|
|
|
|
|
by streptomycin
4571 days ago
|
|
This is exactly why the FDA is acting correctly here! Dig deep on the 23andme website and you'll find that they test for a few BRCA mutations, but not all. It's far from comprehensive, and it's not at all equivalent to a normal test that you would get from a doctor. From https://customercare.23andme.com/entries/23241132-Does-the-2... "The BRCA Cancer Mutations (Selected) report includes 3 selected BRCA mutations. The BRCA mutations covered by this report are only three of hundreds in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes that can cause cancer." I've seen several commenters here on HN making the same mistake as you. HN readers are generally smart and skeptical. If we aren't perceptive enough to see through the bullshit, how do you think the general public is going to fare? |
|
Ultimately, what you seem to be suggesting is that it is better that we not get partial data because most people won't understand that it's partial data and further won't know what to do with it. Most people are not geneticists. I sort of agree, but there is no doubt in my mind that the future will see the loosening of the physician-as-gatekeeper, and to what extent is that acceptable. Would this service be allowed if they taught cursory genetics and SNPs in the general biology curricula at the high school level?