Fixing typo from previous post:
[why they would be giving it to to year olds is beyond me]
should read: [why they would be giving it to 12 year olds is beyond me]
Why? The speculation I've heard is that the action on the brain is at some point not reversable, permanent damage. Like giving a guy in a coma a cognition drug and then saying... see, it didn't work.
Message 11440381
One of them, for example, I heard a guy from J&J talk two weeks ago--in his hands, at J&J's hands, the peptide is 100 times more potent than morphine on the morphine receptor [of the brain]. So our hypothesis is that the autism is secondary to the ability of these peptides, that come through the gut, not be digested, go to the brain, and affect behavior and speech in a paralyzing sort of way."
In other words, I would hope that RGEN focus it's trials on a tight age group, and as young as possible. From the anecdotes I've heard this is where the success has been. I would also be very interested in how they define 'success', the fact that they are hanging around the DAN conference is a very good sign, but I don't know how free they are to pick their endpoints.
Again... all IMO, and anecdotal stuff.
Anyone have any ideas?
DAK |
