[logifail]

> needs a pivot where you can change the public's perception from a one-time test to continuous health monitoring through blood markers or something similar, expand to tests other than genetic and make it a repeatable, accurate test that gives you more information (and obviously stop leaking people's data).

"Stop leaking data"? Sounds like a step forward.

> But why not focus on the B2B side? Sell access to their databases.

So, it's actually: try to sell your customers' data instead of leaking it? :O

Sorry if that sounds snarky, but are we sure there are enough customers who want to pay to give their data to a company so that company can immediately sell their data on to other companies?

[nirvael]

That's the conflict at the heart of the business. But do the public care enough about that? Obviously a HN audience does, but people use Google and Facebook products every day with the awareness that all that data is sold directly to advertisers. With the right messaging ("yes, we sell your data, but it's to drug companies to help make drugs that can cure your illnesses") it's possible that the conflict isnt too much of an issue.

[rchaud]

Drug companies pay pretty well for clinical trials, so why would anyone pay 23andme for their own data, so that 23andme can turn around and sell it to drug companies?

[nirvael]

These are different scenarios, clinical trials are experiments not just genetic information gathering.

[pinkgolem]

i mean, customers are angry if personal data leaks, but a lot of legit usecases can be done with agregate data.