5 ms·

23andMe hit with class action over “misleading” genetic ads

23 points by a_bonobo 13y ago

coldcode 13y ago
If you appear successful someone will sue you. If you do something new and scary someone will sue you. If you have a clever name someone will sue you. In the US you aren't someone until you've been sued.
- cmsimike 13y ago
  That says a lot about the United States and it is all bad.
  - dm2 13y ago
    The right to sue isn't bad. It's still up to the court/judge/jury whether or not the other person has a valid argument.
    - TrainedMonkey 13y ago
      So patent trolling is not bad as long as trolls win? Good to know.
      - dm2 13y ago
        I think that patent trolling is bad. My point was that it's good for people to have the right to sue companies or other people. What is the alternative? It seems like we would be giving up a huge freedom and protection of personal property to be able to bring somebody to court or negotiation to settle a dispute.
        TrainedMonkey 13y ago
        Alternative would be to make losing side bear all litigation costs, baring special circumstances. This way patent trolls will not be suing every company on the web. (And do something about Eastern Texas Judges as poster above mentioned.)
        dm2 13y ago
        I don't think that would be considered an alternative. I agree that the losing side should be made to pay litigation costs in many cases, and in many they do. To help mitigate the huge risk bringing a lawsuit in that situation, if the losing side was suppose to bear all costs, there could be an insurance to cover that. I'm not sure who oversees judges in the east Texas situation but maybe there should be more oversight and punishment of judges and court systems that participate in corrupt activities, such as being paid in some way to rule in favor of patent trolls. It's probably not easy to get sufficient evidence to bring a case against a judge, but at least news articles like that help bring it to the attention of the people that can do something about it.
    - toomuchtodo 13y ago
      East Texas shows the problem with this. Your opinion doesn't get the same weight as facts.
geetee 13y ago
Definitely will be opting-out of this one if it gains any traction.
cromwellian 13y ago
And yet, few FDA actions or class action lawsuits against chiropractors, acupuncturists, purveyors of bullshit diets, nutrition or exercise products, penis and breast enlargement devices. Turn on any radio or late night TV channel and get deluged with sheer bullshit. Better yet, look at your own insurance policy paying for the medical equivalent of scientology (chiropractic medicine). There's a long list of scams and bad products out there (Ranbaxy anyone?), many that actually harm consumers and promise miracles. And yet, here we have the government cracking down on something (as well as opportunistic ambulance chasers), that doesn't really promise anymore than a statistical printout of your DNA. Most of 23andme's customers were early adopters, especially when the price was much higher, I find it hard to believe the plantiffs in this lawsuit were duped into thinking it does anything more than claimed. Meanwhile, people who give medical advice that harms actual children, by claiming vaccination gives them autism, can run wild all over public health.
- jbooth 13y ago
  Most/all of those others provide appropriate disclaimers and, if the FDA is calling them, they pick up the phone. From what I saw of the FDA complaints, really all they wanted is a disclaimer and a dialback of certain marketing claims. The lawsuit is almost certainly motivated by the FDA action and trying to grab a bad-faith payday, but the existence of various other BS products where the management actually bothered to talk to a lawyer doesn't mean that 23andme was exempt from talking to a lawyer themselves.
  - cromwellian 13y ago
    That's all true, but the "disclaimers" on homeopathic pills and bogus diets are so weak compared to overwhelming testimonials that the "disclaimer" amounts to ass covering boilerplate that makes no practical difference in terms of people getting fooled. Maybe 23andme screwed up by not running text in 8 point font and a fast talking muted announcer saying "information may not be accurate or useful...blah blah...", but this seems to be a huge inversion of priority compared to potential harm. People have been poisoned by "supplements" containing lead or arsenic, or killed by ginseng/ginkoba/caffeine overdoses in others. Millions more are ripped off by diets with utterly outrageous claims and faked testimonials.
300bps 13y ago
I am a part of this class and will happily opt out of the class action suit if it attains that status. Through 23andme, I found a moderate genetic disorder that I have which prompted me to make certain lifestyle changes that will very likely stop me from having emphysema relatively early in life. Because I had the particular disorder, I passed this information on to my sister and through testing not through 23andme, she discovered she has it as well. So far it has been the best $99 I have ever spent on anything healthcare related.
- eshvk 13y ago
  > Through 23andme, I found a moderate genetic disorder that I have which prompted me to make certain lifestyle changes that will very likely stop me from having emphysema relatively early in life. Because I had the particular disorder, I passed this information on to my sister and through testing not through 23andme, she discovered she has it as well. How do you actually know you have the genetic disorder? Could it possibly be a bug in 23andme? [1] [1] http://qz.com/151311/why-23andme-might-have-the-fda-worried-it-gave-me-a-false-result/ http://qz.com/151311/why-23andme-might-have-the-fda-worried-...
  - 300bps 13y ago
    How do you actually know you have the genetic disorder? Could it possibly be a bug in 23andme? Actually, the part of my original comment that you quoted shows that is extremely unlikely. Here it is: I passed this information on to my sister and through testing not through 23andme, she discovered she has it as well. Specifically, my sister got tested through a blood test from the foundation for this genetic disorder and verified that she has the same genetic disorder I do. Is it possible that 23andme wrongly stated I have a genetic disorder and that coincidentally my sister has it but I don't? For some genetic disorders, perhaps. But with mine, there's exactly 0% chance. 23andme was correct in my case.
    - toomuchtodo 13y ago
      I too was an early 23andme adopter. Our entire family was genotyped (5 people). We'll all be opting out of yet another frivolous class action lawsuit. I'm trying really hard to have a positive outlook on the US.
ksherlock 13y ago
"The FDA lacks any specific statutory authority to regulate genomic sequencing technologies. President Obama knows this, because as a Senator in 2006 and 2007 he introduced bills that would regulate the genomics industry. They never passed. Yet in 2010 the FDA simply decreed by fiat that these tests are considered new medical devices that require premarket testing and approval." -- http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304465604579220003539640102 http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230446560... (possibly behind a paywall so google news it). And there it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bills_sponsored_by_Barack_Obama_in_the_United_States_Senate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bills_sponsored_by_Bara... -- Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act of 2006/2007.
adventured 13y ago
Anyone know if it's still possible to purchase their DNA kits, despite the FDA action? Looked around their site for a while and didn't see anything about the product being unavailable (also couldn't find a contact us page).
chasing 13y ago
Someone at 23andMe must've read an advance copy of "Without Their Permission."

23 points by a_bonobo 13y ago

If you appear successful someone will sue you. If you do something new and scary someone will sue you. If you have a clever name someone will sue you. In the US you aren't someone until you've been sued.

cmsimike 13y ago
That says a lot about the United States and it is all bad.
- dm2 13y ago
  The right to sue isn't bad. It's still up to the court/judge/jury whether or not the other person has a valid argument.
  - TrainedMonkey 13y ago
    So patent trolling is not bad as long as trolls win? Good to know.
    - dm2 13y ago
      I think that patent trolling is bad. My point was that it's good for people to have the right to sue companies or other people. What is the alternative? It seems like we would be giving up a huge freedom and protection of personal property to be able to bring somebody to court or negotiation to settle a dispute.
      - TrainedMonkey 13y ago
        Alternative would be to make losing side bear all litigation costs, baring special circumstances. This way patent trolls will not be suing every company on the web. (And do something about Eastern Texas Judges as poster above mentioned.)
        dm2 13y ago
        I don't think that would be considered an alternative. I agree that the losing side should be made to pay litigation costs in many cases, and in many they do. To help mitigate the huge risk bringing a lawsuit in that situation, if the losing side was suppose to bear all costs, there could be an insurance to cover that. I'm not sure who oversees judges in the east Texas situation but maybe there should be more oversight and punishment of judges and court systems that participate in corrupt activities, such as being paid in some way to rule in favor of patent trolls. It's probably not easy to get sufficient evidence to bring a case against a judge, but at least news articles like that help bring it to the attention of the people that can do something about it.
  - toomuchtodo 13y ago
    East Texas shows the problem with this. Your opinion doesn't get the same weight as facts.

geetee 13y ago

Definitely will be opting-out of this one if it gains any traction.

cromwellian 13y ago

And yet, few FDA actions or class action lawsuits against chiropractors, acupuncturists, purveyors of bullshit diets, nutrition or exercise products, penis and breast enlargement devices. Turn on any radio or late night TV channel and get deluged with sheer bullshit. Better yet, look at your own insurance policy paying for the medical equivalent of scientology (chiropractic medicine). There's a long list of scams and bad products out there (Ranbaxy anyone?), many that actually harm consumers and promise miracles. And yet, here we have the government cracking down on something (as well as opportunistic ambulance chasers), that doesn't really promise anymore than a statistical printout of your DNA. Most of 23andme's customers were early adopters, especially when the price was much higher, I find it hard to believe the plantiffs in this lawsuit were duped into thinking it does anything more than claimed. Meanwhile, people who give medical advice that harms actual children, by claiming vaccination gives them autism, can run wild all over public health.

jbooth 13y ago
Most/all of those others provide appropriate disclaimers and, if the FDA is calling them, they pick up the phone. From what I saw of the FDA complaints, really all they wanted is a disclaimer and a dialback of certain marketing claims. The lawsuit is almost certainly motivated by the FDA action and trying to grab a bad-faith payday, but the existence of various other BS products where the management actually bothered to talk to a lawyer doesn't mean that 23andme was exempt from talking to a lawyer themselves.
- cromwellian 13y ago
  That's all true, but the "disclaimers" on homeopathic pills and bogus diets are so weak compared to overwhelming testimonials that the "disclaimer" amounts to ass covering boilerplate that makes no practical difference in terms of people getting fooled. Maybe 23andme screwed up by not running text in 8 point font and a fast talking muted announcer saying "information may not be accurate or useful...blah blah...", but this seems to be a huge inversion of priority compared to potential harm. People have been poisoned by "supplements" containing lead or arsenic, or killed by ginseng/ginkoba/caffeine overdoses in others. Millions more are ripped off by diets with utterly outrageous claims and faked testimonials.

300bps 13y ago

I am a part of this class and will happily opt out of the class action suit if it attains that status. Through 23andme, I found a moderate genetic disorder that I have which prompted me to make certain lifestyle changes that will very likely stop me from having emphysema relatively early in life. Because I had the particular disorder, I passed this information on to my sister and through testing not through 23andme, she discovered she has it as well. So far it has been the best $99 I have ever spent on anything healthcare related.

eshvk 13y ago
> Through 23andme, I found a moderate genetic disorder that I have which prompted me to make certain lifestyle changes that will very likely stop me from having emphysema relatively early in life. Because I had the particular disorder, I passed this information on to my sister and through testing not through 23andme, she discovered she has it as well. How do you actually know you have the genetic disorder? Could it possibly be a bug in 23andme? [1] [1] http://qz.com/151311/why-23andme-might-have-the-fda-worried-it-gave-me-a-false-result/ http://qz.com/151311/why-23andme-might-have-the-fda-worried-...
- 300bps 13y ago
  How do you actually know you have the genetic disorder? Could it possibly be a bug in 23andme? Actually, the part of my original comment that you quoted shows that is extremely unlikely. Here it is: I passed this information on to my sister and through testing not through 23andme, she discovered she has it as well. Specifically, my sister got tested through a blood test from the foundation for this genetic disorder and verified that she has the same genetic disorder I do. Is it possible that 23andme wrongly stated I have a genetic disorder and that coincidentally my sister has it but I don't? For some genetic disorders, perhaps. But with mine, there's exactly 0% chance. 23andme was correct in my case.
  - toomuchtodo 13y ago
    I too was an early 23andme adopter. Our entire family was genotyped (5 people). We'll all be opting out of yet another frivolous class action lawsuit. I'm trying really hard to have a positive outlook on the US.

ksherlock 13y ago

"The FDA lacks any specific statutory authority to regulate genomic sequencing technologies. President Obama knows this, because as a Senator in 2006 and 2007 he introduced bills that would regulate the genomics industry. They never passed. Yet in 2010 the FDA simply decreed by fiat that these tests are considered new medical devices that require premarket testing and approval." -- http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304465604579220003539640102 http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230446560... (possibly behind a paywall so google news it). And there it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bills_sponsored_by_Barack_Obama_in_the_United_States_Senate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bills_sponsored_by_Bara... -- Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act of 2006/2007.

adventured 13y ago

Anyone know if it's still possible to purchase their DNA kits, despite the FDA action? Looked around their site for a while and didn't see anything about the product being unavailable (also couldn't find a contact us page).

chasing 13y ago

Someone at 23andMe must've read an advance copy of "Without Their Permission."