Baby born without cancer gene...

The first British baby genetically selected to be free of a breast cancer gene has been born, University College London has said




She grew from an embryo screened to ensure it did not contain the faulty BRCA 1 gene, which passes the risk of breast cancer down generations.
University College London said the the mother and her little girl were doing "very well".

Any girl born with the gene has a 50% to 85% of developing breast cancer.

Announcing the girl's birth, Paul Serhal, medical director of the Assisted Conception Unit at the hospital, said: "This little girl will not face the spectre of developing this genetic form of breast cancer or ovarian cancer in her adult life.

"The parents will have been spared the risk of inflicting this disease on their daughter.
"The lasting legacy is the eradication of the transmission of this form of cancer that has blighted these families for generations."

In June the mother, then 27, told how she decided to undergo the screening process after seeing all her husband's female relatives suffer the disease.

The woman, who wanted to remain anonymous, said at the time: "We felt that, if there was a possibility of eliminating this for our children, then that was a route we had to go down."

It is not clear exactly where the baby was born.

The technique, known as pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) has already been used in the UK to free babies of inherited disorders such as cystic fibrosis and Huntington's disease. But breast cancer is different because it does not inevitably affect a child from birth and may or may not develop later in life. There is also a chance it can be cured, if caught early enough.

Permission to carry out PGD for breast cancer had to be obtained from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority by the London clinic which performed the procedure.

The body, which licenses IVF clinics and embryo research, gave the go-ahead after holding a public consultation. Doctors at the private clinic, housed at University College Hospital, conducted tests on 11 embryos by removing just one cell from each when they were three days old. Six embryos were found to carry the defective BRCA1 gene.
Two embryos which were free of the gene were implanted, resulting in a single pregnancy

Faulty genes are responsible for between 5% and 10% of the 44,000 cases of breast cancer that occur in the UK each year. BRCA1 and its sister gene BRCA2 are the two most commonly involved.

of course this is a good thing, yes? playing at god a little of course but this little girl can grow up free in the knowledge she'll never develop breast cancer....

or is there a whole can of them there worms being opened up here?

hmmm... something doesnt sit right with me on this issue....

[timwilky]

Sits very well for me. My wife is recovering from breast cancer, we have had 3 friends die of it, a further friend is in the process despite loosing both breasts to it, she has a little girl of 8, I have two daughters.

Anyone who has lived with this would never want a child to grow up at risk. Interesting in the article, the defective gene was in the husbands family

I agree with Tim as we are going through similar for the past 3+ years

tim dont get me wrong of course its great from the POV that this girl wont develop breast cancer, my sister is recovering from 2 years of horrendous treatment so i can appreciate the pain caused.

maybe not so much the birth of this child and the story around it, its the whole "we'll make you live longer" philosophy....doesn't it go against nature?

its sits good with me too, if the risk can be removed, providing there are no other side effects (time will tell?) then it has to be a good thing. although no member of my own family have suffered from it, ive seen the devestating effect it can have via a close friend

[SoulKiss]

Originally Posted by keithd

tim dont get me wrong of course its great from the POV that this girl wont develop breast cancer, my sister is recovering from 2 years of horrendous treatment so i can appreciate the pain caused.

maybe not so much the birth of this child and the story around it, its the whole "we'll make you live longer" philosophy....doesn't it go against nature?

We meddle too much already to worry about this.

If things like cancer are caused by "dirty genes" then without medical intervention these things would go away - people with diabetes would suffer the complications and as such be less likely to breed for example.

I believe that without medicine, we would all be healthier - but only because previous generations suffered/had to watch loved ones die in horrible ways.

My only concern is if we keep meddling, what damage will we do for future generations?

I seem rather happy with it too...

Yes it's great that she won't get breast cancer but whats to say she won't get one of the many other hundreds of cancers out there? Whats to say she abuses the fact and smokes and drinks her life away anyway, in the end dying of lung cancer or liver failure?

The fact she doesn't have a breast cancer gene may well make her susceptible to other cancers/diseases, messing about with genes is a very dangerous thing.

I don't believe this has been done to benefit this little girl really, more just to show it can be done, it will probably do more harm than good in the long run. Sorry for the pessimistic post, cancer is awful for all those affected, for families too

[the_lone_wolf]

Originally Posted by SoulKiss

If things like cancer are caused by "dirty genes" then without medical intervention these things would go away

argumental error highlighted for emphasis

they're not...

the article said women with this gene are x% more likely to develop breast cancer, there is not one cause, and refusing medical treatment based on that assumption would only cause mortality rates to skyrocket

im not entirely sure who has children here and who doesnt, im not trying to get anyones back up, but i would imagine the people that have children would be more inclined to see it as a good thing...(i may be wrong!..as i often can be!)

the old saying..."you wont understand till you have kids of your own"..tis true!...

if / when i have another..if its shown that the child could be at risk, and medical science could eliminate that risk..i would take it