I'm dying of a fatal disease. Bureaucrats shouldn't decide how doctors can try to save me
Tragically, the federal government is standing in the way.
I'm not alone; tens of millions of Americans suffer from rare diseases. And while I believe we have entered a "Golden Age" of personalized medicine tailored around a patient's DNA, regulatory roadblocks often force us to wait years to access treatments that could help. We need to break through this logjam so patients can access cutting-edge treatments today.
My disease is Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) — a rare, genetic disorder that causes my muscles to waste away. Patients lose their ability to walk around the ages 9 to 12 and become completely dependent on a power-wheelchair. Then they noticeably lose function of their arms in their teens, and eventually lose their life in their mid-20s as the muscles responsible for breathing are affected, as well as the heart muscle.
I decided early on not to let this disease define me — or stop me. At 15, I founded a nonprofit organization called Destroy Duchenne. I went on to become a bestselling author, public speaker, Hollywood writer and producer, biotech consultant to five companies, investor, and recognized Key Opinion Leader (KOL) in DMD.
Yet I still know the brutality and pain this disease causes. My younger brother, who is 17, also has DMD. So did my other younger brother, who passed away from the disease at age 14. Duchenne affects not just the person with the disease, but everyone around them, as it steals the person away from those who love them.
Fortunately, I'm optimistic about innovation in the medical field. As someone who works in the biotech industry, I know of countless advances currently in the works that are going to change the way we deal with diseases. With the rise of AI, even more progress can be made faster and cheaper, and drugs can be even safer from their inception.
What is critical with rare genetic diseases is time. It's nearly always better to intervene earlier, as it is easier to preserve existing function and overcome some of the effects of the disease. For example, younger patients with Duchenne tend to have more muscle.
They also tend to have less fibrosis (scar tissue) and fat infiltration — two biological effects of the disease as time progresses, which further reduce mobility. Tragically, some patients are at the end of their life, where days can make the difference between living or dying.
On average, clinical trials for new treatments take around 10 years to complete. By then, a patient's disease may have progressed beyond the point where they can be meaningfully treated — or they may have even passed away. We need legislation like the "Right to Try for Individualized Treatments." It's an innovative reform that's now law in six states that puts the power into the hands of the doctor and patient to make these critical decisions about when to try investigational new drugs that are customized based on genetics.
Right now, I can be willing to try a new treatment, the manufacturer of the treatment can be willing to allow me to try it, and a doctor can be willing to administer it — yet Uncle Sam is not willing and stops me from receiving a lifesaving treatment.
This is completely backwards. After all, doctors know their patients better than a far-off bureaucrat who doesn't even know the patient exists. Why should I have to beg the federal government for permission to try to save my own life?
The reality for me is that I'm going to die, likely before I reach middle-age. The average lifespan for people with Duchenne is 25. But it doesn't have to be that way.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
The US fertility rate reached a new low in 2024, CDC data shows
Alarmed by recent drops, the Trump administration has taken steps to increase falling birth rates, like issuing an executive order meant to expand access to and reduce costs of in vitro fertilization and backing the idea of 'baby bonuses' that might encourage more couples to have kids. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up But there's no reason to be alarmed, according to Leslie Root, a University of Colorado Boulder researcher focused on fertility and population policy. Advertisement 'We're seeing this as part of an ongoing process of fertility delay. We know that the U.S. population is still growing, and we still have a natural increase — more births than deaths,' she said. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released the statistic for the total fertility rate with updated birth data for 2024. In the early 1960s, the U.S. total fertility rate was around 3.5, but plummeted to 1.7 by 1976 after the Baby Boom ended. It gradually rose to 2.1 in 2007 before falling again, aside from a 2014 uptick. The rate in 2023 was 1.621, and inched down in 2024 to 1.599, according to the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics. Advertisement Birth rates are generally declining for women in most age groups — and that doesn't seem likely to change in the near future, said Karen Guzzo, director of the Carolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina. People are marrying later and also worried about their ability to have the money, health insurance and other resources needed to raise children in a stable environment. 'Worry is not a good moment to have kids,' and that's why birth rates in most age groups are not improving, she said. Asked about birth-promoting measures outlined by the Trump administration, Guzzo said they don't tackle larger needs like parental leave and affordable child care. 'The things that they are doing are really symbolic and not likely to budge things for real Americans,' she said. Increase in births in new data The CDC's new report, which is based on a more complete review of birth certificates than provisional data released earlier this year, also showed a 1% increase in births — about 33,000 more — last year compared to the prior year. That brought the yearly national total to just over 3.6 million babies born. But this is different: The provisional data indicated birth rate increases last year for women in their late 20s and 30s. However, the new report found birth rate declines for women in their 20s and early 30s, and no change for women in their late 30s. What happened? CDC officials said it was due to recalculations stemming from a change in the U.S. Census population estimates used to compute the birth rate. Advertisement That's plausible, Root said. As the total population of women of childbearing age grew due to immigration, it offset small increases in births to women in those age groups, she said.
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
The US fertility rate reached a new low in 2024, CDC data shows
NEW YORK (AP) — The fertility rate in the U.S. dropped to an all-time low in 2024 with less than 1.6 kids per woman, new federal data released Thursday shows. The U.S. was once among only a few developed countries with a rate that ensured each generation had enough children to replace itself — about 2.1 kids per woman. But it has been sliding in America for close to two decades as more women are waiting longer to have children or never taking that step at all. The new statistic is on par with fertility rates in western European countries, according to World Bank data . Alarmed by recent drops, the Trump administration has taken steps to increase falling birth rates, like issuing an executive order meant to expand access to and reduce costs of in vitro fertilization and backing the idea of 'baby bonuses' that might encourage more couples to have kids. But there's no reason to be alarmed, according to Leslie Root, a University of Colorado Boulder researcher focused on fertility and population policy. 'We're seeing this as part of an ongoing process of fertility delay. We know that the U.S. population is still growing, and we still have a natural increase — more births than deaths,' she said. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released the statistic for the total fertility rate with updated birth data for 2024. In the early 1960s, the U.S. total fertility rate was around 3.5, but plummeted to 1.7 by 1976 after the Baby Boom ended. It gradually rose to 2.1 in 2007 before falling again, aside from a 2014 uptick. The rate in 2023 was 1.621, and inched down in 2024 to 1.599, according to the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics. Birth rates are generally declining for women in most age groups — and that doesn't seem likely to change in the near future, said Karen Guzzo, director of the Carolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina. People are marrying later and also worried about their ability to have the money, health insurance and other resources needed to raise children in a stable environment. 'Worry is not a good moment to have kids,' and that's why birth rates in most age groups are not improving, she said. Asked about birth-promoting measures outlined by the Trump administration, Guzzo said they don't tackle larger needs like parental leave and affordable child care. 'The things that they are doing are really symbolic and not likely to budge things for real Americans,' she said. Increase in births in new data The CDC's new report, which is based on a more complete review of birth certificates than provisional data released earlier this year, also showed a 1% increase in births — about 33,000 more — last year compared to the prior year. That brought the yearly national total to just over 3.6 million babies born. But this is different: The provisional data indicated birth rate increases last year for women in their late 20s and 30s. However, the new report found birth rate declines for women in their 20s and early 30s, and no change for women in their late 30s. What happened? CDC officials said it was due to recalculations stemming from a change in the U.S. Census population estimates used to compute the birth rate. That's plausible, Root said. As the total population of women of childbearing age grew due to immigration, it offset small increases in births to women in those age groups, she said. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
New York Post
4 hours ago
- New York Post
Trump targets ‘woke AI' in series of executive orders on artificial intelligence
President Trump inked three executive orders on artificial intelligence Wednesday, including one targeting so-called 'woke AI' models. 'The American people do not want woke Marxist lunacy in their AI models and neither do other countries. They don't want it. They don't want anything to do with it,' Trump said in remarks from Washington, DC, ahead of the signing ceremony. 3 Trump signed three AI-related executive orders on Wednesday. Getty Images The president's order bars the federal government from procuring generative AI large language models that do not demonstrate 'truthfulness and ideological neutrality.' 'From now on, the US government will deal only with AI that pursues truth, fairness, and strict impartiality,' Trump said. Large language models [LLMs] that are 'truthful and prioritize historical accuracy, scientific inquiry, and objectivity, and acknowledge uncertainty where reliable information is incomplete or contradictory' as well as 'neutral, nonpartisan tools that do not manipulate responses in favor of ideological dogmas like [diversity, equity and inclusion],' would meet the criteria for use by the federal government under Trump's order. The order instructed White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought, in consultation with other Trump administration officials, to issue guidance for agencies to implement these principles in AI procurement. It also mandated that government contracts for LLMs include language to ensure compliance with Trump's 'Unbiased AI Principles.' 3 Trump argued that Americans and other nations don't want 'woke Marxist lunacy' in AI models. REUTERS Last year, Google's Gemini AI model sparked controversy when it started creating 'diverse' artificially generated images, including ones of black Founding Fathers and multiracial Nazi-era German soldiers. The president also signed executive orders to facilitate the quick buildout of data center infrastructure and to promote the export of American AI technology to US allies and partners across the globe. The data center order directs Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to launch a program that would provide loans, grants and tax incentives to qualifying infrastructure projects. 3 Trump's order bars the federal government from procuring AI models that are not truthful or ideologically neutral. Getty Images It also revokes Biden-era DEI and climate requirements for data center projects on federal lands, authorizes Cabinet officials to greenlight data center construction on federal lands and expedites permitting for such qualifying projects. Trump's AI-export order directs the Commerce Department to establish a program to support the development and deployment of 'full-stack, end-to-end packages' overseas, including 'hardware, data systems, AI models, cybersecurity measures' that have applications for the healthcare, education, agriculture, and transportation sectors. Trump's latest directives are part of his effort to usher in a 'Golden Age for American technological dominance' and aim to make the US a global leader in artificial intelligence, according to the White House.
