Charlie Gard 6

[CaveMum]

New thread so that we can await this morning's hearing.

Let's try to keep this one as sensible and measured as the past 5 threads have been.

Fingers crossed that this can all be resolved today and that Charlie and his parents can find peace.

NY witness: since April we’ve evaluated more data. I estimate chance of success to be at least 10%. Of 9 patients on ventilators, one is off

NY witness: since April we’ve evaluated more data. I estimate chance of success to be at least 10%. Of 9 patients on ventilators, one is off

from somon who hasnt even been here!

So is he saying GOSH were wrong about CG's brain damage (in his opinion)

but thyr not the same are thy -charlie is worse

Does anyone on here think there's a chance he may be allowed the treatment?

I think that if you were a terminally ill patient, then you could decide to be, in effect, an experimental animal in such a case, even if you would be 'beyond experience' at the time. I can see that it might give you some solace that your death was of some use. But do we as a society, or parents as parents, have the right to make that choice for Charlie? Is it right to use terminally ill children who are either 'beyond experience', or who can be doped up to an extent that they are such, as experimental animals? Even if there is only a one in a million chance of any improvement, or cure, or anything. Should we be allowed to experiment on babies???? 'Cos that's in effect what some people want to argue.

Myself, I'd say no even if some medics/researchers would like to have a go.......................

Oh Writer I hope not for Charlie's sake but who knows

Writer Based on current "evidence" absolutely not. Nor should it

@SkyFixerJim
1s
Five out of nine patients were able to reduce the amount of time they spent on a ventilator by 8hrs a day or more.
Reply on TwitterRetweetLike
@JoshuaRozenberg
1s
NY witness: treatment shows 11% to 56% chance of clinically meaningful improvement in muscle strength, measured by time on a ventilator.

NY witness: treatment shows 11% to 56% chance of clinically meaningful improvement in muscle strength, measured by time on a ventilator.

To keep his quality of life such as it is the same then no way is it worth it.

admits its not th sam type

so how is it relevant!

I'm actually confused about what he means. 11-56% chance of what - breathing without a ventilator? Is that it entirely or am I missing something?

@Writerwannabe83

I don't know.

Depends on the evidence.

However despite the assertion of the NY expert the fact remains that this therapy is untested.

No one case be sure of success.

NY witness: since April we’ve evaluated more data. I estimate chance of success to be at least 10%. Of 9 patients on ventilators, one is off

But isn't that patients with a different form of the disease? Or the same type that Charlie has?

@SkyFixerJim
1s

However, it must be stressed that these individuals were being treated for a slightly different diseases to Charlie's.

NY expert’s research based a different type of mitochondrial disease, he explains.

So he would be in exactly the same position - blind, deaf, unable to move or communicate, brain-damaged and suffering from seizures but would be able to breathe without a ventilator for part of the time? Is that the whole sum of it?

I think the comments about the legal process etc should be allowed to stand. The comments about the parents should be deleted

This ^ and the rest of Gobbolinothewitchscat's post is what I think

So even if he could breathe unaided which seems unlikely, he would still be unable to move, see, hear or swallow? I would take death over that any day.

It’s very difficult to assess brain functions, says NY expert.

As mentioned upthread - its like saying all cancers are the same!!

He might come off the ventilator but he has severe epileptic encephatholopathy and there is no evidence this will be cured. Seizures are often intractible and cause further brain damage.

contradicting himslf all the time

this precnt that percent thn says brain function is hard to diagnose