HGH deficiency isn't the (only) issue, it's that her HGH receptors don't respond to the hormone. But, to the best of my knowledge, that wouldn't account for a lack of mental development. This sounds like a combination of many factors coming together.

    I'll have to take a look to see if there's anything written from a medical perspective (e.g., a journal paper) on this case. It could be interesting to hear what the doctors have to say, as opposed to what ABC News reports the poor mother has to say (projecting her wishes onto her daughter: thinking she's a rebellious teenager when really she's just an infant).

  23. Another case by polymeris · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is this girl/woman in Brazil, Maria Aldenete, who has similar syntoms. I couldn't find any info in English on her... She's 30 years old or so.

  24. Relativity by trevdak · · Score: 5, Funny

    Has anyone considered that she might just be moving very close to the speed of light?

  25. Re:She seems to grow by GauteL · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Before the movie "50 First Dates", there was a sci-fi short story that posited this, with horrifying consequences"

    It must suck that your example of this is a crappy rom-com with Adam Sandler rather than a brilliant film like Memento.

  26. Re:She seems to grow by camperdave · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah. In several hundred years she'll hit puberty. Then within a few weeks she'll develop blue-green lesions that will cover her body. She'll turn grup, meaning she'll become violent and full of rage, and then die. I saw it on TV.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  27. I've seen this before, sorta... by Yert · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have an aunt who was in her third trimester when she was in a car accident, and Dolly was born soon after with no apparent damage... except she never grew up. Dolly passed away a few years ago, at the age of 33, and weighed about 80 pounds - she did grow "up", but much slower than normal - she was 20 before she weighed 40 pounds, and never spoke a single intelligible word. She never matured mentally beyond around 6 months, and was always in a crib at all the family gatherings. Thankfully, I never had to change her diaper.

    There are some differences, as Dolly did seem to physically mature, just very slowly - but the doctors didn't seem to think it was that phenomenal, just brain damage from the accident. She did have the same odd development that Megan's eyes have - the wandering eye, so to speak. (As opposed to my wandering eye, which is entirely a different sort of affliction.) :)

    --
    Truck driver, plumber, Linux systems engineer.
  28. Mental development... by hellfire · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Her lack of mental development could be directly related to her lack of physical development, in that her brain is not physically developing to be able to learn and process information like everyone else's does. I'm by no means a doctor but I thought I'd throw that out there as a reasonable hypothesis.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

  29. babies are very cute by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Funny

    perhaps a large conglomerate could claim intellectual property on this mutation, and mass produce cute little baby pets that never grow up and become surly teenagers. perhaps you could even clone yourself, and have a little pet baby you to waddle around in diapers and make cute cooing noises. when the novelty wears off and they become a hassle, just leave them by the side of the road, like people always do with golden retriever puppies at the end of the summer and such*

    *this post brought to you in an attempt to offend every shred of ethics you have

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  30. OK, you 'for the children' obsessives... by argStyopa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In a couple of years, when she turns 18, would nudes of her be child porn? Eh?

    (listens for the sounds of heads exploding)

    --
    -Styopa
  31. Not quite wolverine by TheLink · · Score: 4, Interesting

    > So she's Wolverine?

    But maybe with her "normal" growth is considered damage and thus "fixed".

    Just like the brain tumour that appeared and vanished, any parts that try to go "next stage" get repaired.

    --
  32. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  33. Re:Why won't this story die? by Effexor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The 'child' is a primordial dwarf. Her symptoms fit to the last detail.

    This story has done time on Digg and Fark already, probably several other sites as well, and it seems everywhere large numbers of non-doctors can use Google to compare her symptoms to a RARE but known medical condition. The poor kid's doctors either don't know how to research or are otherwise incompetent.

    Or maybe, just a wild thought here, maybe they have a slightly better insight into her symptoms, having actually examined her and seen her test results, and they have already ruled that out for reasons which your cursory diagnosis, based on reading an ABCnews article and several minutes of medical training, missed.

    --

    As the air to a bird or the sea to a fish, so is contempt to the contemptible -W.B.

  34. it's NOT lupus by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Funny

    (scowl... limp... vicodin chomp)

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  35. Re:I bet it's lupus.. by darkstar949 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Episode Eight, season four the solution ended up being Lupus.

  36. Re:Check out TFA by coinreturn · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why isn't there an "insensitive" mod point?

    Would that be +1 or -1 ?