Dr. Michael Kilgard

But we don't need to medicalize everything.

If you're fine, you're fine.

But if you've got a serious problem, these are not subtle conditions.

These are people who are really, really, really struggling.

They're willing to try anything.

And we have this obligation to sort out what works.

And throwing the kitchen sink at it is not so great.

The FDA is having to wrestle with what do you mean you're going to do four different therapies?

Let's just take a two-combination therapy.

Do I now have to do a four-arm study where I do one group who gets both, one who gets just this, one who gets just that, and one who gets neither?

Statistically, that really increases the cost.

So we say, no, let's do it where you do all the things you think are going to need it and then none of those things.

So even – are we doing science experiments?

No, we're trying to treat people.

So I think the pieces of the puzzle are there.

And to my mind, the animal literature is clear it's complicated.

I mean I think about the number of genes that had – for ocular dominance, plasticity, the change in the visual system with two eyes.

How many genes play a role in that?

Many genes.

Many times one says, here's a new gene that plays a role.