dahinds

8 ms·

31.
by dahinds 2y ago
I would not argue with you on that it is "selling your data". But I also think there are meaningful differences in harm levels for different kinds of "selling your data", and fully identified data has more potential harm
32.
by dahinds 2y ago
I can go to a data broker and purchase access to de-identified EMR data for most of the U.S. population. There are much more useful de-identified datasets around than ours, if someone is motivated to try to re-identify those datasets. That
33.
by dahinds 2y ago
Indeed, but here "re-identification" generally means the sort of attack where you have an aggregated genomic dataset, and you already have access to full genomic data for a target individual, and you use the genomic dataset to inf
34.
by dahinds 2y ago
Here "de-identified" means stripped of PII (name, address, phone number, email, etc). You are correct that genetic information is intrinsically identifiABLE (in the sense that it is stable and uniquely distinguishing for individua
35.
by dahinds 2y ago
Click on the "Scientific Details" instead of the Summary.
36.
by dahinds 2y ago
This is false, we've sold data with PII to no one. Or it is misleading: the page you linked to even says, "It is selling de-identified, aggregate data for research, if you give them consent."
37.
by dahinds 2y ago
Yes this is a wildly misrepresented statistic that has nothing to do with DEI and everything to do with demographic shifts in the U.S. population (specifically, that the "non Hispanic white" segment of the U.S. population is shrin
38.
by dahinds 2y ago
There are gaps in Medicare coverage. There's long term care that isn't covered by Medicare; people can self insure, or purchase separate coverage, or many rely on Medicaid which requires exhausting assets first. I've watched
39.
by dahinds 2y ago
I think you're incorrectly assuming that one prescription = one person. Far less than 20% of the population is taking Adderall, this CDC study says 4% in 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/72/wr/
40.
by dahinds 2y ago
I'm not sure where you're going with that, but Svante is an outstanding scientist and won the prize for his work in DNA sequencing + evolutionary biology.
41.
by dahinds 2y ago
umm Svante Paabo?
42.
by dahinds 2y ago
and that was a "catastrophic" outcome? When I think of "catastrophic", it would be something like ending up institutionalized, or dead, not ranked in the top 1% of college applicants.
43.
by dahinds 2y ago
I think often when people talk about cartilage "healing" they are talking very specifically about re-growing lost joint cartilage. I don't think there is any evidence that adults can do that specific thing. I do think it is p
44.
by dahinds 2y ago
The PBMs have mostly been captured by the insurance companies, so they're charging themselves and pocketing the profits themselves. Insurance companies just pass on the costs by charging higher premiums.
45.
by dahinds 2y ago
I am not disagreeing with you, but how does that make your original statement any less false, or my statement less true?
46.
by dahinds 2y ago
The statement that "very, very few people" have been affected is false, the number is in the millions[1]. Numbers have been sharply lower in 2022-2023 though we have had several mild wildfire seasons and it seems optimistic to exp
47.
by dahinds 2y ago
LDTs can only be carried out in a CLIA laboratory which you're unlikely to be able to operate out of your garage. I mean you could but there are a bunch of staffing and accreditation requirements that would make that very difficult and
48.
by dahinds 2y ago
Your link says "To prevent shoplifting" as the first reason.
49.
by dahinds 2y ago
It would not necessarily fix things if private equity wasn't involved, but private equity is particularly effective at identifying cases where a market or regulatory inefficiency is not being maximally exploited, and jumping in to extr
50.
by dahinds 2y ago
That doesn't really contradict the post you're responding to, does it? (they say it is not that useful for bespoke medicine, you say that people are using it for research purposes, both can be true?)
51.
by dahinds 2y ago
Your calculation assumes that the other 60% of the time you get to keep your original investment, but there's a good chance that you lose it all. This is also the calculation for an investor, and is not really relevant for an employee
52.
by dahinds 3y ago
Gas fired heat pumps do exist, they're called absorption heat pumps. https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/absorption-heat-pumps
53.
by dahinds 3y ago
https://www.23andme.com/transparency-report/
54.
by dahinds 3y ago
I did not work on IBD but have been doing stat gen at 23andMe for 13 years. I'd say that anything you evaluated many years ago is pretty irrelevant today as the 23andMe database (and our research effort) didn't reach an interestin
55.
by dahinds 3y ago
This is an inaccurate view of what 23andMe is doing. First we did not "fail" in drug development, our collaboration with GSK yielded substantially more programs than we had anticipated when we started. The verdict on whether the s
56.
by dahinds 3y ago
No 23andMe customer data has been shared with GSK. We have shared results of 23andMe research, not individual-level customer data. In the past we have carried out studies with partners where we shared individual level data and obtained cons
57.
by dahinds 4y ago
Really? All my daughter needs for school is access to a decent browser.
58.
by dahinds 4y ago
This is false, the biological pathways that underly circadian rhythms have been mapped out in great detail in multiple organisms.
59.
by dahinds 4y ago
It is absolutely settled. The genetic basis of chronotype has been extensively studied in fruit flys and mice, and parallel effects in the same genes have been found in humans.
60.
by dahinds 4y ago
In this case the correlation is due to a causal relationship between genetic variation and chronotype that is well established. The roles of many of the genes involved have been established in lab organisms -- fruit flys and mice mostly --

More ›