Re:FDA Authorizes Ten 23andme Genetic Health Risk Reports
by eli on Thursday April 06, 2017 @04:06PM
(#14054108)
The "real" genetic test I took in doctor's office to screen for a condition worked by spitting in a bottle too. It's a reasonable way to collect DNA.
Re:FDA Authorizes Ten 23andme Genetic Health Risk Reports
by amelius on Friday April 07, 2017 @05:42AM
(#14058385)
> I learned about all kinds of interesting genetic stuff
And there's much more to be found. The service of 23andme only records a limited set of SNPs. Further there is "multiomics" (see [1]), where not just the genome is sequenced but a complete biological fingerprint of metabolites is taken at different timepoints. This can e.g. give insight in onset of a disease even before any symptoms present themselves. I wonder when this will become available as a (mainstream) service, but I guess soon.
Re:FDA Authorizes Ten 23andme Genetic Health Risk Reports
by nether on Thursday April 06, 2017 @07:52PM
(#14055795)
> When I signed up the sample they took was spit in a vial.
Yes, and? I don't see the significance of the testing medium here. DNA sequencing from hair or blood or saliva will yield identical results.
Re:FDA Authorizes Ten 23andme Genetic Health Risk Reports
by aarongolliver on Thursday April 06, 2017 @08:16PM
(#14055930)
They're saying the testing medium itself made the test appear less scientific/accurate (to them) than it actually is. Perhaps if it had been a hair sample it would have appeared more scientific (again, to them).
It never clicked for me that this was going to be the most scientifically accurate reading of my health in all the world. I took part because it could give me some scaring and soothing. But I assumed I'd go get a real test done if I was actually worried or interested about something specifically.
The website repeats this sentiment over and over, I learned about all kinds of interesting genetic stuff. I'm sure that's what it's for. I shouldn't be surprised that many people take what it says as gospel.