> but genetic testing is used extenstively and effectually by functional medicine practictioners every day

You mean this functional medicine? Or are you using the term in a different way?

> Functional medicine is a form of alternative medicine that encompasses a number of unproven and disproven methods and treatments.

> It has been described as pseudoscience,[5] quackery,[6] and at its essence a rebranding of complementary and alternative medicine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_medicine

There are certainly quacks out there, but there are also folks with piles of credentials who describe what they do as functional medicine, who operate strictly according to the latest science, and who have massive beneficial impacts on the patients they see, many of which who have been failed by the mainstream medical establishment.

Descriptions like the above which seek to attack and discredit any form of alternative medicine will always exist because mainstream medical practice first seeks to enrich corporations and only secondarily tries to help patients. (Not on an individual level, but structurally.)

I'd invite you to check out the YouTube channels or any of the books written by Dr. Mark Hyman or Dr. Gundry; the content they put out is incredible and has had a huge positive impact on my life.

I don't think many medical scientists support any functional medicine practice. I have no doubt much of the medical industry is extremely corrupt, but I have a hard time believing nearly all medical scientists are working against peoples best interests.

The two people you mentioned seem to be regarded negatively by the scientific community.

Dr. Mark Hyman

> He was the editor-in-chief of, and is a contributing editor to, Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine.

Looking at that journal it's definitely filled with crank nonsense.

And Dr. Gundry I assume is Steven Gundry, who is best known for false claims about lectins.

If you think those two are cranks, with their piles of credentials and active practices with tens of thousands of satisfied patients, who would you recommend I follow for health-related content instead?

> piles of credentials and active practices with tens of thousands of satisfied patients

This doesn't constitute strong evidence and isn't how science works.

I asked you for an alternative and you didn't provide one. Are you interested in solving problems or just throwing stones?

yes, some genetic testing is useful. very little of it makes an actual impact on human health, compared to far larger contributions from other fields. It's just oversold.

Note: I have 25+ years experience in this field, I'm not just spewing out random beliefs.

You probably have much more knowledge than me then, but based on the reading I've done, we now basically know of certain genes that make people far more likely to get diseases like alzheimers or even to get a diagnosis of autism (genes which make the body unable to detoxify heavy metals) - it seems to me like that sort of information is probably instrumental in being able to fully understand and eventually cure or prevent these diseases, no?