Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1 Company plans to sell genetic testing kit at drugstores 
    Company plans to sell genetic testing kit at drugstores

    By Rob Stein
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Tuesday, May 11, 2010

    Beginning Friday, shoppers in search of toothpaste, deodorant and laxatives at more than 6,000 drugstores across the nation will be able to pick up something new: a test to scan their genes for a propensity for Alzheimer's disease, breast cancer, diabetes and other ailments.

    The test also claims to offer a window into the chances of becoming obese, developing psoriasis and going blind. For those thinking of starting a family, it could alert them to their risk of having a baby with cystic fibrosis, Tay-Sachs and other genetic disorders. The test also promises users insights into how caffeine, cholesterol-lowering drugs and blood thinners might affect them.

    The over-the-counter test marks the first foray of personalized genomic medicine into the corner drugstore. The move is being welcomed by those who hope that deciphering the genetic code will launch a new era in biomedical science.

    But it's being feared by those who worry it will open a Pandora's box of confusion, privacy violations, genetic discrimination and other issues.

    The new test comes as federal regulators, bioethicists, geneticists, doctors and patients have been increasingly struggling with how to use, interpret, regulate and guard against abuse from the flood of genetic information, tests and technologies being developed because of the massive, government-sponsored Human Genome Project.

    For years, companies have been hawking tests on the Internet that can analyze genes for a person's risk of some diseases, and genetic tests for paternity and ancestry have been widely available in stores.

    But the plan being announced Tuesday by Pathway Genomics of San Diego to sell its Insight test at about 6,000 of Walgreens' 7,500 stores represents the boldest move yet to bring the power of modern molecular medicine to the mass market.

    "It's the first widespread retail availability of genetic tests that are directed specifically at health issues," said Joan A. Scott, director of the Genetics and Public Policy Center at Johns Hopkins University.

    The Food and Drug Administration questioned Monday whether the test will be sold legally because it does not have the agency's approval. Critics have said that results will be too vague to provide much useful guidance because so little is known about how to interpret genetic markers.
    No good can come of this. People have a really poor understanding of risk as it is. Culturally, we're also losing sight of the fact that longevity itself increases the risk factors of dying of diseases that are always there but but are usually controlled by a youthful immune response.

    Wa Po
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    they are selling to useful idiots to make money... most people will NEVER have to deal with any of that stuff, it's just a scare tactic to sell something...typical in the allopathic health care field
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,689
    You can already get them for paternity tests. I know someone who was really p'od because her baby daddy got one and took a strand of hair from the kid during his visitation, and told the kid (who was about 8 at the time) that he was doing it to make sure he was really her daddy.


    For disputed paternity issues, the test really should be done by the court.


    For genetic testing, I'm kind of torn between a patient's right to know and a patient's need for doctors or medical staff to personally explain risks in conjunction with that particular patient's medical history.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Power CUer FlaGator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Swamps of N. Florida
    Posts
    22,317
    For truly scaring the hell out of people, these test ought to be better than WebMD.

    I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.
    C. S. Lewis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,689
    Quote Originally Posted by FlaGator View Post
    For truly scaring the hell out of people, these test ought to be better than WebMD.


    For the conditions that they mentioned-Tay Sachs and CF-there has been genetic testing for 30+ years, and the first tests didn't involve DNA. The same with Sickle Cell Anemia. Of course back then, if one parent had the dominant gene (or both partners had the recessive gene), they were advised to adopt children. I knew two families in the 70s that had to undergo this testing-one was a family struck by Hunington's Chorea, and the other carried a rare genetic disorder that was similar to CF.


    A DNA test would give better odds about a pregnancy, but short of genetic engineering, there is nothing before conception that will promise that the baby won't have the feared condition. The only 100% accurate way to avoid having a child with that disorder is for those two parents (or the one who carries the trait) to not conceive a child together.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    For genetic testing, I'm kind of torn between a patient's right to know and a patient's need for doctors or medical staff to personally explain risks in conjunction with that particular patient's medical history.
    Genetic testing is a useful tool when people are making a decision to marry or making a decision to conceive together. There are a handful of cheap tests that can offer some insight into the likelihood of a couple conceiving a child with Tay-Sachs, CF, or Huntington's. Even then, we're talking about odds - not certainties.

    For personal decision-making, I can't see what actual use they'd be. While some conditions are more likely when certain gene groups are present, whether or not a condition develops is also heavily influenced by what gene groups are turned off. Or on. All of us carry the right genetic material for at least a dozen fatal conditions (or more) but also carry genetic material that actively turns those genes off.

    Some conditions are just too complex to break out this way. Obesity is dependent on food access as well as physical labor. You could have super obesity genetics but as a Bushman in the Kalahari, it would never get expressed. Cardiovascular disease is very complicated. Half of all people who have fatal heart attacks have no risk factors at all.

    People will just misuse this. :(
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post

    People will just misuse this. :(
    of course they will, hence the reason why I said it's for the useful idiots out there. they can play up peoples fears, help people self diagnose and make stupid decisions that will hurt themselves or others. It's a scare tactic to make money.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •