4 ms·
People generally shell out a lot more than that for many tests. I thought it was pretty cool. The only reason I'm not paying is that they do not seem to have a
by mwerty 19y ago
People generally shell out a lot more than that for many tests.
I thought it was pretty cool. The only reason I'm not paying is that they do not seem to have a service to keep my info updated based on new discoveries.
- run4yourlives 19y agoWell, those kits from the DNA ancestry project are like $100. Even though those guys have a horrible track record, I can't imagine good customer service costs $900 more to implement.
- mwerty 19y agoI thought they only tracked ancestry. I don't want to know if my ancestor was Genghis Khan. I do want to know when they can confidently estimate my risk of getting diabetes. edit - reliably, not confidently.
- motoko 19y agoI very confidently estimate your risk of getting diabetes to be exactly 34.57%. That will be $100, please. Oh... you mean accurate? Well, I'm confident that you don't.
- timr 19y agoYeah, but there's a reason that traditional genetic tests are expensive: they're carefully developed, calibrated and tested to tell you something reliable about a specific gene or condition (they're also usually FDA-regulated, and therefore subject to clinical trials. This is not a trivial expense. It also happens to be an expense that 23andMe has bypassed.) If a regular genetic test is equivalent to obtaining the contents of a single page in a very large book, what 23andMe is doing is closer to quickly skimming the index. It's cheaper to do on a large scale, but much less detailed. It's therefore a vanity expense, which has to affect the price point.