Slashdot Mirror


In First, Doctors Treat Rare Genetic Disorder With an Injection In Utero (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Three babies with a rare genetic disorder have been spared the worst effects of their condition thanks to an experimental injection they received in utero, researchers report this week in The New England Journal of Medicine. The success marks the first time a genetic disorder has been partially reversed by such a treatment prior to birth. The in utero injections treated a rare, recessive genetic condition called X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (XLHED), which affects the development of skin, hair, nails, and teeth. People with the disorder have sparse body and head hair, dry eyes, mouths, and airways, and few teeth, which are usually pointy. But most dangerously, the condition also disrupts development of sweat glands throughout the body. People with XLHED have fewer sweat glands and/or poorly functioning ones. This leaves individuals vulnerable to high fevers and over-heating (hyperthermia), which can be life-threatening and lead to medical complications.

For the new experimental treatment, the researchers realized that it all came down to timing. Humans develop sweat glands much earlier in their development, generally between the 20th and 30th week of pregnancy. To prevent XLHED from wreaking havoc, the researchers needed to deliver the protein prior to birth. After testing the idea for safety and efficacy in mice and monkeys, doctors in Germany got a compassionate-use approval to try it in a 38-year-old pregnant woman. She had a family history of XLHED, a young son with the condition, and was found to be carrying twin boys with it, too. [...] The researchers will track the babies' development to see if the effects are permanent, but data from animals suggests that they will be.

52 comments

  1. GMO Humans by LordAba · · Score: 1

    I'm a vegan cannibal, so I'm not sure how to feel about this. Hopefully it goes well!

    1. Re:GMO Humans by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      I'm a vegan cannibal, so I'm not sure how to feel about this.

      Let me congratulate you. If more vegans were eaten by cannibals, there would be one less sojourns of annoyance in the world.

  2. Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yay for doctors being able to spare child #2 and #3 from the worst effects of this horrible condition (they'll still have it).

    But one must ask: wouldn't it have been more considerate of the parents to not conceive these children? One might consider tubal ligation (especially since the mother has the condition, we didn't hear about the father), vasectomy, an IUD, or any of the many safe and effective methods of birth control.

    You know who I am. Posting anonymously to avoid nastiness.

    1. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know who I am. Posting anonymously to avoid nastiness.

      Jon Katz?

    2. Re:Sigh by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      the mother has the condition, we didn't hear about the father

      It is a recessive trait. You only get the disease if both parents carry the gene.

      On-line dating sites should have checkboxes for these recessive genes, so people don't inadvertently pair up.

    3. Re:Sigh by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      On-line dating sites should have checkboxes for these recessive genes, so people don't inadvertently pair up.

      Why? If both parents carry the recessive, then there is one chance in four that the kid will have the gene reinforced. Not generally worth the bother of worrying about...

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:Sigh by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      I'll treat this as a serious question worth answering.

      They may not have known, at the time of conception, that child #1 had the condition. I have some friends who conceived their second child shortly before realizing child #1 was severely autistic. They only tested the fetus after child #1 was diagnosed.

    5. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      From http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/basics/patterns/

      people observed dominant and recessive inheritance patterns before anyone knew anything about DNA and genes, or how genes code for proteins that specify traits.

      The critical point to understand is that there is no universal mechanism by which dominant and recessive alleles act. Dominant alleles do not physically "dominate" or "repress" recessive alleles. Whether an allele is dominant or recessive depends on the particulars of the proteins they code for.

    6. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be sure to explain this reasoning to the child when he is old enough to ask and understand.

    7. Re:Sigh by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      ay for doctors being able to spare child #2 and #3 from the worst effects of this horrible condition (they'll still have it).

      But one must ask: wouldn't it have been more considerate of the parents to not conceive these children? One might consider tubal ligation (especially since the mother has the condition, we didn't hear about the father), vasectomy, an IUD, or any of the many safe and effective methods of birth control.

      Those were my thoughts too....

      I mean, if these were my potential kids and I knew they had this, I'd be going for the "clothes hanger treatment" pronto.

      Not fair for the parents or the potential kids.

      But then again, that's me, this is a personal decision the parents have to make.

      But it strikes me as a bit selfish on the side of these parents to subject offspring to these genetic maladies they know they would likely have given their genetics and the fact they already have a defective child.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    8. Re:Sigh by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Reinforced is the wrong term.

      There is a 1/4 chance that a child suffers from the gene. And a 100% chance it gives (if it has it) further to its kids.

      Then again there is a 1/4 chance that it does not have it.

      And then again a 1/2 half it has it, and from there another 50% chance it passes it to its children.

      However for many genes we know meanwhile that the terms recessive and dominant are meaningless. It was a simplification we still learn in school, but it has nothing to do how genetics really works.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    9. Re:Sigh by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 0

      Again: the defect is a lack of hair!

      What the funk is wrong with you? Never saw a bald person that is a genius?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    10. Re:Sigh by Instantlemming · · Score: 1

      It's recessive AND X-linked.
      This means that if mom has the disease, she has 2 x-chromosomes with the faulty gene.
      That means ALL male offspring WILL HAVE the disease (as they will get their single x-chromosome from their mother, and the y-chromosome from their father, so there will never be a healthy x-chromosome for them, regardless of what the father has).

    11. Re:Sigh by sjames · · Score: 2

      NO, that is only the most minor effect. They also have only 4 or 5 teeth, all abnormal. But more seriously, no sweat glands. That means they seriously overheat at the slightest provocation. As in medical emergency, not need to sit down for a minute.

      As genetic diseases go, it's not the worst of the lot, but it's a lot more than missing hair.

    12. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since I have an IQ of over 150 and the body of Adonis (it's statistically likely you are inferior to me in most ways) I could say the same thing about you not being conceived. But here's the kicker, unlike you I'm not a cunt. I know a few people who are even more physically and mentally resplendent than I. They also are not cunts.

      There is always someone superior to you in some way or another and it's time to stop being ableist.

      "You know who I am."

      No I don't. Who the fuck are you? Clearly if a significant amount of people knew who you were then there would be no point in posting anonymously.

    13. Re: Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please google the disease, and go to images

    14. Re: Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think of the nosferatu children!

  3. Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Explain to me why eugenics is bad again?

    1. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Defective people are not "encouraged" to breed, they are just not prohibited from doing so. The reason is that governments powerful and coercive enough to impose reproductive mandates tend to do plenty of other nasty things. It isn't worth it. Freedom doesn't lead to perfection, but it is better than the alternatives.

      Anyway, now that we can edit-out the defects (and soon edit-in some upgrades), it doesn't matter as much who breeds.

    2. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by zlives · · Score: 2

      "Anyway, now that we can edit-out the defects" yes like dark hair and eyes /duck

    3. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 3, Informative

      Go watch GATTACA, or the Star Trek episodes that talk about Eugenics Wars, specifically Doctor Bashir, I Presume IIRC.

      The danger is that it might become a slippery slope:

      1. Only the rich will be able to afford,

      2. It could lead to reverse discrimination and job profiling,

      i.e. I'm sorry, your Johnny wasn't born with _X_, he isn't allowed to do _Y_

      3. Loss of genetic diversity.

      Show me ANY tech that man hasn't abused the fuck out? And while that isn't reason enough we need to proceed with caution instead a naive "full steam ahead".

      Go read Eugenics for more details.

    4. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eugenics was a popular past time of the rich and the middle class that was based on fake news about the traits of people. Genetic screening and curing deceases before they emerge will be a popular option for the rich and middle class that will be mostly based on real news about the genetic traits of people.

    5. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Explain to me why eugenics is bad again?

      It really pisses me off the degree to which we seem to have forgotten World War II and are repeating all of its mistakes.

      The main problem is who decides that your personal trait is bad for society. Is it "genetic jewishness"? Does ADHD count? There goes Einstein, and probably me too. Color blindness? Me again. Dispraxia? Maybe me. Cancer? Me again.

      This does not, however, exempt you from personal responsibility regarding who you bring into the world. Conception is a choice.

    6. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is, even when perfectly operational, the human species is defective by design, i.e. it has evolved a form of intelligence that will inevitably lead it to self destruction. It has already begun long ago.

      Humanity is an evolutionary dead-end. Let's just hope the next intelligent species that appears on earth will have enough wisdom to learn from the mistakes documented in the legacy that we'll have hopefully left before our demise.

    7. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      The trouble is, modern medicine has tilted the scales a bit in the other direction and it looks to be causing problems.

      I mean, we now go often to heroic measures and efforts to save problem kids that would not have been born a couple decades ago.

      Sure it works out some, but I fear that by doing this so much on children that are SO damaged genetically, that we are interfering with natural selection that would basically cull this out of the gene pool in the past, but now.....we're keeping bad genes in the pool, potentially to the detriment of humans.

      How do we fix it? I dunno....but just occurs to me that of late, we're really going out of our way to block natural selection.....with those that are born due to heroic measure...or even those who are born naturally ok...but we protect them from their own stupidity, which would have selected themselves out of the gene pool if allowed to do so.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    8. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I like dark hair and dark eyes.
      The darker, the better :D

      The only thing beating that would be a good red hair with green eyes, very hard to come by though.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    9. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it "genetic jewishness"?

      No.

      Does ADHD count?

      Maybe, if we find it's a genetic disorder that we can't fix.

      There goes Einstein

      Nope.

      and probably me too.

      Okay.

      Color blindness?

      No.

      Me again.

      No one cares.

      Dispraxia?

      That's a really broad thing with no known actual cause.

      Maybe me.

      Maybe you're just a klutz.

      Cancer?

      Nearly everyone gets cancer nowadays.

      Me again.

      No one cares. Again.

      This does not, however, exempt you from personal responsibility regarding who you bring into the world. Conception is a choice.

      Exactly.

      Eugenics doesn't have to be active culling. Maybe just don't breed if you're severely infirm or diseased. Or maybe test your partner to eliminate/minimize the chance of passing it on. Or maybe foot the bill for your own IVF procedure including screening at the beginning.

    10. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I like dark hair and dark eyes.
      The darker, the better :D

      So do plenty of other people. Statistics from on-line dating sites show that Asian women get the most responses. Some gentlemen prefer blondes, but many do not.

    11. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      How do we fix it?

      Here is how we fix it: CRISPR/Cas9

      Any problem cause by technology can be fixed with MORE TECHNOLOGY.

    12. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by onepoint · · Score: 1

      Editing, that's the dangerous part, but let's keep everyone breeding because the randomness of DNA is important. Mutant's in any way, shape or form are good for humans.

      Sidenote: I wonder if people who don't do vaccinations ( I think they are called anti-vaccer's ) would accept this. While not the same it seems kinda similar on the real big scale ( no the micro scale of course )

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    13. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by onepoint · · Score: 1

      I wonder if it will lead to a Logans Run type world

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    14. Re:Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as we can edit out assburger and other socially embarassing conditions I'm all for it.

    15. Re: Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the baby that was never born (without these defects).. because you were born instead? You seem to be implying babies without defects are less valuable. How can you know there wouldn't have been an Einstein minus the defects?

      It's a difficult issue, but these criticisms are pretty weak.

    16. Re: Why are defective humans encouraged to breed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Altered Carbon is probably just as as instructive, with a society that organises around wealth and privilege as the arbiters of who gets good bodies, and the consequence being the utter contempt of the haves for the have-nots.

      Hard not to read it as metaphor, alas.

  4. Why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...are doctors injecting a Nirvana album into a foetus? Won't that kill it?

  5. Selfish parents by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

    She had a family history of XLHED, a young son with the condition, and was found to be carrying twin boys with it, too.

    I think it's terrible that despite having a life's worth of warning about the outcome that the parents decided to go ahead and burden children with their own genetic shortcomings. There are orphans that need adopting but despite that they decided to pass on their problems to an entirely new generation. The selfishness of humans really just blows my mind.

    I'm all for science but I can't help but scorn people who insist on having their own children while knowing the price their progeny will have to pay.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Selfish parents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All life is suffering.

    2. Re:Selfish parents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The selfishness of humans really just blows my mind."

      Everyone is selfish in their own way.

      "I'm all for science but I can't help but scorn"

      Everyone 'can't help' what they do sometimes.

      "people who insist on having their own children while knowing the price their progeny will have to pay."

      People have different, genetics, developmental paths, and education, so they all don't feel, reason, or act the same.

    3. Re:Selfish parents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are orphans that need adopting but despite that they decided to pass on their problems to an entirely new generation.

      Adoption requirements may be very strict and all aspects of the life may be inspected with a tight comb, depending of the location. Which is easier to get: a German adoption license or a top secret clearance for US government work?

    4. Re:Selfish parents by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 0

      Judging from the article, XLHED is not that bad.

      So what is your stupid problem with people wanting a child? Ever tried to adopt one? It takes a decade or two to be in line to even be considered ... there are not many kids for adoption in a western country.

      I'm all for science but I can't help but scorn people who insist on having their own children while knowing the price their progeny will have to pay.

      The price is a lack of HAIR you dumb moron.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    5. Re:Selfish parents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      " People with XLHED have fewer sweat glands and/or poorly functioning ones. This leaves individuals vulnerable to high fevers and over-heating (hyperthermia), which can be life-threatening and lead to medical complications. "

      Did you even _bother_ to read the summary?

    6. Re:Selfish parents by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      There are orphans that need adopting

      No there aren't. There are far more people that want to adopt than there are children available, and most prospective parents don't qualify.

      My wife and I tried to adopt, and were told right at the beginning that it was a waste of time. We had two disqualifications, either of which was sufficient:
      1. We already had our own kids.
      2. One of us (me) was over 50.

      So we got a dog instead.

    7. Re: Selfish parents by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      That's why DNA is called the selfish gene.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    8. Re: Selfish parents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like everything else, the sole function of DNA is to reproduce. There is nothing particularly 'selfish' about it.

  6. We are all "defective" by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    We are all genetically defective in one way or another. Problems usually only arise when two people with the same defects decide to have kids which is why we have laws against incest. With this one limitation self-selection of a mate works well - after all, it's how humans and all other species evolved.

  7. I am not a doctor... by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    But I have definite plans this fine Friday night to make an in utero injection or two.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:I am not a doctor... by scottrocket · · Score: 1

      But I have definite plans this fine Friday night to make an in utero injection or two.

      Your sig seems to contradict your Friday night's endeavor.

    2. Re:I am not a doctor... by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps they seek me out, wherever I may be.

      (Neither of us believes that, but it's a fun conceit nevertheless)

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  8. Treated in utero?

    But Nancy P says they aren't even people until you take them home from the hospital!

    1. Re:But by davide+marney · · Score: 1

      At 20 weeks in the US, you can legally kill a baby in the womb OR perform life-saving surgery on them. How that makes any sense whatsoever is beyond me.

      --
      "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
    2. Re:But by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      At 20 weeks in the US, you can legally kill a baby in the womb OR perform life-saving surgery on them. How that makes any sense whatsoever is beyond me.

      Beyond me too.

  9. Babies aren't that easy to come by by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    And people want babies, not children. Babies, especially ones of the right color, are actually hard to come by. What's _not_ hard to come by are kids ages 6 and up who come from broken homes. Most of the time they end up in phoney foster care homes that are really small scale orphanages (know people making a good living running these). Nobody wants them because they're full of problems from the rough upbringing and, well, they're not cute babies. It's a screwed up situation all around.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/