I JUST bought the kit yesterday. The FDA is right though. Imagine making extreme decisions (e.g., double masectomy to avoid breast cancer) based upon the information. This is making me consider cancelling my order.
If you are screening for something, the first test should have a low rate of false negatives. Anyone testing positive on that test should take a second--possibly more expensive--test with a low rate of false positives.
If you remove big blobs of flesh from yourself on the basis of a single test, you are not making your medical decisions wisely. The only decision you should be making on the basis of 23&Me results is whether to take another test that is more specifically targeted at the potential problem.
If 23&Me says you have BRCA, you don't get a double mastectomy. You talk to your doctor. You perform self-exams more often and more thoroughly. You get additional screenings that are not cost-effective for the general public with a lower risk profile. That's the whole point of consumer-grade genetic screening.
If I did see something that suggested a possibility of something, I would go the direction of what you mentioned in the last paragraph.
Although I agree with the FDA's actions, a consumer getting a thorough genetic exam is possibly what prompted this. Check out the artidcle http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-25/fda-tells-google-ba.... Turns out United Healthcare raised a concern which I believe is might be money-related. If your test results suggest a high possibility of some health issue from an non-FDA approved company and you requested a more accurate test, then I can see the health insurance companies getting involved.
you would not take serious action in any condition based on an cheap DNA test, would you?
I would suspect that it might serve as a possible flag and then you can talk to your doctor to further investigate any issue.
Plus 23andme is clear when showing the results that everything is based on probabilities, there's not a single %100 change of anything, it just tells you that people with similar DNA markers (in X, Y or Z study) seem to have a higher/lower chance of X or Y.
Have a google image search for "coloidal silver". See the people who have turned themselves blue. permanently blue - it's not going to change.
People are stupid. This isn't a label on a chainsaw saying "don't lick the blade". This is reasonable regulation of a product being marketed as a medical product.
I wouldn't but some would. I am more interested in my genetic lineage. To get a more accurate test like the one Angelina Jolie did would be a better option.
If you remove big blobs of flesh from yourself on the basis of a single test, you are not making your medical decisions wisely. The only decision you should be making on the basis of 23&Me results is whether to take another test that is more specifically targeted at the potential problem.
If 23&Me says you have BRCA, you don't get a double mastectomy. You talk to your doctor. You perform self-exams more often and more thoroughly. You get additional screenings that are not cost-effective for the general public with a lower risk profile. That's the whole point of consumer-grade genetic screening.