4 ms·

Sounds like a good thing to me

by derision 7y ago

sihoang 7y ago
except when the treatments are only for those who have a lot money or expensive insurances
- larrik 7y ago
  That's how a lot of stuff starts, and then the price goes down while the kinks are worked out. I don't really know what the alternative is here...
  - thatfrenchguy 7y ago
    > and then the price goes down US health insurance costs are up 20% since last year.
    - shadowgovt 7y ago
      The US system's drug payment policies being broken is somewhat independent of the net utility of developing new drugs for the world at large.
    - themaninthedark 7y ago
      By how much did the health insurance industry and hospital administration grow?
  - 1024core 7y ago
    > That's how a lot of stuff starts, and then the price goes down while the kinks are worked out. By that logic, Insulin would be dirt cheap today, right? Hint: it is not.
    - evandijk70 7y ago
      Compared to more recent drugs, it is
    - bananabreakfast 7y ago
      Hint: being cynical does not help your argument and makes you sound like an asshole
      - 1024core 7y ago
        I was pointing out an obvious counter-example to their point. Telling the truth is not being "cynical".
    - simplyinfinity 7y ago
      My grandmother is on insulin which the Bulgarian government mostly pays for, the rest is equal to about 50 euro/month or 55 usd. So it's practically free for us. The US has f-ed up healthcare. Change that.
    - themaninthedark 7y ago
      What is considered dirt cheap? One kind of insulin can be bought for ~$25 at Walmart. Now, this means that you have to monitor you sugar levels, have a restrictive diet, etc. All things that are very restrictive but better than dying that people did when insulin treatment was first being developed. Now we have newer, reformulated insulin that allows for a more permissive lifestyle. That is expensive. Should the newer stuff be cheaper? It certainly allows for a greater QOL and took time and money to research.
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  Vote accordingly.
  - amanaplanacanal 7y ago
    Exactly. It’s not set in stone that the current health insurance system will last forever.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- evandijk70 7y ago
  Even if that's the case (it is not in countries that do not have a stupid insurance system like the US) it is better than no treatment at all
W__S 7y ago
I can't tell if that is sarcastic. Are you sure it's not going to the genetic weapons department to develop targeted pathogens that can kill people of a certain group or with certain characteristics, maybe disagreeableness or behaviors that counter the desires of the global demigod neo-aristocracy?
johnnycab 7y ago
>Sounds like a good thing to me Which part sounds good? At it's most simplest, the part where you are not just frittering away your own privacy, but also of those related to you ─ in order to help a Google spin-off based on nepotism, should be reason enough to remain wary ─ until at least some semblance of how to deal with bad practices or egregious cases, is offered by lawmakers on this subject. Tiffany C. Li, a privacy expert and resident fellow at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project, told Tom's Guide. "You are paying to help the company make money with your data" When you give your DNA data to companies like Ancestry.com or 23andMe, you give up not only your own genetic privacy, but that of your entire family
- shadowgovt 7y ago
  "You are paying to help the company make money with your data" also describes Amazon, Target, and my local gas station. In this day and age, it's hardly an indictment.
- clSTophEjUdRanu 7y ago
  I'm legally allowed to follow you in public and pick up hair or skin particles that fall off of you.
  - johnnycab 7y ago
    NAL. The act of following someone with the express intent of collecting genetic material and then covertly sending it off to be processed, without any overall consent, might be considered legal in your jurisdiction. However, you will require a rigorously disciplined approach, in order to acquire a non-contaminated sample, not to mention the costs associated with this exercise ─ just in case, you had any designs of putting this idea on a pitch deck. Nevertheless, the above-mentioned debate is moot, especially when you consider the original point(s) made in the article, with regards to the vagaries of explicitly sharing your genetic data without first analysing the implications.
    - asdff 7y ago
      it really wouldn't be hard. person goes to a cafe, train station, and a store. grab probable hair sample from cafe, train station, and store. run pcr on 5 fingerprinting markers (kids do this in ap bio, not hard). if all three samplings match, that's probably your guy.

Sounds like a good thing to me

sihoang 7y ago

except when the treatments are only for those who have a lot money or expensive insurances

larrik 7y ago
That's how a lot of stuff starts, and then the price goes down while the kinks are worked out. I don't really know what the alternative is here...
- thatfrenchguy 7y ago
  > and then the price goes down US health insurance costs are up 20% since last year.
  - shadowgovt 7y ago
    The US system's drug payment policies being broken is somewhat independent of the net utility of developing new drugs for the world at large.
  - themaninthedark 7y ago
    By how much did the health insurance industry and hospital administration grow?
- 1024core 7y ago
  > That's how a lot of stuff starts, and then the price goes down while the kinks are worked out. By that logic, Insulin would be dirt cheap today, right? Hint: it is not.
  - evandijk70 7y ago
    Compared to more recent drugs, it is
  - bananabreakfast 7y ago
    Hint: being cynical does not help your argument and makes you sound like an asshole
    - 1024core 7y ago
      I was pointing out an obvious counter-example to their point. Telling the truth is not being "cynical".
  - simplyinfinity 7y ago
    My grandmother is on insulin which the Bulgarian government mostly pays for, the rest is equal to about 50 euro/month or 55 usd. So it's practically free for us. The US has f-ed up healthcare. Change that.
  - themaninthedark 7y ago
    What is considered dirt cheap? One kind of insulin can be bought for ~$25 at Walmart. Now, this means that you have to monitor you sugar levels, have a restrictive diet, etc. All things that are very restrictive but better than dying that people did when insulin treatment was first being developed. Now we have newer, reformulated insulin that allows for a more permissive lifestyle. That is expensive. Should the newer stuff be cheaper? It certainly allows for a greater QOL and took time and money to research.
toomuchtodo 7y ago
Vote accordingly.
- amanaplanacanal 7y ago
  Exactly. It’s not set in stone that the current health insurance system will last forever.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
evandijk70 7y ago
Even if that's the case (it is not in countries that do not have a stupid insurance system like the US) it is better than no treatment at all

W__S 7y ago

I can't tell if that is sarcastic. Are you sure it's not going to the genetic weapons department to develop targeted pathogens that can kill people of a certain group or with certain characteristics, maybe disagreeableness or behaviors that counter the desires of the global demigod neo-aristocracy?

johnnycab 7y ago

>Sounds like a good thing to me Which part sounds good? At it's most simplest, the part where you are not just frittering away your own privacy, but also of those related to you ─ in order to help a Google spin-off based on nepotism, should be reason enough to remain wary ─ until at least some semblance of how to deal with bad practices or egregious cases, is offered by lawmakers on this subject. Tiffany C. Li, a privacy expert and resident fellow at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project, told Tom's Guide. "You are paying to help the company make money with your data" When you give your DNA data to companies like Ancestry.com or 23andMe, you give up not only your own genetic privacy, but that of your entire family

shadowgovt 7y ago
"You are paying to help the company make money with your data" also describes Amazon, Target, and my local gas station. In this day and age, it's hardly an indictment.
clSTophEjUdRanu 7y ago
I'm legally allowed to follow you in public and pick up hair or skin particles that fall off of you.
- johnnycab 7y ago
  NAL. The act of following someone with the express intent of collecting genetic material and then covertly sending it off to be processed, without any overall consent, might be considered legal in your jurisdiction. However, you will require a rigorously disciplined approach, in order to acquire a non-contaminated sample, not to mention the costs associated with this exercise ─ just in case, you had any designs of putting this idea on a pitch deck. Nevertheless, the above-mentioned debate is moot, especially when you consider the original point(s) made in the article, with regards to the vagaries of explicitly sharing your genetic data without first analysing the implications.
  - asdff 7y ago
    it really wouldn't be hard. person goes to a cafe, train station, and a store. grab probable hair sample from cafe, train station, and store. run pcr on 5 fingerprinting markers (kids do this in ap bio, not hard). if all three samplings match, that's probably your guy.