Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Pros and Cons of Screening Newborns for Disorders
Aired November 20, 2003 - 08:46 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Dr. Sanjay Gupta is off, but in medical news this morning, screening newborns for certain genetic disorders. There are benefits, of course, but there can also be drawbacks. Medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen is joining us this morning from CNN Center with a little bit more on that. Elizabeth, good morning to you.
ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Soledad.
Soledad, in five states, they already do this extensive genetic screening, where they screen for a whole host of disorders. And the question is, should other states do the same things?
Some people argue you can catch a lot of disorders, and you can actually make sure that you keep kids healthier, and out of the hospital longer if you catch these diseases at birth, rather than when the child is a couple of months old and actually starts to show symptoms.
So they decided to do a study at an academic center. And they found that, in fact, kids did stay healthier longer when you caught the diseases at birth. Let's take a look at those statistics. When the children were screened at birth, when they were screened at birth, 28 percent ended up being hospitalized. But when they were caught later, when they were caught much later months after birth, 55 percent ended up in the hospital.
So in other words, children screened at birth had a much lower chance of ending up in the hospital than those who where the illness was caught months later. And that certainly, to many doctors says, that many other states, all states ought to be doing this kind of genetic screening -- Soledad.
O'BRIEN: What kind of diseases are we talking about being screened for?
It's a whole host of diseases and many of them are rare, but extremely, extremely serious. It's about 20 to 30 diseases in all. Some of them are metabolic disorders, some of the screenings are for mental retardation.
And when kids have these diseases, it requires very close monitoring in the early months. These children have a higher than normal chance of getting SIDS, as well as other diseases.
O'BRIEN: You mention that five states are already doing it. I'm sort of confused about why it would be controversial. You think that OK, great, screen them. Is it a hugely expensive? Is that the controversy?
COHEN: Right, exactly. You would think, why isn't everybody doing it? Money is one concern. But there's another concern that's a very real one, which is that these tests have an extremely high rate of false positives.
In other words, they say to the parents, Hey, your child has XYZ terrible syndrome and it turns out they don't. In fact 90 percent of the positives are false positives. Only 10 percent of them are real. And that makes parents worry. They become anxious. They become overprotective.
There's a whole syndrome called Vulnerable Child Syndrome where even when it's a false positive, even when the child doesn't have the syndrome, the parents are unnecessarily protective, and that can last for years and years.
Also these tests can sometimes bring up benign conditions, a condition that a child really, truly does have, but it doesn't really mean anything. So then the parents and the child for the rest of that child's life go through thinking oh, my child has X disorder and it worries them, even though they know, really, that it doesn't mean anything.
O'BRIEN: All right, Elizabeth Cohen, thanks for that update for us. Appreciate it.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired November 20, 2003 - 08:46 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Dr. Sanjay Gupta is off, but in medical news this morning, screening newborns for certain genetic disorders. There are benefits, of course, but there can also be drawbacks. Medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen is joining us this morning from CNN Center with a little bit more on that. Elizabeth, good morning to you.
ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Soledad.
Soledad, in five states, they already do this extensive genetic screening, where they screen for a whole host of disorders. And the question is, should other states do the same things?
Some people argue you can catch a lot of disorders, and you can actually make sure that you keep kids healthier, and out of the hospital longer if you catch these diseases at birth, rather than when the child is a couple of months old and actually starts to show symptoms.
So they decided to do a study at an academic center. And they found that, in fact, kids did stay healthier longer when you caught the diseases at birth. Let's take a look at those statistics. When the children were screened at birth, when they were screened at birth, 28 percent ended up being hospitalized. But when they were caught later, when they were caught much later months after birth, 55 percent ended up in the hospital.
So in other words, children screened at birth had a much lower chance of ending up in the hospital than those who where the illness was caught months later. And that certainly, to many doctors says, that many other states, all states ought to be doing this kind of genetic screening -- Soledad.
O'BRIEN: What kind of diseases are we talking about being screened for?
It's a whole host of diseases and many of them are rare, but extremely, extremely serious. It's about 20 to 30 diseases in all. Some of them are metabolic disorders, some of the screenings are for mental retardation.
And when kids have these diseases, it requires very close monitoring in the early months. These children have a higher than normal chance of getting SIDS, as well as other diseases.
O'BRIEN: You mention that five states are already doing it. I'm sort of confused about why it would be controversial. You think that OK, great, screen them. Is it a hugely expensive? Is that the controversy?
COHEN: Right, exactly. You would think, why isn't everybody doing it? Money is one concern. But there's another concern that's a very real one, which is that these tests have an extremely high rate of false positives.
In other words, they say to the parents, Hey, your child has XYZ terrible syndrome and it turns out they don't. In fact 90 percent of the positives are false positives. Only 10 percent of them are real. And that makes parents worry. They become anxious. They become overprotective.
There's a whole syndrome called Vulnerable Child Syndrome where even when it's a false positive, even when the child doesn't have the syndrome, the parents are unnecessarily protective, and that can last for years and years.
Also these tests can sometimes bring up benign conditions, a condition that a child really, truly does have, but it doesn't really mean anything. So then the parents and the child for the rest of that child's life go through thinking oh, my child has X disorder and it worries them, even though they know, really, that it doesn't mean anything.
O'BRIEN: All right, Elizabeth Cohen, thanks for that update for us. Appreciate it.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
