The carefully vetted evidence before four courts was that the proposed nucleoside therapy has a virtually 0% chance of being effective. Since Charlie is now probably suffering, the burdens of continued treatment during the therapy (>0) outweigh the benefits (=0) of the therapy.
The family's proposed new evidence to be submitted Tuesday may show that the probability of expected benefits is higher than 0%. But the science and medicine behind that figure seems shaky and significantly less solid than what Justice Francis is demanding.
Yet, from a legal and ethical perspective, if the probability of benefit were really 10%, then this would be a real value-laden decision about whether that is sufficient to justify pursuing the therapy. Such decisions in the gray zone of right and wrong should be left to the parents.