Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientists Silence Extra Chromosome In Down Syndrome Cells

Posted by samzenpus on from the possible-cure dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Scientists have silenced the extra copy of a chromosome that causes Down syndrome in laboratory stem cells, offering the first evidence that it may be possible to correct the genes responsible for the disorder. The discovery provides the first evidence that the underlying genetic defect responsible for Down syndrome can be suppressed in cells in culture."

11 of 230 comments (clear)

  1. Practicality? by APE992 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Assuming we could silence the extra chromosome in an entire human being what sort of results would we see? I'm curious to see the changes that would occur over weeks if not years. Could it reverse the neurological issues?

    1. Re:Practicality? by Richard+Dick+Head · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, if you'll put on your cyncial hat, the in-utero treatment you wish for already exists:

      plannedparenthood.com

      Some of these treatments coming out really make me worry for the future. Random mutations make their way in a consistent fashion into the human gene pool, and stuff like this prevents them from being filtered out. As cool as this would be *now*, given enough generations these mutations will disburse (ever wonder why so many people have blue eyes?) and eventually the entire human race becomes diseased and enslaved to these treatments.

      I mean, come on...if you subsidize something, you get more of it. if it isn't strong and healthy, throw it out and pump out a new one. Its not like we're suffering a worldwide shortage of semen at the moment!

      And before I hear one more sob story about how great "X" family member was and how they had the disease, let me remind you that our tax dollars are subsidizing the situation (many many times more than a regular child for special needs care)...yes, people feel the warm fuzzies when they encounter a less capable people who deals with their situation in a positive fashion, but that doesn't make it right, or proper.

      I don't know, am I just too cynical? I think at a certain point you're gonna get a test result back and either you do the right thing, or you elect to have a human pet that is a drain on society (but nice for you). I think that stinks. Look around, we're already busting at the seams because there is less and less meaningful work for someone who falls below a certain point on the bell curve, and its getting worse as time goes on.

      --
      The real path to male liberation
    2. Re:Practicality? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, if you'll put on your cyncial hat, the in-utero treatment you wish for already exists:
      plannedparenthood.com

      In America, about 90% of diagnosed DS fetuses are aborted. That is an interesting percentage, since polls indicate that more that 20% of Americans think abortion should be illegal under all circumstances. At least half of those people are apparently hypocrites, willing to make an exception for their own convenience.

      Citations:
      http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_syndrome#Abortion_rates

    3. Re:Practicality? by Zembar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's not necessarily true. What if those 20% were all men, for instance?

    4. Re:Practicality? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's not necessarily true. What if those 20% were all men, for instance?

      Polls have found that gender makes little difference in support/opposition to abortion. Support is only slightly stronger among women, and even then, only among educated women. If you had bothered to read the citations provided, you would already know this.

      It is also unlikely that most decisions to abort a DS fetus are made unilaterally by only the mother.

  2. The Ethical Implications are Staggering by zbobet2012 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Oh god, the ethics debates on this one will be fantastic. What if we can reverse Downs Syndrome in full grown adults. By modern legal definitions those with it are not competent, but could we ethically force them to take the "cure" if they don't want to? What if a mother does not want to have it "fixed" in her unborn child, is she a competent parent?

    1. Re:The Ethical Implications are Staggering by vikingpower · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't know if you can emit such a blanket statement as "...by modern legal definitions those with it are not competent..." There is debate about this, and at least here in Europe, those with it are more and more living their own lives. The 17-year old daughter of a colleague has it - and she is not only learning the trade of a baker: she is preparing to live alone, in an apartment in the middle of the city. She already manages her own money and her own relationship with various administrative bodies. With her father's support, but still - this would have been unthinkable even ten years ago.

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    2. Re:The Ethical Implications are Staggering by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not a geneticists.

      Of all the adults out there with Downs Syndrome, how many of them go on to get married and have children? Of those that have children, what is the likelihood of this abnormality being passed down the family tree? I'm not disputing their choice to procreate. I am however concerned that suppressing the extra chromosome will lead to healthy adults (which is very good), but also have normal procreating life and thus pass it down to the next generation (which is bad). Do we to to encourage adding severe genetic abnormalities to future generations if all were doing is suppressing them rather then removing/correcting said genes? For the sake of the human race, this requires serious consideration.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
  3. Actually.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It could also potentially help curb many of the plaque related neural issues (I think it was mentioned on slashdot years ago that Down syndrome had plaque buildup similiar to alzheimers.) Assuming this chromosome is in part responsible for that plaque buildup, it might allow more Down syndrome sufferers to continue functioning at their current level rather than degrading further in the future.

    Regardless, anything that moves forward the treatment of disease in the world is good research.

  4. Re:Even if it does... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And if fixing the laptop would cost more than buying a new one, throwing it in the trash is still the more sensible approach.

  5. Re:Even if it does... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    (different AC here)
    I get the impression that GP has never gone through the process of trying to conceive, or the high emotions and huge decisions of pregnancy. This isn't 3D printing we're talking about. For many people it's not as simple as "scrap this one and start over." A couple's fertility is unpredictable, riddled with limitations and risks, and it's a lucky minority that conceives first time, every time.

    Imagine you're a couple trying to conceive. You thought you'd get pregnant easily, just when it fitted conveniently into your life schedule (everyone thinks that). You weren't young when you started, but not too old either - late twenties is more the norm than the exception these days. Anyway, it took longer than you thought. By now you've been trying to conceive for years. Maybe you've had a miscarriage or two. Doctors cant see what the problem is, as is often the case with reproductive medicine: Everything looks fine down there, but it just ain't happening. IVF is prohibitively expensive, and still offers no guarantees. At first your failure to conceive was an irritation, a disappointment. Now it's more than that. Time is ticking on and your body is screaming at you to have a baby nownownow, and there are reminders everywhere of the one thing you want but apparently can't have. It's starting to affect your happiness, your marriage, maybe even your mental health. This is not science fiction, this is a situation a lot of people find themselves in nowadays in western society.

    Finally, as you approach your mid-thirties you get pregnant. Your are ecstatic, delighted, happier than you've ever been. Then, the tests show Downs.

    If you abort and try again, it could take another 5 years to get pregnant again, if at all. Do you really want to be conceiving at 38 or 39, when the chances of Downs or some other, even more severe complication, will be even higher? Do you really want to be 40 and pregnant? Do you really want to be nudging 60 when your kid hits adolescence? What if you can't conceive ever again? What if this is your only chance? "Scrap it and try again" or "abort and adopt" may be viable options, but they do not by any means represent an obvious or easy choice for someone in that position.

    I'm not entirely opposed to abortion. I think it's a very personal choice, and a morally difficult issue. I don't believe a microscopic zygote is as much a human being as an adult or a newborn or a 25-week foetus, but I do realise that any hard line drawn between "cluster of cells" and "person" will be arbitrary and ultimately unsatisfactory.

    The point I'm drifting away from here is that even in cases where it is unwanted, a pregnancy is a very precious and special thing, and should not be discarded lightly. In cases where it is wanted, it is even harder to "scrap it and start over."