3 ms·

Every modern car as an 'ODB2' connector under the dashboard, which allows anyone with 99 dollars to monitor the statistics of their vehicles - engine temperatur

Every modern car as an 'ODB2' connector under the dashboard, which allows anyone with 99 dollars to monitor the statistics of their vehicles - engine temperature, fuel efficiency, air pressure, et al. Thought experiment: If everyone all of a sudden had all this information on their dash tonight, how many would change their natural driving habits because of the visible information, even if no metric was any different than the every day before it? I won't speculate. It's just a metaphor.

eli 13y ago
I don't think anyone here is saying the concept of personal genetic testing is bad.
- booyaa00 13y ago
  I would. The only use case I can see for it is if you're adopted and so don't know family history. Other than that, it can only lead to bad things.
aroch 13y ago
Changing your driving habits from "slam the accelerator" to "accelerate slowly and evenly" or "brake hard to stop at the last moment for that stop sign" to "come to gradual stop" is hardly as reckless as "Stop taking as much Warfarin as you are because our tests (with no proven reliability) says you could take a lower dose". Almost all the metrics you'd get out of of an ODB port would tell you to be gentler in your driving. Very few people feel comfortable in messing about with the guts of their car. Whereas many patients are more than happy to disobey their doctor's orders on a whim
aestra 13y ago
No it isn't a metaphor. Not a good one anyway. Medical screening tests are a costs benefits analysis. Science does this. There is a cost for everything. If you have a disease that isn't causing any symptoms, do you treat it, even though it will probably never cause symptoms? There is a risk in all treatments, some more than others. There is a study that most prostate cancers don't show symptoms, ever and our super sensitive cancer diagnostics tests are causing more harm than good. More diagnostics does not mean more good. That's why we no longer do the Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Test. It finds too many cancers that aren't going to cause harm and then people get unneeded treatment that causes side effects. (Source in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate-specific_antigen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate-specific_antigen) For example, it used to be recommended that all women perform a breast self exam every month, then data showed us this didn't prevent cancer and actually caused harm because it lead to needless surgeries and biopsies. (Sources here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_self_exam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_self_exam) We just don't throw more diagnosis and screening at patients and assume that is a good thing.

eli 13y ago

I don't think anyone here is saying the concept of personal genetic testing is bad.

booyaa00 13y ago
I would. The only use case I can see for it is if you're adopted and so don't know family history. Other than that, it can only lead to bad things.

aroch 13y ago

Changing your driving habits from "slam the accelerator" to "accelerate slowly and evenly" or "brake hard to stop at the last moment for that stop sign" to "come to gradual stop" is hardly as reckless as "Stop taking as much Warfarin as you are because our tests (with no proven reliability) says you could take a lower dose". Almost all the metrics you'd get out of of an ODB port would tell you to be gentler in your driving. Very few people feel comfortable in messing about with the guts of their car. Whereas many patients are more than happy to disobey their doctor's orders on a whim

aestra 13y ago

No it isn't a metaphor. Not a good one anyway. Medical screening tests are a costs benefits analysis. Science does this. There is a cost for everything. If you have a disease that isn't causing any symptoms, do you treat it, even though it will probably never cause symptoms? There is a risk in all treatments, some more than others. There is a study that most prostate cancers don't show symptoms, ever and our super sensitive cancer diagnostics tests are causing more harm than good. More diagnostics does not mean more good. That's why we no longer do the Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Test. It finds too many cancers that aren't going to cause harm and then people get unneeded treatment that causes side effects. (Source in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate-specific_antigen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate-specific_antigen) For example, it used to be recommended that all women perform a breast self exam every month, then data showed us this didn't prevent cancer and actually caused harm because it lead to needless surgeries and biopsies. (Sources here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_self_exam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_self_exam) We just don't throw more diagnosis and screening at patients and assume that is a good thing.