fbpx
01 / 05
Children with Rare Genetic Diseases Get CRISPR Cures Center

Nature | Health Systems

Children with Rare Genetic Diseases Get CRISPR Cures Center

“A new center in San Francisco will offer tailor-made CRISPR therapies to cure children with rare diseases. The Center for Pediatric CRISPR Cures, announced in June, brings together pediatrician Priscilla Chan, co-founder of the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI), and Nobel laureate Jennifer Doudna of the University of California, Berkeley. The new center builds on the successful treatment whereby baby KJ was cured of a rare and life-threatening metabolic disorder caused by carbamoyl phosphate synthetase 1 deficiency using a personalized CRISPR therapy. With $20 million in support from the CZI, the new center aims to extend CRISPR’s therapeutic impact to thousands of rare Mendelian disorders.”

From Nature.

Wall Street Journal | Health & Medical Care

Anti-Tumor Device Placed in Brain, Boosts Survival

“Brain tumors are one of the most devastating consequences of cancer’s spread—hard to treat and highly deadly. Scientists have found that using a radioactive implant precisely where a tumor was removed in the brain can help patients get their cancer treated more quickly and in many cases, live longer.

A new study showed that GammaTile, a radioactive wafer the size of a postage stamp, nearly doubled survival rates and nearly eliminated tumor regrowth in people who had it placed in the spot where brain tumors were surgically removed.”

From Wall Street Journal.

Marginal Revolution | Health Systems

The Pilot for AI Prescriptions Refills in Utah Looks Promising

“The first review of the pilot for AI prescriptions refills in Utah is out and it looks very reasonable. In the 72% of cases where the AI recommend a refill at least one of two physicians agreed in 97% of cases.

In the 28% of Cases Where the AI Escalated to a Physician Without Recommending Renewal

  • When the AI declined to recommend renewal without further information, a human telehealth appointment was arranged.
  • For these patients, 69% of physician reviews agreed that the escalation was appropriate, and more information was needed to authorize a renewal.
  • In the other 31% of cases, the physician determined the escalation was overly cautious.
  • For a new system like this, overcaution is appropriate and welcome. In the long term, reducing overcaution without compromising safety would improve patient access to care, but we aren’t rushing to see that happen.”

From Marginal Revolution.

Wall Street Journal | Health & Medical Care

Surprising Potential Weight-Loss Drug Side Effect: Stalling Cancer

“The world’s most popular weight-loss and diabetes drugs are linked to a powerful new possible benefit: better outcomes for cancer patients. 

A suite of four new studies suggest that people taking so-called GLP-1 drugs like Novo Nordisk’s Ozempic and Eli Lilly’s Mounjaro saw reductions in tumor progression, lower overall chance of death and less risk of developing breast cancer.

‘It’s really provocative that they showed, in several cancers, that people who took these drugs seem to have a lower risk of their cancer returning,’ said Dr. Jennifer Ligibel, a breast oncologist at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute who wasn’t involved in any of the studies.

One study from researchers at the Cleveland Clinic Cancer Institute tracked more than 10,000 patients with early-stage cancers who started GLP-1 drugs after diagnosis and compared their disease progression to those on a different diabetes medication. Those on GLP-1s were less likely to see their cancer spread.

In lung cancer patients, the rate of progression to advanced disease was cut roughly in half—10% in GLP-1 users versus 22% in the comparison group. Breast cancer patients showed a similar pattern, with progression rates of 10% versus 20%. Colorectal and liver cancers also showed statistically significant reductions.”

From Wall Street Journal.

Blog Post | Income & Inequality

Was COVID Also an Inequality Pandemic?

COVID slowed but couldn’t stop the fall in global inequality.

Summary: Recent debates have framed global inequality as rapidly worsening, particularly in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence from the Inequality of Human Progress Index indicates that, despite temporary setbacks, long-term declines in inequality across multiple dimensions of wellbeing have largely persisted, with global disparities remaining well below 1990s levels.


Affordability fears, talk of a “K-shaped” economy, and claims of a new Gilded Age have pushed inequality to the center of today’s policy debates. Calls for a worldwide wealth tax and other unprecedented measures are not treated as radical but as inevitable—across academianon-profitsthe press, and international organizations, including the United Nations.

The COVID-19 pandemic seemed to clinch the case. As economies contracted and progress in poorer countries stalled, it was easy to assume that decades of convergence between developed and developing countries had come to an end. The authors of one Oxfam paper, for example, proclaimed during the pandemic that “unparalleled action [is] needed to combat unprecedented inequality in the wake of COVID-19.”

New research suggests a more nuanced reality. The updated Inequality of Human Progress Index assesses how the pandemic affected progress toward a more prosperous and equal world.

The pandemic clearly slowed improvement in global living standards and interrupted the pace at which countries were becoming more equal. It did not, however, cancel out the long-term, positive trends. Even under the strain of COVID-19, its attendant lockdowns, and other forceful policy responses, global inequality across key measures of well-being remained lower than it was a generation ago.

The index looks beyond income alone. It measures inequality across eight dimensions that shape everyday life, including lifespan, child survival, nutrition, education, internet access, environmental safety, income, and political freedom. The index, which I co-authored with George Mason University economist Vincent Geloso, seeks to offer a fuller view of gaps in global development, taking into account more aspects of human well-being than any prior index of inequality.

The data show a substantial decline in global inequality over the past three decades as rising prosperity allowed poor countries to narrow gaps with rich ones. That pattern held through 2019. During the pandemic years of 2020 and 2021, progress slowed sharply and, in some areas, stalled or modestly reversed. Yet the earlier gains were not erased.

This distinction is important. COVID-19 was a severe shock. Life expectancy fell worldwide. School closures disrupted education. Economic activity and international trade declined, with especially devastating effects on low-income countries. The index reflects these setbacks. Inequality stopped falling at its earlier pace and, in some measures, edged upward slightly after years of progress. Still, the overall level of global inequality remained far below where it stood in the 1990s.

In a few areas, improvement continued even during the crisis. Internet access expanded rapidly, especially in poorer countries, reducing inequality in access to information to its lowest level on record. Faster regulatory approvals amid the pandemic helped bring more people online. In Kenya, for example, Alphabet’s high-altitude internet balloons were finally cleared in 2020, allowing rural areas to gain internet access for the first time. The project had been stalled in regulatory review for nearly two years before the crisis prompted action.

Not all the data were encouraging. Inequality in political liberty ticked up during the pandemic as many countries took a turn toward greater authoritarianism. Even with the long-term shift toward electoral democracy intact, the setback shows the importance of protecting political liberty during emergencies.

For all the turmoil, the damage across different measures of well-being was thankfully limited.

These findings complicate popular claims that the world is experiencing a runaway increase in inequality. Calls for a global wealth tax, massive new aid commitments, or other significant expansions of state redistribution often rest on the premise that trade and free enterprise have failed to deliver shared gains. The data suggest otherwise.

If anything, the pandemic highlighted how sensitive progress can be to disruptions in markets. Countries with greater economic freedom generally proved more resilient. In contrast, prolonged lockdowns and restrictions often imposed heavy costs on poorer populations, particularly in countries where remote work and online schooling were not viable options for most people.

The broader lesson is that global convergence is neither automatic nor guaranteed, but instead depends on certain conditions such as undisturbed markets, even as long-term progress has proven more robust than critics often assume.

Mistaken narratives about global inequality have real consequences. They shape public opinion and influence policymakers to embrace sweeping interventions. A more accurate assessment of recent history suggests a need for caution.

COVID-19 tested the global economy in ways few events in modern history have. It slowed human progress and exposed vulnerabilities. At the same time, it demonstrated the durability of the long-term trend toward lower global inequality. Preserving and strengthening the policies and institutions that made that progress possible, including economic and political freedoms, remains a better bet than assuming they have already failed. The gains of recent decades have left the world both better off and more equal.

This article was published in the Orange County Register on 2/1/2026.