|
|
|
|
|
by prat
5528 days ago
|
|
Does it matter? Maybe they will contribute something useful, maybe they won't. If we shut them down now, they definitely won't. Exactly - that's why I say don't shut them down, regulate them. To prevent service providers with a government granted monopoly from extorting payments from the rest of the economy? Is this a serious danger in the personal genomics market? I was under the impression that the FDA wanted to prevent consumers from purchasing genetic tests without receiving permission from another government granted monopoly (doctors).
There is no govt.granted monopoly here. All they want is to be sure that a medical advice is givem by 1) qualifieed entity 2) if 1) is not possible then atleast based on research done by a qualified entity (i.e. published results) |
|
The AMA is a government granted monopoly.
Regardless, could you further explain your analogy to net neutrality? I can't even imagine what combination of misconceptions about net neutrality and personal genomics led you to make such a comparison.
All they want is to be sure that a medical advice...
Personal genomics companies do not give out medical advice. They give out genetic information.
The proposed regulations would require you to get the permission of a doctor (or other clinician) before you can have your DNA sequenced, and the data would be available only through the doctor.