Re:Color Genomics raises $45M to provide genetic tests that ...
by epistasis on Tuesday September 27, 2016 @10:38AM
(#12589879)
I agree with this assessment.
Cancer has genetic predisposition, environmental causes, and random chance all in enough quantity that none of these influences can be ignored.
That said, I'm extremely skeptical that this is a useful consumer-driven test. Far better to be driven by your physician who can decide if there's enough of a familial cancer history to drive the test, to potentially drive other precautions.
Germline genetic testing is useful for entertainment, or for when you have some phenotype that you're interested in investigating, or perhaps for deciding about having children.
Genomes aren't blueprints for an entire life, they're just the parts book. So germline genetic testing is not some sort of Gattaca-like predictor of a person, even if we knew what most of the genome does.
Cancer has genetic predisposition, environmental causes, and random chance all in enough quantity that none of these influences can be ignored.
That said, I'm extremely skeptical that this is a useful consumer-driven test. Far better to be driven by your physician who can decide if there's enough of a familial cancer history to drive the test, to potentially drive other precautions.
Germline genetic testing is useful for entertainment, or for when you have some phenotype that you're interested in investigating, or perhaps for deciding about having children.
Genomes aren't blueprints for an entire life, they're just the parts book. So germline genetic testing is not some sort of Gattaca-like predictor of a person, even if we knew what most of the genome does.