←back to thread

Baby is healed with first personalized gene-editing treatment

(www.nytimes.com)
1257 points jbredeche | 5 comments | 15 May 25 18:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.713s | source
Show context
colechristensen ◴[15 May 25 19:25 UTC] No.43998409[source]▶
>KJ has made medical history. The baby, now 9 ½ months old, became the first patient of any age to have a custom gene-editing treatment, according to his doctors.

This is _not_ the first human to be treated with a treatment under the wide umbrella of gene therapy based on their own edited genes. There probably is a more narrow first here but the technical details get lost in journalism which is a shame.

replies(3): >>43998434 #>>43998437 #>>43998771 #
autoexec ◴[15 May 25 19:29 UTC] No.43998437[source]▶
Okay, I'll bite: Who then was the first patient of any age to have a custom gene-editing treatment?
replies(3): >>43998451 #>>44001533 #>>44002407 #
1. jfarlow ◴[15 May 25 19:35 UTC] No.43998483[source]▶
This is an AI-generated response, and is inaccurate.

That was one of the first cases of _germline_ gene editing using CRISPR - NOT "the first instance of gene editing." There have been quite a few other genetic editing tools that predate CRISPR, and there have been other edits using CRISPR that were not of the entire human's genome.

2. ◴[15 May 25 19:36 UTC] No.43998492[source]▶
3. shermantanktop ◴[15 May 25 19:36 UTC] No.43998493[source]▶
Ah yes, the "neutral" tone of AI generated content. "significant controversy and ethical concerns," sure.
replies(1): >>43998599 #
4. roywiggins ◴[15 May 25 19:37 UTC] No.43998501[source]▶
That is not accurate, attempts at gene therapy in humans go back further than that.

https://www.whatisbiotechnology.org/index.php/science/summar...

5. sigzero ◴[15 May 25 19:46 UTC] No.43998599[source]▶
There are always those concerns.