4 ms·

They had something, I think it was a protein database search goog labs project. It wasn't very popular, so I guess it didn't stick. btw 23me is close enough, an

• beambot 15y ago
  How is 23andMe misleading in scientific value? They just published "Web-based genome-wide association study identifies two novel loci and a substantial genetic component for Parkinson’s disease" in PLOS Genetics: http://spittoon.23andme.com/2011/06/23/plos-genetics-parkinsons-discoveries/ http://spittoon.23andme.com/2011/06/23/plos-genetics-parkins... http://www.plosgenetics.org/doi/pgen.1002141 http://www.plosgenetics.org/doi/pgen.1002141
  • Create 15y ago
    correct me if I am wrong, but the debate which started at about and around [1] didn't quite finish. Would you trust the output of this chip, as it has been presented/used in the paper [2]? 1.Katsanis, S.H., Javitt, G. & Hudson, K. A Case Study of Personalized Medicine. Science 320, 53 -54 (2008). 2.Konstantinopoulos, P.A. et al. Integrated Analysis of Multiple Microarray Datasets Identifies a Reproducible Survival Predictor in Ovarian Cancer. PLoS ONE 6, e18202 (2011).
    • beambot 15y ago
      My robotics training hardly qualifies me to asses the output of their academic research. However, I applaud their commitment to publishing results it top-tier academic journals. Off-handed comments (in a thread about Google) calling 23andMe's scientific research "misleading" seems a bit snarky. Educated discussion has a place -- eg. in HN threads related to the company [1] or (especially) in the peer-review process. [1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2813270 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2813270 (currently on HNs frontpage)