10 ms·

Some Rich People Are Counting Their Antibodies ‘Like Calories’

29 points by elliekelly 5y ago

newsbinator 5y ago
> Others just want to be armed with more information about their medical status That's really all that needs to be said. Rich people, poor people... if you want to know your body's status, you have every right to, without having to justify it. The jury's out on what the numbers mean. But you have the right to do a blood test and get your numbers.
- jjeaff 5y ago
  They have the right, as long as they aren't being subsidized by the government (and I suspect they are). But they might as well get their mitichlorian count while they are at it. It would mean about as much. Antibody levels will always fade after a vaccine within months and memory t-cells will remain.
  - eganist 5y ago
    > They have the right, as long as they aren't being subsidized by the government (and I suspect they are). This is a sound criticism, honestly. If there are social systems designed to provide a specific benefit across an entire population (testing once or twice post-vaccination to see if the vaccine stuck for select immunocompromised people or people in high risk environments) that end up being abused to give a different, nebulous benefit for a select few (testing all the time to have a bead on just one factor of immunity that may or may not show the whole picture), that's not okay. Now if they're paying for it, or if their insurance provider is paying for it (which would amaze me, but alas), then that's up to them and they should have every right.
    - vmception 5y ago
      There was a time when I was getting a PCR* test every 7 days I’m not in healthcare Or working on a movie set, etc I just wanted to know and see a small group of friends every other week, while complying with local orders I’m of the philosophy that money/liquidity isn’t guaranteed, and so for health matters might as well maximize the privilege while it is available At the end of the day some tests were free, some were covered by insurance, some were paid for and not reimbursed, others were I did something similar when I paid for the HPV vaccines out of pocket. Yeah it sucks that I could get hit by a car and all of this is moot, but I also like the additional privileged I can afford which can fortify me against some things (*I dont care about the efficacy or cycle guidelines, thanks)
      - eganist 5y ago
        Yeah, but those are PCR tests, not antibody tests. There's a massive difference between the two, with the former trying to see if you're likely infected and the latter to measure an aspect of immunity. Getting constant PCR testing is useful in that it'll help you reduce your own likelihood of transmitting the virus, which helps everyone.
        vmception 5y ago
        I’m aware they are different and didn't feel the need to qualify that as I think the point being made is very clear: Pay for data and fortification if you want and can, no matter what anyone else can practically do Compare yourself to yourself, not gen pop
        fragmede 5y ago
        Knowing that my antibodies have waned, and thus I'm more susceptible to infection is useful information for not getting everyone around me sick as well though. If I blindly go indoors to large events unmasked while believing I'm fully vaccinated, but it turns out my immunity has waned, you could (depending on how you're also behaving/interacting with the world) catch it from me before I'd pop positive PCR test.
        eganist 5y ago
        > Knowing that my antibodies have waned, and thus I'm more susceptible to infection So I guess this is the point I was making with my original comment when I mentioned a "nebulous benefit for a select few ." Here's a good lay primer on immunity. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/09/waning-immunity-not-crisis-right-now/619965/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/09/waning-i... Now, if it turns out you're a medical or osteopathic doctor, apologies in advance since I can't verify your qualifications; I'm still holding firm to my position because it's how I was instructed. And if you're not, then the link above will be helpful.
    - fragmede 5y ago
      It's still the early days of this situation though. We don't yet have the full picture of what immunity actually looks like across a significant sample size of the population 12/18/24 months after being fully vaccinated. Giving access to "the poors" to get themselves tested would help us develop a far more complete picture of what immunity looks like, especially as variants develop. If 0.01% of people never develop antibodies, or they wane after 6 months, we'd not know if we limit testing to a select few high net worth individuals vs a much larger sample size. For the MMR vaccine, it's something like 0.02% of people just never develop antibodies. We're all paying for short-sighted, selfish thinking right now. I'm glad I can afford and have the insurance to pay for antibody testing, but I'd be happier if my tax dollars went towards letting more people get that testing, in the name of public health policy.
morsch 5y ago
It isn’t overly expensive. Most insurances will cover it, but if they don’t it’s about $100 to 200. It's around 25 EUR in Germany. https://archive.is/dyY3Q https://archive.is/dyY3Q
- Tagbert 5y ago
  This is in the US where we aren’t burdened with inefficient, government-controlled health care. /s
  - Grim-444 5y ago
    To provide additional context: German Tax Rates for an individual: $58,918 - $274,612: 42% US Tax Rates for an individual: $40,126 - $85,525: 22% $163,301 - $207,350: 32% So, if you make an average salary of roughly 40-90k, you pay a full twice as much in taxes, for an extra $9,228 to $20,700 each year. That extra ~$10,000 to ~$20,000 dollars you pay in Germany in taxes, then (a portion of it) goes to pay for the health care. The drug isn't just magically cheaper, they just pay for it via taxes instead.
    - fragmede 5y ago
      Which state are you in? Eg California you'd also pay 9.3% on $58,635 to $299,508, which gets you to 41% (approx), which gets you within spitting distance of Germany's 42%. Add on the fact that you'd pay a decently sized deductable for any real amount of healthcare, and it's starting to look, all-in, that we're getting a raw deal with our US healthcare "system". Yearly "deductible" for a swedish national under their system? ~$100.
    - morsch 5y ago
      The test is around 25 EUR when it's not subsidised by anyone. When it's covered by healthcare (e.g. your GP prescribed it), it's free.
    - hobofan 5y ago
      Not sure why are listing income tax here. In Germany the public healthcare providers are indeed subsidized by taxes (about ~170€ per citizen per year), but the bulk of financing comes from monthly (salary based) fees payed directly to the healthcare providers, which is around 100€ for anyone that is out of the education system and goes up to around 800€ at 58k salary.
bluishgreen 5y ago
Without "Rich People" in the title, this is a non article, with it - it is a cultural phenom. Welcome to the post Internet world.
- 09188 5y ago
  FYI: this article is under the Style section, so not the same journalists that cover serious medical news.
rootsudo 5y ago
Very normal to do a CBC test - it's to see if you're inflamed, or somethings going on but your body is handling it / if there's an excess number from baseline then you have something that should be investigated. It's $20 at most places in USA, results in a day or two, if you need same day that's when it goes up. But I think this is a generally poor article and another NYtimes puffpiece. Not once did they mention the name of the test, being a "CBC" or complete blood cell, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_blood_count https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_blood_count and is available at "any" testing center. If anything, it feels like sponsored content for the the supposed "rich" people mentioned in the article (remember rich =/= wealthy) and the business associated within. Wouldn't surprise me if the people there have any stake in health stuff as well.
- pjc50 5y ago
  Interesting, I've never heard of this as a routine test in the UK. (Undoubtedly it happens, I've just never heard it discussed). What does it tell you that's actionable?
  - enlyth 5y ago
    I think it's called a FBC (Full blood count) in the UK, at least that's what my GP app on the phone says. I had one done in relation to some issues that I was complaining about to my GP, the results all came back normal luckily and had the following: Haemoglobin estimation, Total white cell count, Platelet count, Haematocrit, RBC, MCV, MCH, MCHC, Neotruphil/Lymphocyte/Monocyte/Eosinophil/Basophil count, Nucleated red blood count
  - stordoff 5y ago
    It's usually known as a full blood count (FBC) in the UK: > Full blood count (FBC): This is a test to check the types and numbers of cells in your blood, including red blood cells, white blood cells and platelets. This can help give an indication of your general health, as well as provide important clues about certain health problems you may have. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/blood-tests/types/ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/blood-tests/types/ I've had it done a few times, and the page the NHS links to describes it as "one of the most commonly requested tests".
legrande 5y ago
Anyone here had their telomeres counted? Apparently it's the most accurate indication of how long you will live: https://outline.com/Ex2Z2R https://outline.com/Ex2Z2R
trhway 5y ago
Wouldn't quick and easy, highly automated and thus very cheap blood finger pricking test done at the nearest Walgreens be a great thing? I feel like there is a business idea somewhere here.
- colechristensen 5y ago
  My social media is full of ads for various kinds of medical testing. Usually “at home” versions, sometimes completely at home, sometimes mailing something back. Automation in labs is already a thing, progress marches ever on. Places like LabCorp that do testing for doctors offices without labs also already exist and they will do a la carte tests for anybody. You want to wrap it up and do better, you’ll need to be able to build highly automated machinery that may need FDA approval and do so cheaply enough to replace lab techs who can do hundreds of different kinds of tests. If you were successful you might be able to make a difference and a lot of money but not before you reached a huge scale and because it’s medicine there is a huge mountain to climb for doing lots of things safely and accurately, and a narrow gap to find where you can save money and time.
- amluto 5y ago
  I once got a Theranos test mostly for fun. Everyone is so focused on the fraud that they miss a more fundamental issue: finger pricks are a very painful way to draw blood. Your finger tip is extremely heavily innervated and very sensitive. Okay, maybe no big deal if you need one drop of blood, e.g. for a hemoglobin test. But Theranos wanted maybe ten drops of blood. Having one’s finger squeezed hard and long enough to extract that much blood takes quite a while and leaves one’s finger hurting for quite a while. I would take a venous blood draw from a good or even mediocre phlebotomist over a Theranos test any time. Heck, the time I got thirteen or so blood vials drawn by an actual good phlebotomist was basically painless and may have been faster than getting a single magic Theranos cartridge drawn. So count me out. People who want tests can go to Labcorp or Quest and get reasonably priced testing done by professional phlebotomists. Both companies have offices all over.
  - andi999 5y ago
    What actually happened to draw blood from the earlobes?
asadkn 5y ago
I don't understand the judging. It's everyones's own choice. I got an antibody test post COVID vaccination, and it took a lot of scientific paper reading to find a convertible reference point, but it was time well spent. I got antibodies level less than the average of 80 age group (for my vaccine). Not something I was expecting, since I have been eating very healthy (with enough organic veggies and fruits), consistently, getting enough sunlight or supplementing vit D when I can't, and exercising for over a decade and half now. That made me start doubting my health and immune system, so I started taking it seriously. And surely, there are issues that I discovered upon further investigation and bloodwork. There's a suspicion about a possible autoimmune issue as well, but these diagnosis take a very long time - no simple tests. In short, it's been worth knowing and taking action, for me. Downvoters: I know you're getting triggered because you're anti-vaxxers. FYI, I did pay for everything myself. It affects you in no way - but please come forth and specify your objections.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
09188 5y ago
Note: Article is from the Style section. The different sections of a newspaper have wildly varying journalistic standards. It's important to understand where your news comes from, and these writers don't specialize in medical news. I doubt this would be getting so much attention if it wasn't in NYT
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
guilhas 5y ago
It is free in the UK just your doctor

29 points by elliekelly 5y ago

> Others just want to be armed with more information about their medical status That's really all that needs to be said. Rich people, poor people... if you want to know your body's status, you have every right to, without having to justify it. The jury's out on what the numbers mean. But you have the right to do a blood test and get your numbers.

jjeaff 5y ago
They have the right, as long as they aren't being subsidized by the government (and I suspect they are). But they might as well get their mitichlorian count while they are at it. It would mean about as much. Antibody levels will always fade after a vaccine within months and memory t-cells will remain.
- eganist 5y ago
  > They have the right, as long as they aren't being subsidized by the government (and I suspect they are). This is a sound criticism, honestly. If there are social systems designed to provide a specific benefit across an entire population (testing once or twice post-vaccination to see if the vaccine stuck for select immunocompromised people or people in high risk environments) that end up being abused to give a different, nebulous benefit for a select few (testing all the time to have a bead on just one factor of immunity that may or may not show the whole picture), that's not okay. Now if they're paying for it, or if their insurance provider is paying for it (which would amaze me, but alas), then that's up to them and they should have every right.
  - vmception 5y ago
    There was a time when I was getting a PCR* test every 7 days I’m not in healthcare Or working on a movie set, etc I just wanted to know and see a small group of friends every other week, while complying with local orders I’m of the philosophy that money/liquidity isn’t guaranteed, and so for health matters might as well maximize the privilege while it is available At the end of the day some tests were free, some were covered by insurance, some were paid for and not reimbursed, others were I did something similar when I paid for the HPV vaccines out of pocket. Yeah it sucks that I could get hit by a car and all of this is moot, but I also like the additional privileged I can afford which can fortify me against some things (*I dont care about the efficacy or cycle guidelines, thanks)
    - eganist 5y ago
      Yeah, but those are PCR tests, not antibody tests. There's a massive difference between the two, with the former trying to see if you're likely infected and the latter to measure an aspect of immunity. Getting constant PCR testing is useful in that it'll help you reduce your own likelihood of transmitting the virus, which helps everyone.
      - vmception 5y ago
        I’m aware they are different and didn't feel the need to qualify that as I think the point being made is very clear: Pay for data and fortification if you want and can, no matter what anyone else can practically do Compare yourself to yourself, not gen pop
      - fragmede 5y ago
        Knowing that my antibodies have waned, and thus I'm more susceptible to infection is useful information for not getting everyone around me sick as well though. If I blindly go indoors to large events unmasked while believing I'm fully vaccinated, but it turns out my immunity has waned, you could (depending on how you're also behaving/interacting with the world) catch it from me before I'd pop positive PCR test.
        eganist 5y ago
        > Knowing that my antibodies have waned, and thus I'm more susceptible to infection So I guess this is the point I was making with my original comment when I mentioned a "nebulous benefit for a select few ." Here's a good lay primer on immunity. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/09/waning-immunity-not-crisis-right-now/619965/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/09/waning-i... Now, if it turns out you're a medical or osteopathic doctor, apologies in advance since I can't verify your qualifications; I'm still holding firm to my position because it's how I was instructed. And if you're not, then the link above will be helpful.
  - fragmede 5y ago
    It's still the early days of this situation though. We don't yet have the full picture of what immunity actually looks like across a significant sample size of the population 12/18/24 months after being fully vaccinated. Giving access to "the poors" to get themselves tested would help us develop a far more complete picture of what immunity looks like, especially as variants develop. If 0.01% of people never develop antibodies, or they wane after 6 months, we'd not know if we limit testing to a select few high net worth individuals vs a much larger sample size. For the MMR vaccine, it's something like 0.02% of people just never develop antibodies. We're all paying for short-sighted, selfish thinking right now. I'm glad I can afford and have the insurance to pay for antibody testing, but I'd be happier if my tax dollars went towards letting more people get that testing, in the name of public health policy.

morsch 5y ago

It isn’t overly expensive. Most insurances will cover it, but if they don’t it’s about $100 to 200. It's around 25 EUR in Germany. https://archive.is/dyY3Q https://archive.is/dyY3Q

Tagbert 5y ago
This is in the US where we aren’t burdened with inefficient, government-controlled health care. /s
- Grim-444 5y ago
  To provide additional context: German Tax Rates for an individual: $58,918 - $274,612: 42% US Tax Rates for an individual: $40,126 - $85,525: 22% $163,301 - $207,350: 32% So, if you make an average salary of roughly 40-90k, you pay a full twice as much in taxes, for an extra $9,228 to $20,700 each year. That extra ~$10,000 to ~$20,000 dollars you pay in Germany in taxes, then (a portion of it) goes to pay for the health care. The drug isn't just magically cheaper, they just pay for it via taxes instead.
  - fragmede 5y ago
    Which state are you in? Eg California you'd also pay 9.3% on $58,635 to $299,508, which gets you to 41% (approx), which gets you within spitting distance of Germany's 42%. Add on the fact that you'd pay a decently sized deductable for any real amount of healthcare, and it's starting to look, all-in, that we're getting a raw deal with our US healthcare "system". Yearly "deductible" for a swedish national under their system? ~$100.
  - morsch 5y ago
    The test is around 25 EUR when it's not subsidised by anyone. When it's covered by healthcare (e.g. your GP prescribed it), it's free.
  - hobofan 5y ago
    Not sure why are listing income tax here. In Germany the public healthcare providers are indeed subsidized by taxes (about ~170€ per citizen per year), but the bulk of financing comes from monthly (salary based) fees payed directly to the healthcare providers, which is around 100€ for anyone that is out of the education system and goes up to around 800€ at 58k salary.

bluishgreen 5y ago

Without "Rich People" in the title, this is a non article, with it - it is a cultural phenom. Welcome to the post Internet world.

09188 5y ago
FYI: this article is under the Style section, so not the same journalists that cover serious medical news.

rootsudo 5y ago

Very normal to do a CBC test - it's to see if you're inflamed, or somethings going on but your body is handling it / if there's an excess number from baseline then you have something that should be investigated. It's $20 at most places in USA, results in a day or two, if you need same day that's when it goes up. But I think this is a generally poor article and another NYtimes puffpiece. Not once did they mention the name of the test, being a "CBC" or complete blood cell, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_blood_count https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_blood_count and is available at "any" testing center. If anything, it feels like sponsored content for the the supposed "rich" people mentioned in the article (remember rich =/= wealthy) and the business associated within. Wouldn't surprise me if the people there have any stake in health stuff as well.

pjc50 5y ago
Interesting, I've never heard of this as a routine test in the UK. (Undoubtedly it happens, I've just never heard it discussed). What does it tell you that's actionable?
- enlyth 5y ago
  I think it's called a FBC (Full blood count) in the UK, at least that's what my GP app on the phone says. I had one done in relation to some issues that I was complaining about to my GP, the results all came back normal luckily and had the following: Haemoglobin estimation, Total white cell count, Platelet count, Haematocrit, RBC, MCV, MCH, MCHC, Neotruphil/Lymphocyte/Monocyte/Eosinophil/Basophil count, Nucleated red blood count
- stordoff 5y ago
  It's usually known as a full blood count (FBC) in the UK: > Full blood count (FBC): This is a test to check the types and numbers of cells in your blood, including red blood cells, white blood cells and platelets. This can help give an indication of your general health, as well as provide important clues about certain health problems you may have. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/blood-tests/types/ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/blood-tests/types/ I've had it done a few times, and the page the NHS links to describes it as "one of the most commonly requested tests".

legrande 5y ago

Anyone here had their telomeres counted? Apparently it's the most accurate indication of how long you will live: https://outline.com/Ex2Z2R https://outline.com/Ex2Z2R

trhway 5y ago

Wouldn't quick and easy, highly automated and thus very cheap blood finger pricking test done at the nearest Walgreens be a great thing? I feel like there is a business idea somewhere here.

colechristensen 5y ago
My social media is full of ads for various kinds of medical testing. Usually “at home” versions, sometimes completely at home, sometimes mailing something back. Automation in labs is already a thing, progress marches ever on. Places like LabCorp that do testing for doctors offices without labs also already exist and they will do a la carte tests for anybody. You want to wrap it up and do better, you’ll need to be able to build highly automated machinery that may need FDA approval and do so cheaply enough to replace lab techs who can do hundreds of different kinds of tests. If you were successful you might be able to make a difference and a lot of money but not before you reached a huge scale and because it’s medicine there is a huge mountain to climb for doing lots of things safely and accurately, and a narrow gap to find where you can save money and time.
amluto 5y ago
I once got a Theranos test mostly for fun. Everyone is so focused on the fraud that they miss a more fundamental issue: finger pricks are a very painful way to draw blood. Your finger tip is extremely heavily innervated and very sensitive. Okay, maybe no big deal if you need one drop of blood, e.g. for a hemoglobin test. But Theranos wanted maybe ten drops of blood. Having one’s finger squeezed hard and long enough to extract that much blood takes quite a while and leaves one’s finger hurting for quite a while. I would take a venous blood draw from a good or even mediocre phlebotomist over a Theranos test any time. Heck, the time I got thirteen or so blood vials drawn by an actual good phlebotomist was basically painless and may have been faster than getting a single magic Theranos cartridge drawn. So count me out. People who want tests can go to Labcorp or Quest and get reasonably priced testing done by professional phlebotomists. Both companies have offices all over.
- andi999 5y ago
  What actually happened to draw blood from the earlobes?

asadkn 5y ago

I don't understand the judging. It's everyones's own choice. I got an antibody test post COVID vaccination, and it took a lot of scientific paper reading to find a convertible reference point, but it was time well spent. I got antibodies level less than the average of 80 age group (for my vaccine). Not something I was expecting, since I have been eating very healthy (with enough organic veggies and fruits), consistently, getting enough sunlight or supplementing vit D when I can't, and exercising for over a decade and half now. That made me start doubting my health and immune system, so I started taking it seriously. And surely, there are issues that I discovered upon further investigation and bloodwork. There's a suspicion about a possible autoimmune issue as well, but these diagnosis take a very long time - no simple tests. In short, it's been worth knowing and taking action, for me. Downvoters: I know you're getting triggered because you're anti-vaxxers. FYI, I did pay for everything myself. It affects you in no way - but please come forth and specify your objections.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

09188 5y ago

Note: Article is from the Style section. The different sections of a newspaper have wildly varying journalistic standards. It's important to understand where your news comes from, and these writers don't specialize in medical news. I doubt this would be getting so much attention if it wasn't in NYT

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

guilhas 5y ago

It is free in the UK just your doctor