Scientists ‘switch off’ autism symptoms in mice using $3 epilepsy drug
nypost.com
nypost.com
Also the article completely fails to even mention the troubling ethical issues with such a drug if it works.
It would be like the "net negative" of someone in a wheelchair who can now walk again and therefore lose access to welfare benefits and handicapped parking spots. Now maybe some people in wheelchairs think their handicap is part of how they are and want to keep it, but I would be surprised if it wasn't at best a tiny minority.
We're not talking treating non-speech children here.
It in no way is a “downer”, and is often given semi-offlabel interchangeably with standard SSRIs for depression. Also the article quotes $3/pill but is widely available as generic for < $.10/pill.
If this deeply studied—in humans—and readily accessible drug provides an option for those who seek treatment, wonderful.
Hence, it needs to be actually phase 2 trialled properly for this indication.
If the indication requires a genetic test beforehand, that's a minor ethical problem right there, in terms of privacy.
Well, then you don't want to take it. But there's not an ethical issue there unless you're forced to take it.
If you're so autistic that you're essentially nonfunctional, and someone decides for you, do you see that as an ethical issue?
(and full disclosure, I've been diagnosed with aspie-style ASD)
The argument goes - These disorders are incredibly taxing for both the individuals who suffer these conditions and for their family, friends and colleagues. There is real suffering and pain, and alleviating this pain, and potentially preventing it through germ-line edits could eradicate these conditions for ever (glossing over the incredible ethical concerns there)
At the same time, these conditions _can_ provide incredible gifts to both the individual and society as a whole. History is littered with famous artists, scientists, etc., who have all made important and unique contributions to the human experience. Would they have been able to do these things without their condition? In curing the disease, are we missing these non-linear thought patterns that are common with these disorders? And what cost does that have for society?
Choosing not to treat someone because "they may contribute to society", even if they are suffering and wish not to suffer from their treatable disorder, is always unethical imho.
However, forcing treatment on someone who either doesn't want to pursue treatment, or has tried treatment and decided against it, would also be unethical.
I agree - it's absolute misery on the individual level and relieving that pain is a good thing.
The real ethical debate comes when we have the ability to eliminate these conditions through germ-line edits. A rogue doctor in China already did this by making the CCR5 gene non-functional in embryos and the children were born.
The doctor went to prison, and the scientific community roundly condemned his work, but this isn't going away. "Fixing" major genetic diseases in the embryo is possible, and it's a pretty slippery slope once we start down that path.
What are those "troubling ethical issues with such a drug if it works," specifically?
I can't see an interpretation of your comment besides it being "ethically troubling" to cure someone of a mental disorder.
- constant urge to leave tiny, cigar-shaped turds all over the house along the edge of the walls
- chewing through the bottom corner of cereal boxes instead of opening the top
- uncontrollable urge to procreate
- licking your hands and forearms before cleaning your face with them
- chewing through your own pex plumbing for no apparent reason
- not being a mouse
- lamotrigine potentially turning a person into a mental zombie/fatigued (My own personal experience for another indication)
- other side effects of lamotrigine some of which are rare but deadly
It might be worth it to try if it's better than standard treatment. Which means, shut up researcher and run an RCT.
EDIT: I meant to say "append in my head".
It's just a way of being smugly dismissive without adding anything of value to the conversation.