3 ms·
>> He used his sister’s breast-cancer markers as an example... her risk may not have changed at all, the variation being the result of natural biological fluctu
by hmahncke 10y ago
>>
He used his sister’s breast-cancer markers as an example...
her risk may not have changed at all, the variation being the result of natural biological fluctuations and inherent uncertainty in the measurement.
>>
That natural biological fluctuation is exactly what pinprick blood testing could help with, because (in concept) the blood test could be delivered much more frequently, and measure the true variability.
- gumby 10y agoI don't see why pinprick testing would help; it's not like a regular draw is that unpleasant (I went through a period of my life where I had two cylinders drawn every week). The opposite problem exists with the tiny samples: blood like any other fluid, is not at all points identical at all times. You can easily demonstrate this for yourself: go to the drug store and buy a cheap glucose meter and take a bunch of samples just around the same finger, much less different fingers. You'll see a surprising level of variation. The larger samples of a conventional draw are shown to vary less. They still vary (as the line you quote says) but less than the highly local samples.