How should we pay for gene therapy?
By Aaron Carroll (The Incidental Economist),
Academy Health Blog
| 05. 27. 2016
For many, many years we’ve been hearing about gene therapy – the chance that we can get into people’s DNA and fix it to resolve problems and fix disease. In a recent piece in Science, Stuart Orkin and Philip Reilly discuss what finally achieving success might mean:
Imagine a young man with hemophilia A who no longer has to self-administer factor VIII replacement; an individual with sickle cell disease who is free of chronic pain and intermittent crises; a girl functionally blind since the age of 5 who can now see; or a baby rescued from a fatal, inherited neurodegenerative disease. For decades, gene therapy has tantalized us with such futuristic scenarios. However, these goals are now coming into focus, and it is the time to consider some of the consequences of success.
As they report, gene therapy has been forty-four years in the making. But gene therapy, which has cost billions of dollars in research and development, is different from the traditional pharmaceutical market. For one thing, most diseases which are the focus of gene therapy research are relatively...
Related Articles
By Darren Incorvaia, Fierce Biotech | 07.16.2026
Jennifer Doudna, Ph.D., the Nobel Laureate best known for co-inventing the CRISPR system that has become the foundation for gene editing, is dipping her toes into a new, buzzy field: AI-powered protein design.
In a new paper, published today...
By Risa Cromer, The Conversation | 07.17.2026
By Emily Packard Dawson and Lainie Friedman Ross , The Hastings Center for Bioethics | 07.16.2026
Major news outlets recently reported – based on a bioRxiv preprint – that scientists had edited genes in human embryos with “startling precision.” The scientists’ decision to release this work ahead of peer review, coupled with the extensive media coverage...
Media coverage of recent developments in embryo gene editing might seem to suggest that gene-edited babies are close to becoming a reality. As tech billionaires eager to profit off of techno-eugenics invest in “designer baby” technologies, attempts to normalize heritable genome editing – which remains unsafe and raises significant ethical and societal concerns – are especially dangerous. It’s worth taking a closer look at these developments and what they mean, in a way that pushes back on narratives normalizing the...