3 ms·
Their interpretations were based on poorly proven associations between genes and disease-outcomes. I bet with the info you could look up on wikipedia/google sc
by kingkawn 13y ago
Their interpretations were based on poorly proven associations between genes and disease-outcomes. I bet with the info you could look up on wikipedia/google scholar much of what you needed to know. But it depends on the format of this data dump.
- Afforess 13y agoNo, that is pure FUD. 23andme provides a confidence assessment for the associations and risks. Here is a screenshot from their site: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/49805/confidence.png https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/49805/confidence.png
- infocollector 13y agoAnd no one has problems with their privacy policy?
- Afforess 13y agoYour DNA is pretty much public domain anyway. You drop tons of it all over the place.
- infocollector 13y agoThankfully I do not label it with my name ;)
- kingkawn 13y agoAll well and good that intervals of confidence exist in medical research. But good understandings of these associations have been reached with very few genes. The categories alone do not prove that they apply broadly enough to justify the product.