The case of Charlie Gard in London, England, has been the focus of international attention, generating polarized views about the use of experimental treatments. On one side are those who hold that patients should be able to purchase whatever treatments they desire and can afford; on the other are those who maintain that governments must play a regulatory role in protecting patients from harm and that unproven therapies must meet a threshold of scientific validity before they are offered, regardless of the ability of the patient to pay. Charlie Gard is an 11-month-old boy who, according to court records, “suffers from a rare inherited mitochondrial disease called infantile onset encephalomyopathic mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome.”1,2 During the several months he has been hospitalized at Great Ormond Street Hospital his condition has steadily deteriorated, and he is now dependent on life support and mechanical ventilation. His physicians believe he has no reasonable remaining treatment options, and they have recommended palliative care and withdrawal of the ventilator. Charlie’s parents, however, are asking that

中文翻译：

---

英国对实验性治疗设置限制

英国伦敦的查理·加德 (Charlie Gard) 案例一直是国际关注的焦点，在使用实验性治疗方法方面产生了两极分化的观点。一方面是那些认为患者应该能够购买他们想要和负担得起的任何治疗的人；另一类人坚持认为，无论患者的支付能力如何，政府必须在保护患者免受伤害方面发挥监管作用，并且未经证实的疗法在提供之前必须达到科学有效性的门槛。Charlie Gard 是一个 11 个月大的男孩，根据法庭记录，他“患有一种罕见的遗传性线粒体疾病，称为婴儿型脑肌病线粒体 DNA 耗竭综合征。”1，2 在大奥蒙德街医院住院的几个月里，他的病情不断恶化，现在依靠生命支持和机械通气。他的医生认为他没有合理的剩余治疗选择，他们建议进行姑息治疗并停用呼吸机。然而，查理的父母要求