Umfrage: Search Engine Optimist oder Search Engine Pessimist? …

yigg_url=”;Welche Position nehmt ihr ein? … …

Interessante Links hierzu:
Googlewatchblock: Die Macht einer Suchmaschine
Hermann Maurer – Google, Freund oder Feind?
Peter Fleischer, Google’s Global Privacy Counsel: Protecting Priv…

I think we would all rest more assured if we had a more clear picture of our health outlook. If we could better understand the makeup of our DNA we would would be more clear on what hand we have been dealt by our ancestors. 23andMe, a Silicon Valley-ba…

“Would you, could you, spit in a tube?
I would not, could not, spit in a tube.”
– Guy Kawasaki (paraphrased)

I just finished reading Guy’s summary of the 23andme Spit Party. It sounded interesting, and kinda gross, at the same time. I g…

http://novate.w...ire-human-race/

It is dubbed as a Personal Genome Service. Starting Monday, 23andMe is offering a $999 genotyping service. The company has partnered with Illumina to perform whole-genome genotyping and provide this as a service to individuals.
The $999 price tag appe…

Don’t forget that while this may show you have an increased risk of one or two diseases, it’s can also showing you a decreased risk for all the others they test for, so, if anything, it should reduce the cost of insurance.

It won’t make insurance obsolete, because even if there’s a marker that indicates 100% certainty of developing some disease, it remains unknown and unknowable when the disease will develop.

http://www.dirk...t/DNATests.html

Several big problems with this:

1. You misunderstand the importance of family history vis-a-vis genetics. This is not an alternative to FH. You do a FH. Say you have a FH that suggests you have a high risk of inherited breast or ovarian cancer. Then, and this assumes your doc knows how to take a proper FH (or has the time), knows how to interpret it, and knows what to do with it (and that’s all a long stretch), he or she should refer you to a specialist or genetic counselor. After further discussion, it may be suggested that you take a genetic test and you may decide to take the test or maybe not. Taking a BRCA test in the absence of a positive FH? Well, say it comes back and you have a mutation. What does it mean? You don’t have a FH so it’s meaning is probably indeterminate but your anxiety is through the roof. Lot’s of fun don’t you think?

2. Most genetic information is of indeterminate meaning at the moment. Take it to a doctor and it will have no practical bearing on the care he or she provides. At least that should be the case. Worse case is that they take it as seriously as you do.

3. Even when the genetic information is relatively well understood and may have a practical implication for the type of care you should receive, most doctors don’t understand it sufficiently and aren’t prepared to use it appropriately. Think most primary docs can take decent FHs and refer you for BRCA test counseling when it is appropriate? Read the literature and learn otherwise. And that’s a genetic test that’s been a round for a while, on which there has been lots of research, and for which there are even national guidelines.

At best this is just genetics for fun and entertainment; at worst it’s a way to feed your worst anxieties and screw up your medical care.

So I highly doubt that building a machine that does that will some how change what we do with such judgments. There is already a hierarchy of desirability and this sort of testing will be one more way of stratifying society. Nothing new here really.

He talks about how a single gene may be a marker for some condition or disease, but that it takes several genes working in concert to really make someone more likely to develop a condition or disease.

He also says that environmental factors have a greater effect than genes in determining these rates.

It’s nice that a genetic mapping is available to regular people (who can afford $1k) but I think we need to look at this closely and realize that if someone has the “cancer” gene or the “high blood pressure” gene, there may be many other genes in concert that we don’t yet understand that will cause a higher rate of something occurring, and that where someone lives, what they do and consume, whether they exercise and whether they have a sunny disposition that will predict rates.

At the end of Forum, (-15:42s) someone called in to ask about startups like 23andme doing this kind of work, and he suggests the above issues will make it harder to control or identify effects based on a single gene. If you knock one gene out, you don’t remove the possibility of the disease, and the whole picture has to be analyzed to have any realistic chance of giving you good information. He thinks these services may only give a partial picture. And that genetic determinism is not accurate.

they have been around for 7 years or someting are on the stockmarket DCCN i think.

I’m sure we all want to know what diseases we might end up with in the future, and in the development of human knowledge the accessibility of 23andMe’s product is a step forward

i do not want to know what diseases i might end up with!!!

23andMe’s product is a step backward!!!

This is really babylon 2.0 bullshit…